Will there ever be a new large iMac (Pro)?

[Azrael9]

Yeah, sad sad reality. Lets hope that COVID will help with that and people will be more cost conscious. That itself could be a good shift.
Although there will always be some jerk that will get fully loaded Mac Pro just for facebook. (trust me, I've had those when I worked for Apple years and years ago)

Marketing. Lies and Truths.

A premium Mac computer should have premium (up to date) parts.

I don't think 8 gigs or ram, a 3 year old Polaris gpu or an 8 year old Fusion Kludge Drive are 'premium.'

The 5k monitor is.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591377294[/automerge]

Luke Miani made a interesting point in his new video about more real estate on the inside of both iMac sizes if fusion drive/HDD is not part of the design anymore. Had not really thought about that even knowing that the SSD is put in at a complete different area and is not SATA based.
In the video he also makes a comparison to the iPadPro and how the smaller version got a bigger screen and the bigger version got a reduced footprint by reducing bezels. He guesses that thats why we hear about a bigger small iMac screensize and suspects that the largest model will also only get a smaller footprint but keep the 27 inch screen size.

I just wonder if the space that is won by removing the HDD space would make up for the real estate lost due to the smaller overall size. The tighter the interior design gets the more i am afraid of soldered on SDD/RAM or no RAM door.

Good post.

I think this is a real possibility. It should be. It gives the iMac more screen real estate which is it's key 'killer' feature.

So more of that is a 'Good Thing.'

Azrael.
[automerge]1591377476[/automerge]

Yeah, sad sad reality. Lets hope that COVID will help with that and people will be more cost conscious. That itself could be a good shift.
Although there will always be some jerk that will get fully loaded Mac Pro just for facebook. (trust me, I've had those when I worked for Apple years and years ago)

A couple of weeks to go. And perhaps a more cost conscious and power value proposition will emerge from WWDC2020.

Hopefully the iMac line can provide some redemption for Mac desktops. They look very iStale at the moment. (I won't count the Mac Pro in that...as it's another a completely different reality...or universe...)

Azrael.
[automerge]1591377749[/automerge]
Power. Thermal. Comet.

Intel finally discloses Comet Lake-S power limit values - VideoCardz.com

Intel has finally revealed Comet Lake-S power limits. Intel Comet Lake-S PL1/PL2 values Intel has not been eager to reveal all power limit details at the launch, even reviewers were not told the full story. However, the information has finally been provided to ComputerBase. The new data confirm...

videocardz.com

Azrael.

 

[DrRadon]

Random other thing interesting to look at. Germany is about to lower its VAT from 19% to 16% so that could affect prices we have here unless Apple is just like "yes please" and takes these 3%.

 

[Phil77354]

. . . more real estate on the inside of both iMac sizes if fusion drive/HDD is not part of the design anymore.

. . . The tighter the interior design gets the more i am afraid of soldered on SDD/RAM or no RAM door.

That is a very interesting point, that if the next iMac goes to SSD only then it would provide more design flexibility. I wonder if Apple is quite ready to go that far yet (only SSD) for the iMac, since it would result in at least slightly higher prices if fusion option is removed. Perhaps they have a lower-cost iMac that retains the fusion drive option, maybe this is the smaller size display, then the 27" model could be further distinguished with smaller bezels, a freshened up design and SSD only?

I sure hope that they do not eliminate the ability for users to add RAM. It is only present for the 27" model anyway, now. That would be disappointing.

 

[Azrael9]

Random other thing interesting to look at. Germany is about to lower its VAT from 19% to 16% so that could affect prices we have here unless Apple is just like "yes please" and takes these 3%.

We could do with a VAT cut here in the UK to help prices. Though I wouldn't put it past Apple to say, 'thank you.'

imac pro: Search Result | eBay

Find great deals on eBay for imac pro. Shop with confidence.

www.ebay.co.uk

One or two iMac Pro around the £3.5k-ish mark. (Never bought off eBay, personally.)

Current state of play for iMac and iMac Pro prices for those that are curious. I'd expect some of those prices to cave after teh WWDC announcement.

Azrael.

 

[DrRadon]

Perhaps they have a lower-cost iMac that retains the fusion drive option

The fusion drive pretty much is inexcusable in 2020.

 

[Phil77354]

The fusion drive pretty much is inexcusable in 2020.

Is Apple the only computer manufacturer who still supplies desktop computers with a choice of either spinning disk hard drives or SSDs? If they are, then that is one thing, but I doubt that is the case, and offering fusion gives customers a choice and the ability to get greater storage at less cost.

 

[DrRadon]

imac pro: Search Result | eBay

Find great deals on eBay for imac pro. Shop with confidence.

www.ebay.co.uk

One or two iMac Pro around the £3.5k-ish mark. (Never bought off eBay, personally.)

I just checked eBay. Holy hell theres a ******** of obvious fraud offers on the iMacPro. Crazy.

 

[Azrael9]

I just checked eBay. Holy hell theres a ******** of obvious fraud offers on the iMacPro. Crazy.

Yeah. Never bought off eBay. (I have trust issues regarding that.) Not sure I could shop with confidence on eBay.

Though it seems popular.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591379152[/automerge]

Is Apple the only computer manufacturer who still supplies desktop computers with a choice of either spinning disk hard drives or SSDs? If they are, then that is one thing, but I doubt that is the case, and offering fusion gives customers a choice and the ability to get greater storage at less cost.

HP Desktop Computers - HP Store UK

Find the perfect HP® desktop for your needs at the HP® Store UK. Explore a wide selection of home & business desktops, from powerful ENVY models to gaming-ready OMEN machines.

store.hp.com

Here's an example of a 512 SSD. Plus a Spinning Hard drive to go with it.

Many cheaper PC towers are offering 256 SSDs or 512 gig SSDs. And a 1TB Spinner alongside it for storage.

But, Apple, being the company that had the courage to lose all the legacy ports on the Macbook...weren't quite so expedient to lose the legacy 8 year old Fusion Drive. Or the legacy Polaris gpu (3 years and counting...)

Now (full disclosure here...) when I bought my late 2012...iMac 27 incher? I went for the Fusion drive. But I really wanted SSDs. The port of the Fusion drive was 128 gig.

Later on, and 'Tim Cook's Apple 'Badge of Honour', Apple reduced the 128 gig partition on the Fusion drive to something 'pitiful.' And that, for me, sums up Tim Cook's Apple. Especially when it comes to Mac desktops.

As such, the Fusion Drive should go into the trash can where it belongs. Even more so if it's holding back the iStale iMac's design or preventing a larger screen size, which, ten years later, is due an update. And? Is iMac's 'killer feature' so it should be pushing screen real estate efficiency and size...and yes. Resolution. 5k. Yeah. It's very good. But 5k has been with us 'a while now.' Either push for 5k at a 30 inch screen size or really go for it. Let's go for the wow factor and push for the 6k display on a 32 incher. Which, bezels forgiving, could fit inside the current foot print.

Especially the stingy and pokey 21 inch iMac. (...dropping the 24 inch iMac was a big mistake.)

For the Premium prices apple charges? Put SSD as 256, 512, 1tb standard across the price points. If the Mac Mini has it an every other Mac has it...then there is no excuse for the ancient Fusion Kludge these days.

For a company like Apple, a 512 gig SSD costs nothing.

Azrael.

 

[CWallace]

Is Apple the only computer manufacturer who still supplies desktop computers with a choice of either spinning disk hard drives or SSDs? If they are, then that is one thing, but I doubt that is the case, and offering fusion gives customers a choice and the ability to get greater storage at less cost.

I just purchased a Dell Inspiron desktop for my father and 7200RPM HDDs were the default with a 256GB M.2 SSD a $50 upgrade (which is a substantial $150 savings over Apple's upgrade on the 21.5"). To get a 512GB SSD on a Dell required a Core i7 (didn't need it, but whatever) and 16GB (which I wanted, so okay with that up-charge).

 

[xgman]

If you really want fusion drives to disappear, simply don't buy any mac with one. Problem solved. What you really want is a comparably sized SSD for the same price. Not going to happen. I don't mind paying extra for super fast SSD's, but I do with they would start to come in larger sizes at mortal prices at this point.

 

[DrRadon]

Is Apple the only computer manufacturer who still supplies desktop computers with a choice of either spinning disk hard drives or SSDs? If they are, then that is one thing, but I doubt that is the case, and offering fusion gives customers a choice and the ability to get greater storage at less cost.

I don´t know. All i can tell you is that a HDD is absolutely not fit to meet the requirements of a Uptodate MacOS. Building in a better USB drive to fix that OS problem and fart on every other software run on that system is just terrible.

I feel like they should have a base configuration of 256GB, 512GB and 1TB spread across the three models. If apple was nice the 27 inch machine would start with 512GB and end with 2TB.
They do offer the biggest 27 Inch with 2TB Fusion Drive in its base config after all, so they ignoleged thats a space people with that machine would require, deserve, use.
If Apple is just Apple they probably would do 512Gb, 512GB and 1TB on 27 inch.

And you got to think about what that dos to the price of the machine. The Fusiondrive to 1TB SSD Upgrade is sold 375€ (about the price of an 2TB Samung EVO Plus SSD - so if you have someone build it into the machine for you...) on the 27 Inch Machine.
On the 21.5 Model they ask for a wooping 625€ for the 1TB SSD. SIXHUNDREDANDTWEENTYFIVEEURO. I am not an expert for non Sata SSDs besides the "Samsung Evo Plus" being the supposed best... but i am seeing non SATA 4TB SSDs for about 700€.
Not saying that a single 4TB SSD is desirable, messes up way to much of your Data if something melts down. But Apples prices is way-out of perspective for 2020. I know they are expensive, and they will stay expensive, but this just seems based on prices from god knows how many years ago.

Like, i wonder if the models that actually are standard in Apple Stores and oder retailers are actually fusion drive or if the actually standard is SSD and not BTO at all anymore.

 

[Azrael9]

If you really want fusion drives to disappear, simply don't buy any mac with one. Problem solved.

Sage advice.

Buy Mac mini

Mac mini with the M4 and M4 Pro chips. Built for Apple Intelligence. With front and back ports. Get credit when you trade in an eligible Mac. Buy now.

www.apple.com

Here we have...a Mac Mini.

£799. 256 gig SSD.
£1099. 512 gig SSD.
+£200 for 1TB SSD.

Hopefully this augers well for the iMac update.

Azrael.

 

[CWallace]

Fusion Drives must be popular on iMacs because those are the pre-configured models Apple offers and are the ones you would have available in an Apple store. If there was hard demand for an SSD-only model amongst the general iMac-buying public, the pre-configured model on the right of the 27" "Buy" page would be $2399 with a 512GB SSD instead of a $2299 one with a 2TB Fusion Drive.

The laptops all went SSD because it allowed Apple to make them thinner and lighter and last longer on battery. And laptops are inherently "expensive" (at least quality ones) and always had small storage (256-512GB) when they were on HDDs so you could add a similar small SSD and people would absorb the extra cost.

Mac mini went all-SSD in 2018 probably because the use cases for the model favor it. I would not at all be surprised if a significant number of them are sold with a 256GB SSD because that is all you need for a media server to hold macOS and PLEX because everything else is stored on a NAS or external array. The 512GB and 1TB models are likely predominately used by software developers and in COLOs (and even there, between cloud and attached storage, that might be the exception rather than the rule).

 

[DrRadon]

If you really want fusion drives to disappear, simply don't buy any mac with one.

This is trying to be smart while actually coming of silly when making comments like this among people nerdy enough to obviously not be buying a fusion drive.

 

[pepperonibois]

This is trying to be smart while actually coming of[f] silly...

That's basically 66% of this thread.

Friends, I'm looking forward to a new iMac as much as the next guy,

but wowee some of y'all are completely out of touch

 

[DrRadon]

Well have fun correcting the dyslexic guy writing in his second language while enjoying lectures about how we are keeping fusion drive alive while not actually ever buying it.

 

[sublunar]

You seem to be conveniently ignoring that it also comes with a 500 nit 5K P3 display, wrapped up in an all metal and glass chassis. The competitors all use plastic chassis and HD (maybe 4k) displays way below apple standards.

It is very frustrating that SSD is only offered via BTO, but it's far from a disgrace. And with the 27" iMac just buy more ram and stick it in the back port like everyone else?

I get heavily frustrated by that too, and the fact that the SSD is top quality PCIe 3.0 M2 NAND that competes with Samsung's 970 Pro. It's not SATA rubbish that people wheel out all over the place, and quality cases cost money too - even the ones that go for thinness over cooling volume, silence, or ease of access for maintenance.

On the 21.5 Model they ask for a wooping 625€ for the 1TB SSD. SIXHUNDREDANDTWEENTYFIVEEURO. I am not an expert for non Sata SSDs besides the "Samsung Evo Plus" being the supposed best... but i am seeing non SATA 4TB SSDs for about 700€.
Not saying that a single 4TB SSD is desirable, messes up way to much of your Data if something melts down. But Apples prices is way-out of perspective for 2020. I know they are expensive, and they will stay expensive, but this just seems based on prices from god knows how many years ago.

Like, i wonder if the models that actually are standard in Apple Stores and oder retailers are actually fusion drive or if the actually standard is SSD and not BTO at all anymore.

Amazon France are selling the Samsung 970 Pro 1Tb for 378 Euros at the moment. Yes, that's still a huge slice cheaper than the price you quote for Apple's 1Tb SSD (in which they keep the hard drive you are upgrading from) but bear in mind that at this stage Apple has been doubling the storage for no extra cost as they refresh.

I'm sure after this year's refresh the price for doubling SSD storage would come down to more reasonable levels but we are operating at March 2019 prices right now.

Look at the reported performance figures for Samsung's 980 Pro, reported to be available in a PCIe 4.0 4x package and reading 6500MB/s and writing 5000MB/s. That's almost double the numbers of the same SSD over a PCIe 3.0 connection.

While AMD motherboards will take advantage of it this year Apple will surely be eyeing up the Rocket Lake CPUs (the one that comes after this year's Comet Lake) in order to use it.

And speed wise it eliminates the advantage of the iMac Pro RAID PCIe SSD.

At the end of the day what's really yanking the chain of so many people here is Apple's selection of components for the iMac. And too many people are complaining because Apple don't have a viable alternative option for what they really want - a headless desktop machine with powerful graphics at a price that doesn't break the bank.

A pity that Apple believe that this is a vocal minority - but that's their call and they are the ones making a profit from their computer plans.

 

[sublunar]

Fusion Drives must be popular on iMacs because those are the pre-configured models Apple offers and are the ones you would have available in an Apple store. If there was hard demand for an SSD-only model amongst the general iMac-buying public, the pre-configured model on the right of the 27" "Buy" page would be $2399 with a 512GB SSD instead of a $2299 one with a 2TB Fusion Drive.

The laptops all went SSD because it allowed Apple to make them thinner and lighter and last longer on battery. And laptops are inherently "expensive" (at least quality ones) and always had small storage (256-512GB) when they were on HDDs so you could add a similar small SSD and people would absorb the extra cost.

Mac mini went all-SSD in 2018 probably because the use cases for the model favor it. I would not at all be surprised if a significant number of them are sold with a 256GB SSD because that is all you need for a media server to hold macOS and PLEX because everything else is stored on a NAS or external array. The 512GB and 1TB models are likely predominately used by software developers and in COLOs (and even there, between cloud and attached storage, that might be the exception rather than the rule).

There's an easy assumption to make that the average buyer of the iMac values the amount of storage and may not be sensitive to the speed of it.

Easily the best speed bump for an iMac right now would be to go all-SSD but to keep the 1Tb capacity Apple would have to break their pricing structure which they typically don't do. The best I can see them doing is to switch to 512Gb SSD across most SKUs while keeping everything else the same.

The other factors for Apple is the space taken up by a hard drive which was replaced by the superior cooling system in the iMac Pro.

The sheer heat output from Comet Lake and Rocket Lake (assuming both stay on the 14nm process) may be giving Apple pause for thought - a redesign would surely be mandatory to cope with Intel's trek down a very hot cul-de-sac before the 10nm Alder Lake appears in 2022 - capable of using DDR5 RAM.

Obligatory iMac Apple Store watch: the 27" iMac is now offering Express delivery options for stock models - 20-27th June (Fastest). 22nd-29th June (Free). Any BTO is slipping deeper into July.

 

[CWallace]

There's an easy assumption to make that the average buyer of the iMac values the amount of storage and may not be sensitive to the speed of it.

It may not be so much about "sensitivity" as "experience". Folks buying 2TB or 3TB Fusion Drives likely are doing so because they have large amounts of data that relatively immune to the access and transfer speeds of the media hosting it - items like photos, music and video.

128GB seems laughably small to those of us who have 512GB or larger SSDs (I have been 1TB for my last two iMacs), but if that is enough to hold the OS and the productivity applications those users predominately access, then they are getting the speed they need for the applications they interact with.

This is why while I support the concept of Fusion Drives, I continue to pillory Apple for reducing the size of the companion SSD on the 1TB model to 24GB (and then 32GB) from 128GB. That I see as a willful attempt to punish an end-user for their choice.

Easily the best speed bump for an iMac right now would be to go all-SSD but to keep the 1Tb capacity Apple would have to break their pricing structure which they typically don't do. The best I can see them doing is to switch to 512Gb SSD across most SKUs while keeping everything else the same.

I would like to see Apple drop the 256GB option from the iMac line-up and just offer 512GB as the base model because I think 256GB is too small (I can accept it on the Air and the Mac mini for their markets). But since they still offer 256GB as the base storage for the 2020 MacBook Air and 2020 Mac mini, I am not holding my hopes up - doubly so since the 24" iMac is supposed to be "cheaper" which scares me on a number of levels and not just storage.

The other factors for Apple is the space taken up by a hard drive which was replaced by the superior cooling system in the iMac Pro. The sheer heat output from Comet Lake and Rocket Lake (assuming both stay on the 14nm process) may be giving Apple pause for thought - a redesign would surely be mandatory to cope with Intel's trek down a very hot cul-de-sac before the 10nm Alder Lake appears in 2022 - capable of using DDR5 RAM.

I wonder how cool Alder Lake really well be, since they are rumored to be taking the Apple approach of having a mix of "low power" (low-heat) cores and "high power" (and likely high-heat) cores. I mean it should be better than Comet Lake and Rocket Lake, but then by the time they actually ship in a PC, Apple might already have "desktop class" ARM CPUs (at least "desktop class" for running macOS and macOS apps).

 

[Phil77354]

...a HDD is absolutely not fit to meet the requirements of a Uptodate MacOS ...

...And you got to think about what that dos to the price of the machine...

Well, to begin with, nobody here is arguing that SSD is not preferable or superior to an HDD, but if it was 'not fit' then Apple wouldn't continue to offer it. To claim otherwise is to presume to know Mac better than Apple does.

What continuing to offer Fusion Drives does to the price of the machine is lower it (or said differently, hold it down), since the cost is lower than for an SDD of equivalent size. You seem to be suggesting that if they went to SSD only then it wouldn't result in higher prices, and that somehow the upgrade costs Apple charges for more storage would somehow be improved. As long as a 500GB SSD costs more than a 500GB Fusion Drive, and a 1TB SSD costs more than a 1TB Fusion Drive, then an SSD only iMac product line will be more expensive than an iMac product line that includes the choice of Fusion Drives. Those are just the facts.

The iMac will almost certainly transition to SSD-only at some point, and that timing will be driven by the costs of SDDs continuing to come down until they are cost effective enough to be the sole storage offered. At that point all (or most) computer manufacturers will probably be doing the same, whereas today they are all offering both HDDs and SDDs.

Further, from Apple's point of view I'm sure they consider the Fusion Drive to be a sales advantage, because of the performance benefit they claim for Fusion compared to normal HDDs. The extreme dislike here for the Fusion drive seems to be overlooking that point as well, and when we are pontificating on what Apple should do with respect to their entire iMac product line, we shouldn't loose sight of the fact that the customers for those products are not limited to forum members who generally will have higher standards, including eschewing the Fusion Drive, but all consumers which includes many who are perfectly happy with Fusion Drives.

 

[Freida]

Dude! I'm sorry but no no no! Apple is premium brand with premium prices. For that customers expect certain 'base' level of value which in this case is not there. Stop excusing Apple for making this crappy computer crappier!
Sorry but fusion drive is the worst thing that was ever invented. Avoid at all cost!

Is Apple the only computer manufacturer who still supplies desktop computers with a choice of either spinning disk hard drives or SSDs? If they are, then that is one thing, but I doubt that is the case, and offering fusion gives customers a choice and the ability to get greater storage at less cost.

[automerge]1591391829[/automerge]
People who defend fusion drive really shouldn't be here. Fusion drive is a matter of statement and the fact that Apple has the audacity to have top 27" iMac starting with fusion is just INSANE!
Whats even worse? People thinking its ok or defending Apple - that to me explains why we still have this crap around.

SJ said - 'never settle!' and this applies here too. Its literally impossible to buy SSD iMac in the Apple store! Not a single model available for purchase! Absolute disgrace with the price tag it comes with!

If you really want fusion drives to disappear, simply don't buy any mac with one. Problem solved. What you really want is a comparably sized SSD for the same price. Not going to happen. I don't mind paying extra for super fast SSD's, but I do with they would start to come in larger sizes at mortal prices at this point.

 

[askunk]

AMD has officially stated that RDNA2 will come out first for PCs and then for the PS4 and XBX.

It would be quite embarrassing to introduce new iMacs with more than one-year-old GPUS in September right when AMD is introducing new cards.

 

[Freida]

If that happens I feel like I might just give up on Apple once for all. There is only so much one can take.
On the other hand. Apple knows when RDNA2 comes out as I'm sure they are in talks with AMD so seeing that there is no iMac now they can just wait and do amazing update when RDNA2 is ready. Sure, it could mean October but I think we can all agree that 4 months wait for RDNA2 and beefy up to date iMac is way worth it then to get in in 2 weeks and have an outdated stuff in

AMD has officially stated that RDNA2 will come out first for PCs and then for the PS4 and XBX.

It would be quite embarrassing to introduce new iMacs with more than one-year-old GPUS in September right when AMD is introducing new cards.

 

[DrRadon]

Well, to begin with, nobody here is arguing that SSD is not preferable or superior to an HDD, but if it was 'not fit' then Apple wouldn't continue to offer it. To claim otherwise is to presume to know Mac better than Apple does.

What continuing to offer Fusion Drives does to the price of the machine is lower it (or said differently, hold it down), since the cost is lower than for an SDD of equivalent size. You seem to be suggesting that if they went to SSD only then it wouldn't result in higher prices, and that somehow the upgrade costs Apple charges for more storage would somehow be improved. As long as a 500GB SSD costs more than a 500GB Fusion Drive, and a 1TB SSD costs more than a 1TB Fusion Drive, then an SSD only iMac product line will be more expensive than an iMac product line that includes the choice of Fusion Drives. Those are just the facts.

The iMac will almost certainly transition to SSD-only at some point, and that timing will be driven by the costs of SDDs continuing to come down until they are cost effective enough to be the sole storage offered. At that point all (or most) computer manufacturers will probably be doing the same, whereas today they are all offering both HDDs and SDDs.

Further, from Apple's point of view I'm sure they consider the Fusion Drive to be a sales advantage, because of the performance benefit they claim for Fusion compared to normal HDDs. The extreme dislike here for the Fusion drive seems to be overlooking that point as well, and when we are pontificating on what Apple should do with respect to their entire iMac product line, we shouldn't loose sight of the fact that the customers for those products are not limited to forum members who generally will have higher standards, including eschewing the Fusion Drive, but all consumers which includes many who are perfectly happy with Fusion Drives.

Have you tried running Catalina on a HDD? It's weekend, i invite you to do the experiment.

Fusion Drive dos not hold the price down, it brings the price up. If the customer dos not see the disadvantage of the HDD involved the salesperson will, theres a good selection of SSD iMacs i found earlier in online (and i suppose also offline) stores that appear not to be available BTO only. And there go another 400€ flying so you don't have 2010 level Hardware.

 

[CWallace]

Apple is premium brand with premium prices. For that customers expect certain 'base' level of value which in this case is not there.

And yet, those customers buy millions of the damn things ("substandard Macs") a quarter. Go figure.

Sorry but fusion drive is the worst thing that was ever invented.

I used something like a Fusion Drive with my 2008 MacBook Pro 15" - it was called a Seagate Hybrid drive. Folks here bitch about a 128 gigabyte SSD in the Fusion Drive. Try the 128 megabyte SSD in the Seagate. But let me tell you, if the data you needed was on that 128MB, gosh darn it was nice!

People who defend fusion drive really shouldn't be here.

Or maybe we just get rid of all the "haters" to lower the noise to signal ratio on these forums so the rest of us can have reasoned discussions.

SJ said - 'never settle!' and this applies here too. Its literally impossible to buy SSD iMac in the Apple store! Not a single model available for purchase! Absolute disgrace with the price tag it comes with!

SJ probably was behind the Fusion Drive.