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

[gusping]

Even if today or in 2021 the first Mac with ARM will be presented, then devices such as MacBook Pro or iMac will continue to be released with Intel for next several years (minimal). This is a large segment of professionals who do not tolerate such changes. It will be a smooth transition.

I am very curious about the 'high-end' Macs having their i7/i9s replaced with ARM CPUs. It could easily take 3-4 years to catch up and exceed them. Only time will tell, and this is before all prosumer and professional software is adapted. Any bets on how long it will take Adobe to fully optimise Photoshop, After Effects, etc, for high core count and powerful ARM CPUs? I know they've started to dabble with the iPad, but those are very cut down pieces of software...

 

[Kalae]

MacBook Pro or iMac will continue to be released with Intel for next several years (minimal)

I expect them to go ARM in late 2021 or early 2022, but either way 15 days from now I hope Apple gives us an idea of what to expect.

 

[Jamacfer]

Even if today or in 2021 the first Mac with ARM will be presented, then devices such as MacBook Pro or iMac will continue to be released with Intel for next several years (minimal). This is a large segment of professionals who do not tolerate such changes. It will be a smooth transition.

Yes, but for many the "future-proof" Mac will be the ARM based only so, if possible, it does make sense to wait for them (just like in the early 90's for the transition from Motorola to PowerPC).

 

[Azrael9]

Even if today or in 2021 the first Mac with ARM will be presented, then devices such as MacBook Pro or iMac will continue to be released with Intel for next several years (minimal). This is a large segment of professionals who do not tolerate such changes. It will be a smooth transition.

I think we can look towards the last transition to see how ruthless Apple are with expediency of their product lines. It took just over a year.

And they're much better prepared this time in terms of infrastructure of hardware and software once they decide to pull the trigger.

They didn't care much how 'Mac Pro' owners would 'tolerate' their profligate attitude to the Mac Pro or professionals for 6 years.

(Or how Apple 'just decide' it's going TB3 only on it's Macbooks. Chainsawing legacy ports in the process.)

The caveat being, they had that 'emulation' of PPC layer for 3 years -ish.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591545571[/automerge]

I expect them to go ARM in late 2021 or early 2022, but either way 15 days from now I hope Apple gives us an idea of what to expect.

Whenever Mac ARM is ready to drop a performance 'H' bomb on Intel.

I'd say a A14x is going to be very close to that. (That may explain the delay on it coming to an iPad this year. Maybe the step the 'x' version is going to take is significant.)

If it's coming next year, we must hear 'something' about it *this* WWDC2020.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591545943[/automerge]

I am very curious about the 'high-end' Macs having their i7/i9s replaced with ARM CPUs. It could easily take 3-4 years to catch up and exceed them. Only time will tell, and this is before all prosumer and professional software is adapted. Any bets on how long it will take Adobe to fully optimise Photoshop, After Effects, etc, for high core count and powerful ARM CPUs? I know they've started to dabble with the iPad, but those are very cut down pieces of software...

We can't overlook the current Single core performance vs Intel cpus right now of A'X'. Or dismiss their multicore performance on what is now, a two year old chip.

Intel are thermally drowning. They're almost 'on fire.'

Apple want efficiency. They want power. They want performance.

In terms of where the current iMacs are...I'd be very concerned about A14x if I were Intel. They must know the relationship is on borrowed time.

The sheer order of magnitude of phone/pad sales pushing the dev' of the chip...must allow Apple leeway to create a tweaked for Mac 'ARM' chip that has higher clocks unshackled by a fanless environment.

And...they're cheap compared to Intel chips. You could put two A14x in an iMac and I think you'd see a frightening performer. ie. A14X dual core. Quad core. 8 core. You put an 8 core A14X in a Mac. The only thing I can think of is 'smash.' A beast. A wrecking ball. Transformational.'

I couldn't imagine 2 or 4 or 8 A12z cpus. One of them in an iPad is frightening.

The proof is ultimately in the pudding.

As somebody who remembers the PPC days. And the 'fear' over going INtel and all the 'holy war' arguments... I remain very calm about Apple 'coming' home to a Mac ARM chip.

There will be open displays of weeping and hails of triumphal returns to performance greatness.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591546313[/automerge]

Yes, but for many the "future-proof" Mac will be the ARM based only so, if possible, it does make sense to wait for them (just like in the early 90's for the transition from Motorola to PowerPC).

I'm looking forward to a Mac ARM that has access to the iPad application market. Some of those apps are very packed with innovation, fresh, slick, paradigm shifting. Procreate is a wonder to behold.

People can talk about iOS being limited compared to the Mac OS. But those 'limitations' are walls that are being hauled down. Mouse. Keyboard. Adobe. AFFINITY apps being on the iPad market.

I expect Apple to step up their iPad OS efforts. (Very telling that Apple went 'iPad OS' in the 1st place...) You only have to look at iOS to see what Mac OS is getting next. eg. Metal.

Azrael.

 

[Azrael9]

I am very curious about the 'high-end' Macs having their i7/i9s replaced with ARM CPUs. It could easily take 3-4 years to catch up and exceed them. Only time will tell, and this is before all prosumer and professional software is adapted. Any bets on how long it will take Adobe to fully optimise Photoshop, After Effects, etc, for high core count and powerful ARM CPUs? I know they've started to dabble with the iPad, but those are very cut down pieces of software...

Adobe 'took their time' on the last transition. There were some 'heated' Steve Jobs vs Chisen jibes at the time. And Steve Jobs openly lettered torpedoed Flash on the way to building up the iOS empire.

I don't think it matters if Adobe works on Macs at all. Those days are gone. As are teh 'must have' M$ on Macs days.

There's so much choice now on Mac/iPad of image editors and more progressive thought.

If eg. You're drawing?

Affinity Photo, Design, Publisher. Clip Studio. Painter 2020. Procreate on iPad. So are the Affinity Apps. Just a few. There are loads of them.

I once thought I couldn't live without PShop. Those days are no more. Adobe are, though, bringing Photoshop to the iPad and I'm sure future updates will only make it more feature complete. ie. It's already happening.

I'm sure Apple will allow a bridge for eg. Apps like Z Brush to come to Mac ARM from Mac OS with a recompile and some Marzipan magic. Or some temporary emulation whizzy thing.

The Mac market is 20 million units per year. 100 million units in 5 years. Add that to the installed base of 100 million units that may make the move, that's $$$. And as M$oft once said, 'We never walk away from money.'

Azrael.

 

[Moonjumper]

I think we can look towards the last transition to see how ruthless Apple are with expediency of their product lines. It took just over a year.

And they're much better prepared this time in terms of infrastructure of hardware and software once they decide to pull the trigger.

They didn't care much how 'Mac Pro' owners would 'tolerate' their profligate attitude to the Mac Pro or professionals for 6 years.

(Or how Apple 'just decide' it's going TB3 only on it's Macbooks. Chainsawing legacy ports in the process.)

The caveat being, they had that 'emulation' of PPC layer for 3 years -ish.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591545571[/automerge]


Whenever Mac ARM is ready to drop a performance 'H' bomb on Intel.

I'd say a A14x is going to be very close to that. (That may explain the delay on it coming to an iPad this year. Maybe the step the 'x' version is going to take is significant.)

If it's coming next year, we must hear 'something' about it *this* WWDC2020.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591545943[/automerge]


We can't overlook the current Single core performance vs Intel cpus right now of A'X'. Or dismiss their multicore performance on what is now, a two year old chip.

Intel are thermally drowning. They're almost 'on fire.'

Apple want efficiency. They want power. They want performance.

In terms of where the current iMacs are...I'd be very concerned about A14x if I were Intel. They must know the relationship is on borrowed time.

The sheer order of magnitude of phone/pad sales pushing the dev' of the chip...must allow Apple leeway to create a tweaked for Mac 'ARM' chip that has higher clocks unshackled by a fanless environment.

And...they're cheap compared to Intel chips. You could put two A14x in an iMac and I think you'd see a frightening performer. ie. A14X dual core. Quad core. 8 core. You put an 8 core A14X in a Mac. The only thing I can think of is 'smash.' A beast. A wrecking ball. Transformational.'

I couldn't imagine 2 or 4 or 8 A12z cpus. One of them in an iPad is frightening.

The proof is ultimately in the pudding.

As somebody who remembers the PPC days. And the 'fear' over going INtel and all the 'holy war' arguments... I remain very calm about Apple 'coming' home to a Mac ARM chip.

There will be open displays of weeping and hails of triumphal returns to performance greatness.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591546313[/automerge]


I'm looking forward to a Mac ARM that has access to the iPad application market. Some of those apps are very packed with innovation, fresh, slick, paradigm shifting. Procreate is a wonder to behold.

People can talk about iOS being limited compared to the Mac OS. But those 'limitations' are walls that are being hauled down. Mouse. Keyboard. Adobe. AFFINITY apps being on the iPad market.

I expect Apple to step up their iPad OS efforts. (Very telling that Apple went 'iPad OS' in the 1st place...) You only have to look at iOS to see what Mac OS is getting next. eg. Metal.

Azrael.

Arm on Mac is going to be quite a different beast to Arm on iOS/iPadOS. As you mentioned, they will no longer need to be fanless (although I think we may see a fanless Macbook and Mac Nano). They will also not need to be reliant on batteries on devices such as the iMac. Also, I don't think any Apple Arm device has had more than 6GB RAM, but I expect every macOS device to have at least 8GB.

Rather than multiple chips, I expect many cores. Apparently the 2020 iPad Pro has 4x2.5 GHz + 4x1.6 GHz cores. I wouldn't be surprised to see 4 to 8 low speed cores for efficiency, especially running background processes, and a minimum of 8 high speed cores on the low end device, going up to 24, 30 or more the high end, probably also with higher clock speeds. The GPU may be even more crazy on cores. The 2020 iPad Pro has 8 cores, but a 2080 graphics card has over 600! That is a large range for macOS Arm GPUs to sit in. The lowest models may sit near the bottom of that range, but I don't think they all will.

By the way, macOS already has Metal.

EDIT: Forgot to add. I think the iMac will be redesigned soon. I think Apple will want all the current machines to stay the same in the swap to Arm because they want to show nothing is being lost, but will also add new models to show the flexibility it creates.

 

[Azrael9]

By the way, macOS already has Metal.

EDIT: Forgot to add. I think the iMac will be redesigned soon. I think Apple will want all the current machines to stay the same in the swap to Arm because they want to show nothing is being lost, but will also add new models to show the flexibility it creates.

Good post.

Yes. Mac already has Metal. (My point being, it was on iPad 1st and that Mac got it after...?) And that iOS and iPad are more representative of what's going to happen to Mac and 'Mac ARM' in the future. Software. And hardware wise.

I'm very intrigued as to where the train ultimately goes on the twin pillars of software and hardware.

I think re: design. Last time around, they kept the designs the same to keep the Mac buying audience reassured. eg. Retail stores.

So, currently, I don't think it will have any bearing on whether the iMac gets redesigned this year. Apple still have to sell iMacs over the next year. And a stale design doesn't inspire confidence. If the Mac Pro got a redesign, the iMac is long over due for 'next.'

These designs will stay the same on MAC ARM. Bar, perhaps, a show pony product eg. iBook that will show a preview of where Mac ARM design will go. ie. Very 'ARM' iPad style slender. Or just the 'Macbook' design that they canned but with genuine all day battery life on 'Mac' ARM.

The dramatic Mac ARM designs will come later once the software transition is complete. Allowed iMacs that will look dramatically slimmer (even more so than the redesign that's coming this year.)

Just getting the software transition done is a big job. So that would be the foundational focus of any transition, just as it was last time. Hardware follows that.

Azrael.
[automerge]1591549552[/automerge]

I think Apple will want all the current machines to stay the same in the swap to Arm because they want to show nothing is being lost, but will also add new models to show the flexibility it creates.

*nods. Agreed.

Azrael.

 

[DrRadon]

I am entertaining myself with some Math based on the thought of being struck with a redesign.

My assumptions are based on the other Macs being sold, like the 16inch MBP that comes with 1TB and 16GB ram as base configuration.

I assume the SSD will be Apples on, non user/technician replaceable, hardware since the T1 Chip deal even is in the MacPro.
I assume on the highest cost model i want Apple will include a 1TB SSD and 16GB RAM.
I assume based on todays upgrade from 1TB SSD to 2TB SSD that should be about 400€ extra.
MBP 1TB to 2TB is 500€ though.
I fear the loss of a RAM door because it was lost on the iMac Pro.
I assume Apples Upgrade to 32GB will cost 250€
Actually according to MPB RAM +16GB would be 500€, but MBP is soldered so who knows.
This is kinda sad because i was planing to go from 8GB to 40GB via Ram door.
I assume GPU and Intel Upgrade will stay at about the same price level with 500€ and 600€.
I would like the full keyboard wich i assume will remain at an extra cost of 50€.

So when i look at this i would pay roughly 4200-4550€ wich actually is surprisingly close to what i would pay right now (2TB, 40GB Ram), just by integrating the assumption of more RAM and 1TB SSD in the base model of the biggest 27 inch.
I´ll get 5% of because i got a voucher at my Apple dealer so it's more like 4000-4250€
So in a worst case, in case Apple raises the overall price, i could probably handle a price increase of 200-300€.

A RAM Door or technician replaceable RAM worth further lower the price by some percent points.

I actually think i could be okay with a redesign unless Apples crazies up the price to 5000€. FOMO is a redesign fear though.

Here is a potato to compensate you for your time reading my pointless math.

 

[Azrael9]

32 gigs of Ram not enough for you? What are you doing? But 'more' is never a bad thing.

My current 'walking dead' iMac has 8 gigs. There's no way I'd buy a new model with that amount.

I'd rather not lose the Ram door.

Think you could be right on the upgrade prices being similar to what they are now. Instead of BTO for 8 core, it will be ten core. Instead of Vega 48 it will be 5700XT. Similar prices.

I wouldn't rule out a price rise with a dramatic new iMac with the entry model costing £2k... With the top end model even topping out at £5k. Depends on if they go 8 core as standard with a 5700 gpu and 16 gigs of ram and 512 gig SSD as standard.

What might prompt this? The 24 inch model incoming. £999-£1750. (Look what they did with the 13 inch Macbook. You can't get a 16 inch Macbook below £2k now?)

Maybe they'll add more TB3 ports...raise the ram ceiling.

Expect the standard SSDs to be as they are on Mac Mini and Macbook this time around. Options to 2TB SSD? Sure.

I can live without the T2 chip.

Faster SD card slot might be nice.

Azrael.

 

[DrRadon]

32 gigs of Ram not enough for you? What are you doing? But 'more' is never a bad thing.

My current 'walking dead' iMac has 8 gigs. There's no way I'd buy a new model with that amount.


I wouldn't rule out a price rise with a dramatic new iMac with the entry model costing £2k... With the top end model even topping out at £5k. Depends on if they go 8 core as standard with a 5700 gpu and 16 gigs of ram and 512 gig SSD as standard.

4k video editing
i prefer a larger amount of ram If I cannot easily replace it.
i gave the price some more thought. As the iMac Pro starts at 5500€ and the Mac Pro at somewhere around 7500€ I would asume the normal iMac will have some sort of price ceiling below 5000€... unless of cause they go and just Make a more broad pro line up like with MacBooks Pro, than I could see the price more liquid towards the higher areas.

 

[CWallace]

I am extremely confident a new 23" iMac is coming and will be launched at WWDC. What I am less confident about is whether it will look like the existing iMac (just with a different screen size) or if it will be a new design (and if a new design, will it be more than just slightly thinner bezels?). The 16" MacBook Pro will also get a CPU upgrade to 10th generation Comet Lake.

I am also extremely confident that the 27" will see a spec bump at the BTO level with 10th generation Comet Lake-S CPUs and AMD RDNA 1.0 GPUs. It will also have a new TB3 controller (Titan Ridge) and WiFi 6 and probably Bluetooth 5.0. And I am tentatively hopeful it will have a 1080p webcam. What I am not confident on is whether or not it will look like the current model or it will have a new design/thinner bezels.

Frankly, I don't think bezel size on a desktop display matters all that much to Apple and probably not much to Apple users outside of this forum. And even for those who feel "the bezels are too damn wide", if the 2020 iMac was just the 2019 iMac with thinner bezels but the same CPUs and GPUs, if you had a 2017 (and especially a 2019), I doubt you'd rush out and buy one just for the aesthetics. It would be the new internals that were the driver to upgrade - improved aesthetics would just be a bonus.

October will be when the new iMac Pro is launched along with new RDNA 2.0 cards for the Mac Pro. And if we're lucky, Intel might have their 10th generation "B-Core" out and Apple could also update the Mini while we're at it.

 

[Moonjumper]

I think small bezels are important for two reasons beyond aesthetics.

1. Many people have limited space in their home environment. Smaller bezels frees up some of that space.
2. Multi-screen setups can have the monitors closer together when there are smaller bezels. This is becoming increasingly common. I would benefit from this.

I've just thought of a different possible arrangement for a redesigned iMac that I would quite like, and has some potential benefits. Instead of the arc on the back, what if the sides, top and bottom came back on a 45 degree bevel, then a flat back. It would keep the thin edges as now. It would allow greater internal volume as maximum depth is over a greater area of the back. It would be easier to machine vents into a flat surface, allowing a cheesegrater type approach, or similar.

 

[jazz1]

I'd love to see smaller bezels! I've got two external monitors and smaller bezels would narrow the gap between the iMac's screen and the very narrow bezels on my two external Dell monitors.

 

[Phil77354]

Yeah, smaller bezels might reduce the overall dimensions of the computer, if they don't go to a larger display at the same time!

I think that it is more of a design and aesthetic matter, the smaller bezels simply make the computer more attractive.

I do agree that the smaller bezels make a 2-monitor arrangement nicer, that is for sure.

 

[CWallace]

My second monitor is mounted on top of my iMac 5K (using a tall pole and a VESA adapter) so having the wider bezels is actually a benefit in my setup, but if the new models come with thinner bezels, I'll adapt.

 

[briloronmacrumo]

I am extremely confident a new 23" iMac is coming and will be launched at WWDC.

What leads you to be so sanguine about its appearance/announcement at WWDC?

 

[Mr. Warbles]

I wish this 2020 run would either give us the space grey option or just go to that color by default. We’ve had the light aluminum look for so long...time for a change. I think that looks so classy on the iMac Pro. Yep, just pure aesthetics but I’m allowed that dream...right?

 

[sublunar]

What leads you to be so sanguine about its appearance/announcement at WWDC?

All new form factor (and therefore an all new product) is the most likely to be presented at WWDC if any hardware is going to get announced but it's equally possible that they could leave it till October.

In the present circumstances it could be easy for a pre-recorded segment to announce any 23" iMac be pulled should Apple decide not to launch it at that point.

The 'iBook' - 12" ARM MacBook - looks like the likeliest candidate for a hardware release if at all because it's so intrinsically tied into a developer conference and would kick off development of apps for an ARM version of macOS. Imagine Tim wheeling out a legendary line about one particular Mac living a double life...

If they don't do it this year the transition would be delayed a year...

 

[CWallace]

What leads you to be so sanguine about its appearance/announcement at WWDC?

Enough leaks from enough sources with proven-enough track records of the existence of a ~24" iMac that is ready to ship. As such, I do not see Apple waiting until October as that would mean the product is sitting in a warehouse for months on end and "Tim Cook don't play that".

I expect the initial delay (the "March Miss") was due to either Intel and/or AMD not being ready or COVID-19 shutdowns in China impacting the production schedule. Once the production chain was in place and relevant parts were available, be it April or May, then COVID-19 lockdowns in the US resulting in the closing of Apple and third-party retail channels as well as the inability to hold media demos in Cupertino and New York as has been done in the past would have probably scuttled any plans to launch during those months. And the civil unrest over the death of George Floyd would have prevented a launch in early June.

So at that point, WWDC became the "earliest available option" and since there is precedent to launch iMac hardware at such an event (2017, for example) it also became the "most likely option" IMO. And since the ~24" will launch then, it stands to reason we will also see a refresh of the 27" (assuming the 21.5" will be replaced by the ~24").

 

[gusping]

Enough leaks from enough sources with proven-enough track records of the existence of a ~24" iMac that is ready to ship. As such, I do not see Apple waiting until October as that would mean the product is sitting in a warehouse for months on end and "Tim Cook don't play that".

I expect the initial delay (the "March Miss") was due to either Intel and/or AMD not being ready or COVID-19 shutdowns in China impacting the production schedule. Once the production chain was in place and relevant parts were available, be it April or May, then COVID-19 lockdowns in the US resulting in the closing of Apple and third-party retail channels as well as the inability to hold media demos in Cupertino and New York as has been done in the past would have probably scuttled any plans to launch during those months. And the civil unrest over the death of George Floyd would have prevented a launch in early June.

So at that point, WWDC became the "earliest available option" and since there is precedent to launch iMac hardware at such an event (2017, for example) it also became the "most likely option" IMO. And since the ~24" will launch then, it stands to reason we will also see a refresh of the 27" (assuming the 21.5" will be replaced by the ~24").

Well said. I completely agree with your reasoning, it is almost certainly WWDC now.

The big question now is, what level of treatment is the 27in iMac receiving? spec bump or a radical overhaul. Thankfully we are only 2 weeks or so away!

 

[ssong]

not sure how I missed this but...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1268422293862178816

 

[CWallace]

The big question now is, what level of treatment is the 27in iMac receiving? spec bump or a radical overhaul.

Spec bump is a given either with or without an overhaul.

I am not expecting "radical", but if we really are now SSD-only, that will open up some options for cooling and design.

not sure how I missed this but...(Fusion Drive claimed to be deprecated)

If true, then are we looking at 256GB or 512GB for the entry-level? My guess is 256GB on the ~24" and 512GB on the 27".

 

[Freida]

Don't post it here or else some 'idiots' will come and complain because fusion is awesome, right? HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

I swear, if I meet someone in person that will tell me that fusion is great I think I will ...... (insert an action)

not sure how I missed this but...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1268422293862178816

 

[Moonjumper]

Don't post it here or else some 'idiots' will come and complain because fusion is awesome, right? HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

I swear, if I meet someone in person that will tell me that fusion is great I think I will ...... (insert an action)

I wouldn’t say Fusion was great, but it served a purpose. I got my 2015 iMac second hand (swapped for my 15” MBP). It has Fusion, but it has 128GB SSD alongside 2TB HDD, and it seems to be able to have the SSD do almost all the work (I have about 600GB full). But I would have gone for SSD if I had the choice.

 

[Freida]

Fusion drive was Apple's way to 'improve' something when trying to cheat the customers back when SSD was expensive.
Few years later, it became daylight robbery and now its a "Gordon Ramsay" insult.
So, 2020 and all SSD. Anyone saying otherwise should meet Simon Cowell and Gordon Ramsay in person. :-D

Sorry but I'm not sorry

I wouldn’t say Fusion was great, but it served a purpose. I got my 2015 iMac second hand (swapped for my 15” MBP). It has Fusion, but it has 128GB SSD alongside 2TB HDD, and it seems to be able to have the SSD do almost all the work (I have about 600GB full). But I would have gone for SSD if I had the choice.