Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2015 iMac Reviews: 'Best All-in-One' Desktop, But Lacks USB-C and Fusion Drive Isn't Standard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Those institutions buy directly from a sales rep and not online nor from an Apple stores at those prices they get better prices.
Average new Apple consumers know almost nothing about computers therefore they will bite the new Apple and buy the model they can afford or whatever the 'genius' offers them.
Apple indeed can offer lower prices for many of these crippled configurations, and it is very intriguing how many of these low end models are they really selling.
The disposable nature and expensive pricing for not new tech components are really showing a focus on not long term customers, but a focus on how to milk money out of uneducated users.
Bad though is that they seem to release these models just to sell during the holidays and if I buy one of the high end models, next year in the spring time they will be releasing the right models for us to be lured into upgrade again..
how are the prices of last year models in the used market faring???
The 27" is just too much screen for me. I originally bought the 27" in 2010, but it was bigger than what I needed.
Because apparently even the low margin players like Dell and HP can't put out an All-in-one with similar screen and specs. I checked out Dell's all in one and not only are they similarly priced, but they are using 4th generation i5 CPUs and they don't have anywhere close to a 5k screen built in for the 27 inch version.
HPs best All-in-One, which is $1,599
Haswell i7 and
58.4 cm (23") diagonal FHD WVA 10-point touch-enabled WLED-backlit (1920 x 1080)
Last edited:
I think this goes along the idea that Dell, HP, etc don't really want to compete in the same market as Apple. I will say Apple has been successful with its premium pricing and premium products. What bothers me is for that premium pricing they cut some serious corners. I mean, I'm spending 1,500 dollars for a computer and I'm getting a 5400 rpm drive. I was actually surprised to see that people actually made those drives in this day and age.
Yes, but the product has to be produced and part of the lineup to sell to institutions. They will get a better price when they outfit all the dorms in a University. But the product has to be there. A genius should direct every consumer to either the ultra cheap version if they are on a budget or to the 4K with Fusion drive.
I've been looking at Dell's and HP's All-In-Ones. They are still using Haswell CPUs and they have 1,980x1080 screens, even in the 27inch size. There really is no comparison between the products offered by anyone else that I can find and these 4k and 5k iMacs. So complaining that you know what the price is for a 4k all in one with Broadwell CPU or even more so for a 5K with a Skylake CPU is ridiculous. There isn't anything else out there that is comparable. Of course you are going to pay a premium for a device that has no competition in the market.
And nothing is disposable about an iMac. I've been using them for many years and even a decade old there are people eager to take them off my hands. The latest iMacs won't fair quite as well due to non-upgradeable memory and thermal issues. But other than that I suspect they are built to last and they will float around in the used market for years.
Well if not Dell and HP, where can I find a 21# 4K All-In-One? Maybe what you want is Apple to just have started the 4k at $1,600 and skipped the HD version. Because suggesting that the computer that no one else in the industry can match is somehow still over priced for its specs seems a bit confused.
Yeah, with Windows, cables all over the place and a screen that is either way worse or $2,500 alone.
I agree with everyone's disbelief over Fusion not being standard on these Macs. I have watched a number of iMac generations come and go since Apple introduced the Fusion Drive technology, and thought surely with this next update it will come standard on the base configuration… But no. It truly beggars belief. Anyone who understands the bottleneck here (most MR members probably) can do a build-to-order with Fusion or even 100% SSD. The real problem here is that customers who walk into a store and walk out with a Mac, not knowing any better, are going to get the sluggish experience and wonder why Macs are so slow. That Apple's current management would happily create this situation shows very little care for retail customers, and little long-term thinking about how creating a great customer experience out of the box creates more loyal customers. Very short sighted.
My opinion of Apple goes down another notch. (20-odd year Apple customer here.)
My opinion of Apple goes down another notch. (20-odd year Apple customer here.)
+1 Kalsta.
Similar situation. You think by now in 2015 Apple would see the opportunity to differentiate themselves from the pack by standardizing fusion and SSDs in their drives across the board and if necessary slightly bump the base pricing for a premium experience ..no matter what Mac u own. Spinning drives are history in 2015 for main storage...just good enough for backup material now. Most probably another year to wait for better storage options, DDR4 RAM, TB3. Tune up your present system and hold out!
Similar situation. You think by now in 2015 Apple would see the opportunity to differentiate themselves from the pack by standardizing fusion and SSDs in their drives across the board and if necessary slightly bump the base pricing for a premium experience ..no matter what Mac u own. Spinning drives are history in 2015 for main storage...just good enough for backup material now. Most probably another year to wait for better storage options, DDR4 RAM, TB3. Tune up your present system and hold out!
Not contesting Apple's strategy here. But, I think people are upset about the sentence that I have highlighted. And I think, rightfully so.
I don't think Dell and H-P are even contenders in the market. They are probably making up their losses in volume. The key point here is that no one believes Apple is riding such a razor thin margin that going above and beyond a 5400rpm drive would break it for them. This comes out as either Apple abandoning their drive to "paint the back of the fence" or worse as a cynical ploy to upsell. I think its fair to be upset about either scenario, at least question Apple's motives.
Bottom line here is that Apple (Tim Cook) isn't interested in pushing out compelling products that might motivate the Tech Award crowd to upgrade their machines out of want not need. Rather it's pushing out computers that people buy only because they have to: there old one has either broken out of warranty or so old as to finally be too inefficient productivity-wise to use.
Apple is using a playbook from the 00's that is long in the tooth even for us chronic upgraders; keep the basic list price year over year and just upgrade slightly. There was a time when that worked for me, and I think other Mac diehards because the new machines were better. But spending $1800 on a machine that not just lacks so many components that should be standard in 2015, but has ones that are literally leftovers from the 00's only pushes me into the "I'll upgrade when my machine breaks or becomes too slow.
Apple is using a playbook from the 00's that is long in the tooth even for us chronic upgraders; keep the basic list price year over year and just upgrade slightly. There was a time when that worked for me, and I think other Mac diehards because the new machines were better. But spending $1800 on a machine that not just lacks so many components that should be standard in 2015, but has ones that are literally leftovers from the 00's only pushes me into the "I'll upgrade when my machine breaks or becomes too slow.
Alas no. The reason the previous 5k iMac couldn't do target display mode anymore was because 5k over Thunderbolt 2 simply couldn't carry the bandwidth necessary for 5k@60Hz. Thunderbolt 3 doubles the bandwidth and would allow it. Since Thunderbolt 3 got delayed as it was tied with Skylake but since that's been out a while, people expected the new iMacs to use Skylake (which they do) and so expected that they'd use Thunderbolt 3. Unfortunately, they don't use Thunderbolt 3, which is frankly, baffling. The two Thunderbolt 2 ports on the back of the new iMac should be USB-C ports carrying Thunderbolt 3 instead. It is beyond bizarre that they didn't do this.
Edit: Love your avatar btw.
I wouldn't say it's that easy. I built my own desktop last year. It's not really for the masses.
Apple has convinced themselves that "silent updates" do not need to present a "wow" factor.
I would hold off until next year's iMac re-design, you can tell it's coming.
I would hold off until next year's iMac re-design, you can tell it's coming.
You're giving away your Windows prejudice calling it 'primary school'. Windows 8 onwards are excellent operating systems.
I have been a huuuuuuge Mac fan over the years, having owned many Apple laptops/desktops during that time but as a tech enthusiast I've drifted away from the OS X platform because the computers have become ever more locked down an un-upgradable and specs seemed to drift ever downwards. I still use the iPhone and watch because they're still class-leading products but the computers seem designed for non-techy people these days.
Also, regarding Apple having no real competitor for 'trendy, beautiful computers', it's hard not to mention Microsoft at this stage with their Surface Pro and Surface book lineup.
That's where I'm at now. Basically, I'll be driving my rMBP into the ground so to speak. I mentioned this elsewhere, but my 2012 rMBP is and continues to be the best laptop I've owned. That means the bar has been set rather high expectation wise. Seeing the lack of effort Apple has displayed in this roll out only reinforces the idea that I need to defer any new purchases until i have too.
The SurfaceBook is definitely on my short list of possible replacements but I want to see them in real use before deciding. Plus I really wanted a desktop this go around as my monitor is getting rather old.
From what I've seen, most people can't seem to get past the complaining about under spec'ed models, let alone if the upgraded models go along the lines of fair price for what you get.
Thanks. Great example. Slightly less sharp display, but it includes Skylake CPU. Though I note that it has a suggested price of $1,700 and I can't yet find it actually for sale yet. Seems to be about the same price as an iMac.
Since they are gluing everything they are disposable and not easily upgradable. That you can't replace the internal drive is a shame.
Beyond that... the issue with this iMacs is that all other components that are expected to be standard nowadays from Apple aren't offered:
No 5400 rpm drive at all...SDD 512GB or 1TB or a Fusion drive
RAM that isn't overpriced
Full keyboard with numeric pad plus home/end/pg up/down and full arrow keys, wireless and with backlit keys
Dedicated GPU for the 21"
In addition to your points, I would like to add the following: Best Buy doesn't sell the proper configurations therefore people like me that would like to buy one and financing it with zero interest using BB credit card cannot do anything.
The Apple financing options currently available aren't there for existing customers, only for new applicants.
Sincerely Apple seems to be very happy with eh current crop of newbies that are willing to pay up the cash every quarter for whatever mini tweak is done to their product offerings. Obviously we are no longer their main interest.
Last edited by a moderator: