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.
2020 iMac
- Thread starter Glockworkorange
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Who the heck is spending time looking at or even noticing bezels?!
Too much thought and time wasted on this bezel ****!
Must be same people that can’t handle "THE NOTCH". You’d think the apocalypse was upon us.
Too much thought and time wasted on this bezel ****!
Must be same people that can’t handle "THE NOTCH". You’d think the apocalypse was upon us.
The large bezels means there is a big gap to my second screen. With smaller bezels i might even be able fit a third monitor on my desk.
This is dope bro!!!!I just came across this new redesign concept yesterday:
https://theultralinx.com/2019/07/apple-needs-to-take-notes-from-this-gorgeous-imac-redesign/
Love love LOVE the rounded corners and super thin bezels.
This design while great pretty much cancels out mounting your Mac with vesa.I just came across this new redesign concept yesterday:
https://theultralinx.com/2019/07/apple-needs-to-take-notes-from-this-gorgeous-imac-redesign/
Love love LOVE the rounded corners and super thin bezels.
I just came across this new redesign concept yesterday:
https://theultralinx.com/2019/07/apple-needs-to-take-notes-from-this-gorgeous-imac-redesign/
Love love LOVE the rounded corners and super thin bezels.
Shut up and take my money!
Is there a need for a “iMac Pro” model? A redesigned iMac could just have options turned up to 11 and be that bridge, without a distinct model name.
Pro=Xeon, which means more money, besides the fact that they are two totally different computers inside that simply share the same chassis.
Realistically, what they also should do is move the MacBook Pro line up the chain and give it Xeon-E, a stouter GPU, higher memory ceiling, a thicker chassis, better battery life, scissors keyboard and a better HDR display. Perhaps, they will do this with the 16” MacBook Pro, but then that leaves the 13” and 15” as Pro models, which confuses the lineup a bit...anyways.
There isn't a *real* reason for people to buy the iMac Pro now that the Mac Pro is out... except they want one. And Apple charges a big premium for them. They will be show-off machines that make money for Apple.
[automerge]1575475420[/automerge]
I'd like to see the electrical connections between the stand and the display. Is the stand is an optional accessory?I just came across this new redesign concept yesterday:
https://theultralinx.com/2019/07/apple-needs-to-take-notes-from-this-gorgeous-imac-redesign/
Love love LOVE the rounded corners and super thin bezels.
I disagree. Huge price difference when you take the monitor into consideration,
Well, it's a mixed bag. Your up-front cost is cheaper, it's true, but you're basically re-purchasing the monitor every time you upgrade the system. Repairs and replacement also become more difficult, and putting all of your eggs in one basket means you're increasing the number of failures that can hinder the entire system.
Just as an example, my iMac (non-Pro) has developed the "pink fringing" issue along the edges that people claim indicates a sign of impending failure. A few small insects also crawled into the screen and died, which is surprising - first monitor I've had where this happened, but also my first iMac, although I've read enough stories from other people who suffered the same thing to know that this isn't a totally rare thing. How much money does Apple want to repair these issues, all of which of course cropped up right after my extended AppleCare expired? Somewhere in the range of $600-700. I bought a used LG Ultrafine 5K monitor for just a bit over that, and I would not be surprised if someone said that they charge more if you were bringing in an iMac Pro instead.
Raw price aside, consider what paying that fee for the monitor means. If I sink another $600-700 into my iMac to replace the screen I'll be in monitor bliss again, but when I upgrade this computer then the repairs to the monitor go down the drain. Modern iMacs don't have a "target display" mode; there's no way to even use this as an external monitor (aside from remoting solutions, which is a whole additional level of complexity and latency). When I think about my overall computing life, I've upgraded computers far more frequently than I have monitors; investing in a monitor that won't last between systems doesn't make financial sense.
That's just talking about costs related to monitor repairs. If we're talking overall financial sense, I'm not even touching on the fact that the Mac Pro marks a return to the modular structure so that people can upgrade individual components without having to entirely junk the old system, which again represents cost savings and efficiency. The iMac Pro does not afford such a luxury - another example where the up-front cost may be cheaper, but it may not really be cheaper in the long run.
For me, it's a shame because the hardware in this iMac is still working very well for my purposes, and I could imagine how I might get another 3-5 years out of this system before desiring to upgrade, maybe even more. At the rate this display is going, though, it's going to be the reason that pushes me to upgrade. I knew the risk going in but didn't realize the display would be as flakey as it has been; given this experience, this iMac will likely be my last iMac, especially now that the 2018 Mac minis are such strong performers (and assuming they continue to be updated).
If I needed pro-level hardware and could afford the Mac Pro, I don't think I'd even consider the iMac Pro, purely over the monitor issue.
Last edited:
I can't believe we are still using the same screen sizes as 2009. I remember people here joking in 2004-06 about a 30-inch iMac to match the 30-inch Cinema display. At the time, the biggest iMac was a 20-inch. It's been 15 years and we haven't seen that 30-inch iMac yet. I thought it was coming for a while. But now I am not sure. Took the plunge because in the case of redesign I don't want to end up with a RevA product that has a lot of problems, and I assume they are going to solder RAM on the bigger iMac this time.
Now that Apple has given attention to the Mac mini, and the Mac Pro, they need to give some to the iMac. Bezels aren't my biggest problem. I do have a fact that will upset you guys wanting smaller bezels though, the glass part of the current bezel is the same size as the iMac G5 bezel.
If I were in charge, I would have a 20", 24", and 30" All 16:10 and Retina. I prefer 16:10, and the 20" would be $999 as a good starter for students or secondary computer. I would have to bring back Front Row and a remote too. And dashboard. and a bunch of other macOS features that they have stripped away...
Now that Apple has given attention to the Mac mini, and the Mac Pro, they need to give some to the iMac. Bezels aren't my biggest problem. I do have a fact that will upset you guys wanting smaller bezels though, the glass part of the current bezel is the same size as the iMac G5 bezel.
If I were in charge, I would have a 20", 24", and 30" All 16:10 and Retina. I prefer 16:10, and the 20" would be $999 as a good starter for students or secondary computer. I would have to bring back Front Row and a remote too. And dashboard. and a bunch of other macOS features that they have stripped away...
I bought a 2019 iMac, mostly for Ms. Jouster's use.
But if they release an update based on the XDR I'll buy one for me. I think it's a terrific design.
I realize that it's silly to care so much about the shape of a computer when my attention is on the OS and apps. But I do.
But if they release an update based on the XDR I'll buy one for me. I think it's a terrific design.
I realize that it's silly to care so much about the shape of a computer when my attention is on the OS and apps. But I do.
I don't think it's silly at all to care about the design of a computer. Apple built their legacy on design and distinguished itself from the rest of the industry. It's in their DNA.
And the XDR is terrific design indeed! I hope those type of bezels, and perhaps a bit of the design language on the stand (minus the price...) eventually make their way to the iMac line
Last edited:
The iMac Pro likely still has a business case vis-a-vis the Mac Pro. The base iMP is $1000 cheaper, has more RAM and storage and a better GPU and includes a 5K display which is a $1300 option on the Mac Pro. The iMac Pro seems to be popular with software developers and audio (podcast) producers and I expect it also does decently enough in the video production market.
Well, sort of... the new iMac will start at $999*
* Requires purchase of optional $2,500 stand to operate
(Sort of like the $7.99 Dominos pizza offer that ends up $20 by the time it gets to your door!)
I expect the main reason we are still at 27" is that is the "commodity" 5K display panel size, though LG does have the 34" 5K/2K widescreen display that Apple could design an iMac update around. Designing a larger custom panel for Apple would raise the price of the base machine and depending on the resolution, might limit the available options for the second display (with the current 27" panel, any QHD panel offers the same pixel resolution so windows do not re-size when moved between them).
The 5K iMac was announced (and released) within a month of the announcement of the first 5K monitor, and there have been few 5K monitors. I doubt "commodity" has much to do with it. I wouldn't be surprised if the 5K screen only happened because Apple asked for it.
Something not existing doesn't mean it won't, especially with Apple's buying power.
That there have been few 5K monitors is probably one of the reasons we're still stuck on it. Apple shipped 18 million Macs last year and less than 4 million of those were desktops. So between the 5K iMac and the Ultrafine, LG maybe cleared a million panel sales. Sounds like a lot, but compared to television panels and more mainstream computer panels, it's likely nothing.
As much as Apple is pilloried for their pricing, that they are the overwhelming buyer is likely why they could afford to add an entire computer to the display for a couple hundred more than Dell, HP and others were charging just for the display at launch (and why those OEMs all soon dropped the model from their lineups, leaving only LG themselves and Iiyama).
It could also be that Apple's marketing shows that 27" is the optimum size for a 5K display. Dell's 8K display is 32" as is Apple's 6K XDR display (and both display's underlying technologies are currently far too expensive for the iMac).
As much as Apple is pilloried for their pricing, that they are the overwhelming buyer is likely why they could afford to add an entire computer to the display for a couple hundred more than Dell, HP and others were charging just for the display at launch (and why those OEMs all soon dropped the model from their lineups, leaving only LG themselves and Iiyama).
It could also be that Apple's marketing shows that 27" is the optimum size for a 5K display. Dell's 8K display is 32" as is Apple's 6K XDR display (and both display's underlying technologies are currently far too expensive for the iMac).
I don't even know why the thing is thin. Worst design change there could be. You can't even see the sides during use, and it doesn't make the footprint any smaller because the stand is the same size.
Apple's had cooling problems with some of these thin iMacs, they apparently forgot how to make a function computer and instead decided to focus on a semi thin look. I'd be all for a thicker iMac, even getting back to white iMac levels of thickness. That would be a real powerhouse.