Yeah, I really want to take a laptop into work each morning, peer at a 13 or 15" screen for 7 hours and then take it back home with me in the evening.
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.
Apple Discontinues 512GB and 1TB SSD Configurations of 4K 21.5-inch iMac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I did that with my 2012 iMac. Made so much difference. Its not that difficult to effect the changes. Fiddly, but worth it. Prefer that the next iMac is screwed rather than glued and if its the sort of design being showed, that's quite feasible.
Wasn't that expensive for me to put the SSD in although at the time it didn't support trim function, but soon changed that.
Yes it might not be as easy to upgrade as opening other PC's, but not really difficult or expensive.
On the new iMac no doubt it will have even faster SSD, but I already have SSD external for home use that's rapid, so as long as new iMac has minimum 256Gb SSD for my home machine it will be fine and my little iMac 2012 will then join the G5 I have networked in the loft, along with my boxed working Lisa and Apple II
The start up on the iMac after SSD upgrade was multiples faster.
Pretty much. Though there are situations where you know you will always use your machine sitting at the same desk, situations where you can’t take your computer with you because of security concerns, etc. But the market reflects that - desktop sales have been on the decline for a long time.
You missed the part about docks and all the things that go with that, like external monitors. I'm staring at a 34 inch curved monitor attached to my Macbook right now. And lugging to work? Well, many people who work at an office often being something with them every day, like lunches or coffee or whatever. Lugging 3-4 pounds isn't exactly a chore.
But, to each his own.
Yes or take a spare larger monitor in a backpack, look for a power supply close by and fall over the cable.
For presentations, word processing etc. and general admin they are probably fine, and no doubt others will say they do high level graphics/audio/video processing/rendering etc. on theirs, and good on them.
Many of the complaints on this site about Apple are really down to users picking the wrong kit for the wrong job.
Nothing wrong with AIO's, and look forward to a beast of an iMac. within 18 months, probably after the first. silicon iMac. Then we will consider procuring replacements for our workhorses.
I hate laptops personally (Apple and PC), I'm too old school, fat fingers, don't like touchpad, and I'm no fan of facial recognition that some seem to feel is life or death in any future iMac, even though its proven that security wise its very poor.
The iMac Pro was a lovely machine for us, did its job superbly, and if any new iMac betters that then another purchase on its way.
There's absolutely no good reason to stop supporting MacOS on Intel processors. All the high level features (what the user can see) can be just compiled twice, once for Intel, once for ARM. If there are lower level features that would require extra work, maybe that will not be done for Intel, but all the user visible features would be there.
My 2014 MacBook Pro still gets macOS updates. I'd hate being an early 2020 MacBook Pro owner if they're considering ending support in 2-3 years.
Also my little Guppy have jumped on top of the water, after I exchanged water with Lemon Fruit Jelly. Dunno why c")
It is also a mystery to why they are cutting down on the iMac
I cannot seem to get my head around it.
It is also a mystery to why they are cutting down on the iMac
I cannot seem to get my head around it.
Now that Apple is a major landlord, this small SSD could have to do with them wanting to rent Apple customers more iCloud space. In the future, an Apple device may mainly be used for accessing rented storage space, an endless income stream requiring an up to date Apple device and credit card to access.
It's certainly a good time for the 4k iMac - now 2 years old this month - to get a refresh. And the M1 Chipset as it stands is capable of replacing the Intel model. The CPU and GPU capabilities are more than enough to replace the 7th and 8th gen Intel CPUs.
I must say I like that particular corner. 5K Retina display is just £300 more than the equivalent 4K iMac (both with 6 Core, 16 GB, 256 GB to make the prices comparable, 3.1 instead of 3.0 GHz), that's dirt cheap for that display. It looks like you are comparing the cheapest 4K with the cheapest 5K, and that's how you got $1000 difference, but that's not a valid comparison. You need to compare the most expensive 4K with the cheapest 5K so all the other parts are the same.
I have a drawer at work with a lock, and unless I was working from home the next day, the MacBook went into the drawer. No need to carry it (and no way to go into London by car).
External monitors and docks.
I have an employer provided Surface, I attach it to a dock and two big external screens at both home and work.
I haven't read all posts so sorry if it was discussed. But do you think there is chance on new iMac now? Shortages suggests that.
Would apple ship its more powerful M1X first in iMac and 16" later? It sounds weird to me. Can Apple introduce higher clocked M1 for low-end iMac? To differentiate from laptops and beef up especially graphics.
It is highly unlikely they update them with new Intel chips.
Otherwise it seems like there will be no iMacs till summer when I think will Apple introduce M1X MPB 16" and may some other on WWDC. It can be Apple sacrifice for future growth tho.
Would apple ship its more powerful M1X first in iMac and 16" later? It sounds weird to me. Can Apple introduce higher clocked M1 for low-end iMac? To differentiate from laptops and beef up especially graphics.
It is highly unlikely they update them with new Intel chips.
Otherwise it seems like there will be no iMacs till summer when I think will Apple introduce M1X MPB 16" and may some other on WWDC. It can be Apple sacrifice for future growth tho.
I think at WWDC they announce the 16” MBP and iMac, and maybe higher-end 13” MBP.
I'd be happy with an M1 honestly. It's still plenty fast for the majority of work you'd want to do on an iMac. But they'll most certainly introduce an M1 iMac at some point, unless sales have been really bad or something.
If you go back to the old Amiga days, they used to have chip memory and fast memory. The FAST RAM could only be accessed by the CPU, whereas the Chip memory was accessed by the rest of the computer, notably by the graphics system.
Just a thought but if they are going to allow RAM upgrades this RAM could be accessible by the CPU only and not be a part of the unified RAM setup that the graphics could access.
For example, this could be something that a Apple could do with the 27" iMac. Make all SKUs 16Gb - theoretically maxing out the on-package unified RAM on the M1. Anything added via the slots would then be accessible by the CPU only.
I expect this could be the model followed by high end Mac mini Pro and iMac for example. Max out the M1 RAM and anything after that is for the CPU only.
Last edited:
I upgraded in stages. Firstly when it was new I immediately bumped it to 8GB RAM over the factory 4GB. Later I bumped it to 16GB. Then maybe two years ago I bumped it again to 32GB, added the i7 and the SSD. Before the last upgrades my iMac took about a minute or so to start up. Afterward it was 22 seconds flat from hit the power button to ready to use. Sweet!
I didn't actually swap out the old 512GB HD. Doing so would have required a thermal cable or something. Upon recommendation I left the HD where it was and placed the SSD behind my optical drive given the curvature of the back's design allowed sufficient space for it. I didn't have to sacrifice my optical drive and I didn't require any additional cables because the connection was already in there. So I actually have two drives in my machine wherein I can use the old HD as a backup.
Yeah, in my industry trying to work like some council hotdesker would make you a laughing stock!
I'm a desktop person because I don't like trackpads or using the keyboards of a laptop because of what I feel is an awkward hand position. I find the keyboard and mouse of a desktop much easier to use. Also I don't need my computer to be mobile--I have an iPad for that.
I'm not saying it works for everyone, but it works for me.
I'm not saying it works for everyone, but it works for me.
they could do that. just treating the in-package RAM as system cache gives them most of the same benefit but a lot more flexibility, though. Allows supporting more monitors at higher resolution, or more complicated GPU workloads, at the penalty of some speed (but not that much speed as long as the algorithm is such that the working set fits mostly within the cache).
It is probably that people who buy a 21.5 iMac, do it with a budget in mind. While people who go all out on an iMac, they will go to the larger model.
If a product does not sell, then no point of keeping it.
Funny thing is I did work with a guy who did exactly that on a 13". Nothing else just his 13"... I have no idea how he did it.
I am with you - desktops all the way, with a lightweight laptop companion device for mobile work.
However it all depends on the tasks you are doing. I can do about 70% of my work on a 16" MBP [with monitor etc], but the other 30% needs a desktop.
Like they are taking the 512GB and 1TB SSDs and setting them aside for the M1’s, because they’ll need them. Leaving the 256GB SSD and 1TB Fusion drive options could be due to: 1. over abundance of SSDs in supply, and 2. the discontinuation of the 1TB Fusion drive with the M1 iMac release.
... or a variation of all that.
LOL, sure, let me go ahead and plug in 2 monitors, like on the Intel Macs...oh, doesn't work. No matter, I'll live with 1 screen, at least I'll have 1 port free to plug in my fast external drive...oh, it runs at 30% of its speed on my older Intel Mac...
Yeah, totally the same as on Intel Macs.
You're probably not aware, but 10th Gen Intel CPUs, like those in the 4 port 13" MBPs that are still sold today, brought some pretty big advancements regarding TB controllers in comparison to older models. Older 4 port Macs had one TB controller per a pair of ports on each side, which was a very simple implementation and it's true that Apple could've easily replicated that. However, the 10th Gen models have TB controllers integrated into the CPU and can dynamically allocate full bandwidth of both controllers to any pair of 2 TB ports - on the same, or opposite sides. That is a considerably more complex implementation which took Intel a while to get to and I wouldn't be surprised if that is what Apple is going for too, they just needed a bit more time to get it ready.