Sidebar Sidebar
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

If they were discontinuing they logically would get rid of the fusion drive first.. Then SSD.. Unless they won’t people to buy fusion drives because they have a lot of extra stock
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jony Ive and Co.
Spock said:
I find it odd that they discontinued the 1 TB SSD option and still kept that damn fusion drive, I bet has something to do with the chip shortage AND a redesign.
Click to expand...
what chip shortage makes them go fusion instead of ssd? i feel like this is separating the entry level 21" imac from the 27"
 
ikramerica said:
Apple painted themselves in a corner with the 5k iMac.

1. 5k is expensive
2. 5k monitors and panels are rare
3. Most people don’t need 5k in an iMac if it means $1000 more than 4k even if it’s 50% more pixels.

The only option for Apple moving forward is to dump the large iMac.

24” M1 4k iMac is the only model to come.

That leaves room for a “mini pro/pro mini” and Apple branded thunderbolt displays of 4k, 5k and 6k of various sizes.
Click to expand...
The reason why the 5K iMac exists is so that video editors can show full quality 4K content during editing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apple Knowledge Navigator and BaltimoreMediaBlog
G4DPII said:
Arrogance? Because I don't think computer manufactueres should get away with stuffing Mechanical HD's into computers that cost $500 or more. If you say so.
Click to expand...
Sometimes people prefer more storage than speed. Why is this difficult to understand? HDD prices are still FAR BETTER than SSD prices. I can get a 14 TB HDD for almost the price of a 1TB 980 Pro SSD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gnasher729 and BaltimoreMediaBlog
ikramerica said:
That’s only because Apple is losing margin on the 5k and Apple doesn’t like losing margins.

A good 4k monitor is much, much cheaper than a 5k. That’s just fact.

Then there is the one size fits all problem of a large iMac. When you are paying that much, an all in one with a fixed monitor size starts to be ridiculous as different people have different needs.
Click to expand...
Thing is, the 4k Apple screen is probably better than most - it's 4096x2304 at 21.5" - it's just physical size that's the issue if there is one at all. It's got more pixels than the traditional 4k monitor (3840x2160).

Apple have economies of scale that make 5k monitors relatively inexpensive compared to 4k monitors - it's just a question of whether or not they think the Apple GPU can adequately drive a 5k panel.
 
crevalic said:
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.
Click to expand...
Its a GPU limitation. The two ports on the Mac mini is EQUAL to the two controllers on the older Intel mini. Apple just did not include an extra port per controller.

eshop.macsales.com

Thunderbolt on the M1 Mac mini – When 2 Actually Does Equal 4

I have read a lot of complaints about the new M1 based Macs only having two Thunderbolt ports. Having only two ports doesn't seem like enough for professional use. Both my 2019 16 inch MacBook Pro and my 2018 Mac mini have four Thunderbolt ports, and I can't imagine using a Mac with only two...
eshop.macsales.com eshop.macsales.com
 
mdriftmeyer said:
He doesn't have to work for Intel or AMD or Fujitsu, HPE, Lenovo, etc., to note that Apple is down sizing their entire product lines. They are making disposable systems that will require upgrades annually or every two years creating far more waste with these solutions.

Unless Apple develops a fully modular, upgradable solution that the Mac Pro is no Professional working with heavy real-time workflows is going to touch them.

They made all this hoopla about the Mac Pro [when they should have gone AMD Zen 2 and future Zen processors] and then they gut it and x86 all together. Instead of rolling out Consumer for M series and then high end only x86 they jumped the shark on the M series. The chief architect of their CPUs bailed to do his own start up and took several key members with him and now is with Qualcomm.

You'd think if anyone would see the long game of ARM and General Purpose Computing it would have been him having stuck it out with Apple for over a decade.

The Industry isn't moving to ARM over x86. Microsoft couldn't care less about it. If they truly wanted to test the waters they'd have introduced an ARM based XBox X system, but they didn't. Without Microsoft 93% of the industry isn't jumping to ARM.

Mobile is saturated and now it's just ‘‘new camera'' better upgrade every 24-36 months. Oh look! A sport watch. Every 12-18 months or 18-24 months on that one.

Telling your professional users that we've developed workflows over the past three years to target their markets only to gut the only Pro lines they have sends the wrong message.

Pros will expect 1TB or more system memory options. And they don't ever buy soldered on memory. How do I know this? The hundreds of low memory ordered Mac Pros now being recycled as Refurb/Clearance by Apple, never mind having worked at Apple and inside Enterprise Services. Same happened with the iMac Pro. They want expandability, socket upgradability for 5-7 years, and will pay for professional service contracts.
Click to expand...
Apple has very messy product lines at the moment. Why does eliminating some options mean they are not going to be pro anymore?

Seriously people need to just stop with the Pro argument. I would seriously like to hear someone tell me how I can do 16k video editing on a Microsoft Surface Pro. Or complex statistical analysis that requires 20+ CPU cores and 128GB of RAM+. Or heavy graphical work that requires a Quadro instead of the gaming GPUs.

This who Pro argument has been going on for more then a decade now, and its seriously ridiculous. No classification of any manufacture can ever satisfy 100% of the pro market. There are some that need dual Xeons with a total of 200+ CPU cores, and 4TB of RAM. Others need to work only on 1080p video editing. Both are still "Pro".
 
  • Like
Reactions: EntropyQ3
Roller said:
I've heard the Apple is abandoning the "pros" arguments for as long as Macs have been around. But it depends on how you define "pro," doesn't it? I use a suite of applications productively on a 7-year-old iMac every day., and I can assure you that I'm every bit as professional as you.
Click to expand...
There is no classification of Pro that can satisfy 100% of the customer base. None. Some might need more cores and sacrifice clock speed, while others have workflow that needs more single threaded performance.
 
Roller said:
I've heard the Apple is abandoning the "pros" arguments for as long as Macs have been around. But it depends on how you define "pro," doesn't it? I use a suite of applications productively on a 7-year-old iMac every day., and I can assure you that I'm every bit as professional as you.
Click to expand...
I have designed houses and output plans for permits with my 9 year old MacBook Pro as well.
sublunar said:
Thing is, the 4k Apple screen is probably better than most - it's 4096x2304 at 21.5" - it's just physical size that's the issue if there is one at all. It's got more pixels than the traditional 4k monitor (3840x2160).

Apple have economies of scale that make 5k monitors relatively inexpensive compared to 4k monitors - it's just a question of whether or not they think the Apple GPU can adequately drive a 5k panel.
Click to expand...
the economies of scale make their 4ks dirt cheap for them though.

I still expect a standard 4k 24” iMac even though the 21.5 currently has 14% more pixels.
 
Why is RAM cost so much for an iMac, the price between 64GB and 128GB of RAM is crazy. Why is it they charge you more for more RAM instead of a discount for more RAM?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike_Trivisonno
Spock said:
I find it odd that they discontinued the 1 TB SSD option and still kept that damn fusion drive, I bet has something to do with the chip shortage AND a redesign.
Click to expand...
There is a shortage of NAND flash controllers, but AFAIK Apple makes their own. The price of flash _is_ going up ~5%.

I suspect though that the 512/1TB SSD options didn't sell great overall due to the cost; there is a reason the iMac has held on to it's spinning rust options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike_Trivisonno
dwaite said:
There is a shortage of NAND flash controllers, but AFAIK Apple makes their own. The price of flash _is_ going up ~5%.

I suspect though that the 512/1TB SSD options didn't sell great overall due to the cost; there is a reason the iMac has held on to it's spinning rust options.
Click to expand...
Apple doesn’t make chips. Even when they design them, others make them. And those manufacturers have lots of customers to supply.
 
BaltimoreMediaBlog said:
I have a question I've not seen an answer to. What is to prevent some company from cloning the M1 architecture like x86 was cloned? ARM is an instruction set that existed long before M1.
Click to expand...

Well, this question confuses me just a bit. M1 uses the Arm instruction set architecture. Anyone can get a license from Arm for that architecture, and make a chip. Cloning the M1 microarchitecture is a different matter. Someone could reverse engineer the M1 netlist (would be an expensive undertaking) and clone it, sure. They’d presumably still need an Arm license. But in doing so they may very well infringe Apple’s patents, to the extent Apple has patented things that it does in the M1 circuitry.

The original AMD clone of intel’s chip was done with Intel’s permission at the insistence of IBM, who demanded Intel allow it so they could have a second source of chips. At least that’s the story I heard (it was before my time :) ). So that’s a different situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos and BaltimoreMediaBlog
mdriftmeyer said:
They are making disposable systems that will require upgrades annually or every two years creating far more waste with these solutions.
Click to expand...
Apple Silicon Macs are powerful enough to give users at least 4 to 5 years of useful life, if not more.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
You'd think if anyone would see the long game of ARM and General Purpose Computing it would have been him having stuck it out with Apple for over a decade.

The Industry isn't moving to ARM over x86. Microsoft couldn't care less about it.
Click to expand...
Then why would MS go through the trouble of investing in an ARM version of Windows & introduce their own ARM tablet (Surface Pro X) never mind the myriad of ARM Windows laptops that have introduced?

In addition, Qualcomm will be sampling their next generation ARM SoC for Windows laptops in 2022 which will be designed by the new team via the Nuvia acquisition. I wouldn’t say ARM has no future.
 
Last edited:
kaycrystal626 said:
Why is RAM cost so much for an iMac, the price between 64GB and 128GB of RAM is crazy. Why is it they charge you more for more RAM instead of a discount for more RAM?
Click to expand...
Profits.
Last time I checked, the spot market price for 8GB LPDDR4x was $25.40 (Apple should pay significantly less).
Apple charges $200 for another 8GB of RAM for their M1 macs, a roughly 1000% mark-up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdoherty
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back