Apple Planning to Launch 4K 21.5-Inch iMac in Late October

[johnnyturbouk]

I know and its so sad.

The BIGGEST ? Computer Hardware maker in the world can't make a desktop computer for it's users that has inside it, the best? consumer parts on the market today.
It's such a dam shame.
So many people would adore Apple to offer such a device. And they could.
They could be THE one that those "into" computers would love to buy.

Why they don't offer just 1 range or even just 1 machine like this, alongside their other machines I don't know.

I can only assume they feel they cannot compete. It's a shame really

Excellent point. I tend to abstain from let's bash apple rhetoric, however, I do value constructive criticism, and you really hit the nail on the head there. Apple should offer more BTO option, i understand they stuck to a limited models in the early days and the rationale for streamlining their products, however, as you highlighted, they are the largest PC manufacturer on the planet, and should be working to be more inclusive.

 

[Steve121178]

I know and its so sad.

The BIGGEST ? Computer Hardware maker in the world can't make a desktop computer for it's users that has inside it, the best? consumer parts on the market today.
It's such a dam shame.
So many people would adore Apple to offer such a device. And they could.
They could be THE one that those "into" computers would love to buy.

Why they don't offer just 1 range or even just 1 machine like this, alongside their other machines I don't know.

I can only assume they feel they cannot compete. It's a shame really

Apple are not interested in that. They are interested in making money. They buy a select bunch of components in massive quantities to ensure the best possible price.

Apple doesn't care about giving people a larger choice. It doesn't make financial sense to do that.

For those "into" computers, they wouldn't even consider an Apple computer. Those people want no restrictions to what they want to do with their hardware. Building a Windows based PC is the only sensible choice for the enthusiast.

 

[deconstruct60]

Huh, what options? Did Intel release Skylake's with Iris Pro? Broadwell is the only one-chip solution atm. Skylake's with Iris Pro are scheduled for next year.

Why does the iMac require a one chip solution? The upper end of Intel's Iris Pro has not been particularly priced any cheaper than a discrete+VRAM solution. Intel has taken to pricing their top end Iris at least as expensive if not more so then discrete solutions. That makes sense when dealing with the highly constrained on motherboard space. The iMac isn't.

The Mini has a fundamental need for a one chip solution. The MacBook , MBA , and MBP 13" need one chip solutions. The iMac and the Mac Pro do not.

Apple could go with Iris Broadwell because it is dated and Intel is giving them an even bigger than normal huge discount on them. That seems to be somewhat what motivated Apple to put MBA CPU+GPU packages inside of the "education" iMac. But there too is a situation where there were better options technology wise, but also a "stuff more profit in my pocket" one.


P.S. Apple might use the "firesale" Gen 5 Broadwells to offset introducing a 'more affordable' 4K iMac. For example just wipe away the non Retina versions (except for the "education" one which would bump to current MBA chips or perhaps to the MBP 13" option which is less embarrassing performance wise). Iris Pro is more useful there in that it frees up the PCIe v3 lanes on the CPU package so do not need the new 100 Series chipset that comes with Gen 6 (Skylake). However, for the iMac models that are using discrete GPUs (which has historically been all except the first 1-2 entry models ), Iris Pro makes no huge impact. The iMac primarily leans on and runs the discrete GPU all the time. So the Gen 5 option would be just about as much of an odd-duck as the MBA CPU package option one is. More based on volume discounts agreements (and larger margins ) than what would be a better solution.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Why does the iMac require a one chip solution?

Simpler design (MB, ventilation, PSU...) and rMBP 15" will use the same chip if they update the model now. Besides Iris Pro 6200 is pretty good performer... same level as desktop Nvidia GTX 750. (According to Tomshardware.com) And that makes M370X quite obsolete. (Quite, because no 5k support with iGPU)

UPDATE: i5-5675C scales from 37W to 65W TDP. It is a real general purpose chip (expensive, but iGPU is double as fast as before). Could be used on 13" and 15" rMBP, Mac Mini and iMac 21.5". For 13" rMBP and Mac mini it would be huge boost both in CPU and GPU performance.

 

[dannys1]

Nothing particularly exclude that being some prototype or placeholder. Broadwell would have made sense in June but in Oct-Nov... not so much. There are better options.

You think so, Apple won't. Trust me 21" iMac will be broadwell and we want be seeing Skylake iMac updates until well well into next year. You've done some research, you've got some wishful thing, it still won't happen. I'm willing to bet heavily on that!

I think the rMBP will be the first Mac's to launch with TB3 and Skylake and that wont be until March 2016 at the earliest.

 

[manu chao]

i5-5675C scales from 37W to 65W TDP. It is a real general purpose chip (expensive, but iGPU is double as fast as before). Could be used on 13" and 15" rMBP, Mac Mini and iMac 21.5". For 13" rMBP and Mac mini it would be huge boost both in CPU and GPU performance.

And it would bust the thermal limits in the 13" MBP, giving off more heat that the currently-used processor.

 

[manu chao]

Why does the iMac require a one chip solution? The upper end of Intel's Iris Pro has not been particularly priced any cheaper than a discrete+VRAM solution.

Apple seems to differ given that it sells the two cheaper iMac models without a discrete GPU.

Intel has taken to pricing their top end Iris at least as expensive if not more so then discrete solutions.

This sounds you are guessing (instead of actually knowing) that the Iris Pro is more expensive then discrete solutions.

 

[OneMike]

I wouldn't mind having an iMac, but after working on 27 inch displays for the past few year, I can't imagine going back to anything less.

 

[Zarniwoop]

And it would bust the thermal limits in the 13" MBP, giving off more heat that the currently-used processor.

28W vs 37W. True. But maybe doable.

 

[manu chao]

Excellent point. I tend to abstain from let's bash apple rhetoric, however, I do value constructive criticism, and you really hit the nail on the head there. Apple should offer more BTO option, i understand they stuck to a limited models in the early days and the rationale for streamlining their products, however, as you highlighted, they are the largest PC manufacturer on the planet, and should be working to be more inclusive.

I see, so until maybe about a year or you ago, it was early days but now they need to change? The Mac has been gaining market share continuously for about seven years AND has been making bumper profits. You can argue that this was despite their limited offering but we can equally argue that it was due thanks to their limited offering. Having a streamlined product line-up is definitely one of key differentiators of Apple. And I even think that we can very strongly argue that it has been one of the reasons why they are successful.

 

[manu chao]

28W vs 37W. True. But maybe doable.

Given that Intel is offering 28 Watt Skylake processors as well, I think we need a better reason than 'doable'. Just because something can be done, does in no way mean in should be done.

 

[johnnyturbouk]

I see, so until maybe about a year or you ago, it was early days but now they need to change? The Mac has been gaining market share continuously for about seven years AND has been making bumper profits. You can argue that this was despite their limited offering but we can equally argue that it was due thanks to their limited offering. Having a streamlined product line-up is definitely one of key differentiators of Apple. And I even think that we can very strongly argue that it has been one of the reasons why they are successful.

I see your point, however, firstly - but i did not stipulate anywhere in my post that: until maybe about a year or you ago, it was early days".

Secondly, it was not until recently that apple decided to turn some of there machines into once purchased items, with very little upgrade potential. It started with soldered ram, then custom ssds. I remember how easy it was to upgrade my MBP or mac pro with custom ssds/hdds; even cpus and gpus in the MP. Furthermore, I appreciate that the many consumers rarely upgrade there machines and the half-life of PCs rapidly began to depreciate after 2010/11.

I am thankful i can still add RAM to the 27" imacs, and TB3 in skylake would allow ultrafast data transfer for a true lightening fast RAID network, perhaps even eGPUs

i currently using qnap, plex, and a lacie big disk [over TB1].

 

[consoleboi]

Finally. My parents are desperate to replace their 2007 iMac. I keep telling them to hold off just a little longer...once this comes out, I will tell them that it's time.

Sorry what are your parents doing that they desperately need a replacement? Surely surfing the net, sending emails, watching youtube doesn't necessitate a costly upgrade.

Just replace mechanical HDD with SSD and they're good for another 5 years.

 

[pat500000]

Now that i'm hearing that mac pro is being discontinued...I wonder if this iMac could out perform mac pro since i'm looking for alternative.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Given that Intel is offering 28 Watt Skylake processors as well, I think we need a better reason than 'doable'. Just because something can be done, does in no way mean in should be done.

Let's see. Intel Skylake-K is the only chip available atm. Everything else exists just on paper. With release date unknown.
If Skylake is not out for iMac 21.5" retina at the end of October, there's only two options: Haswell and Broadwell. Apple is not in hurry to update their Macbook Pro fleet this year so yes, they might wait for Skylake. Early 2016. With new form factor..?

 

[paoli]

I want a mac that is able to mount on a ****ing

GeForce GTX 980 Ti

WTF

or I will have to switch over a stupid pc after 30 years?

 

[MrX8503]

I want a mac that is able to mount on a ****ing

GeForce GTX 980 Ti

WTF

or I will have to switch over a stupid pc after 30 years?

You want to play games? Get a Windows machine.

 

[Piggie]

You want to play games? Get a Windows machine.

The point is WHY.

There are many many millions of people all around the globe that LOVE games.
If it were not for games players we would not have the machines we have today as it was GAME above all else that pushed hardware. Not office apps.

Why should you be forced to buy a Windows machine to play games?
Why should Apple stick their middle finger up to games players and offer them nothing?

I can only presume it's because Apple makes most money from lower end hardware at high prices and if they DID try and fit nice hardware then it would be more apparent how much of a mark up is going on.

I'm 100% sure most here would LOVE Apple to launch a Power/Gaming range of machines alongside their more basic range they do now.
They would sell really well.

It's a shame.

 

[johnnyturbouk]

The point is WHY.

There are many many millions of people all around the globe that LOVE games.
If it were not for games players we would not have the machines we have today as it was GAME above all else that pushed hardware. Not office apps.

Why should you be forced to buy a Windows machine to play games?
Why should Apple stick their middle finger up to games players and offer them nothing?

I can only presume it's because Apple makes most money from lower end hardware at high prices and if they DID try and fit nice hardware then it would be more apparent how much of a mark up is going on.

I'm 100% sure most here would LOVE Apple to launch a Power/Gaming range of machines alongside their more basic range they do now.
They would sell really well.

It's a shame.

Well said, and the option for consumers to upgrade certain components, that was feasible in older machines seems to of evaporated, I appreciate that i have little understanding of the inner workings of macs by apple engineers, however, the recent 'evolution' to soldering on everything and making consumer upgrades either extremely difficult or impossible, seems to be to drive up customers being forced into making the necessary upgrades when ordering their machines - something i deeply disagree with. There may be technical reasons for this, however, greed does come to mind.

 

[Piggie]

I can only assume that Apple is so desperate to try and stop looking like a silly fashion brand that no one in business REALLY takes seriously, hence their desperate attempts to hook up with IBM to try and get some of the business world to look at them in any real way.
That they are scared if they did launch anything GAMING related, it would damage them further.

In real business people use PC's and have done for decades.
And I'm not talking Fashion/graphics stuff. I real REAL boring mundane keeping the work running business.
That's the world of the PC and I can't see that changing.

Apple is like the Nike of computers. Yay great at fashion and makes money, but nothing anything serious would use.
Hence perhaps that's why they are scared to offer gaming. As they may well feel it would damage their attempts to try and get taken seriously

 

[MrX8503]

The point is WHY.

There are many many millions of people all around the globe that LOVE games.
If it were not for games players we would not have the machines we have today as it was GAME above all else that pushed hardware. Not office apps.

Why should you be forced to buy a Windows machine to play games?
Why should Apple stick their middle finger up to games players and offer them nothing?

I can only presume it's because Apple makes most money from lower end hardware at high prices and if they DID try and fit nice hardware then it would be more apparent how much of a mark up is going on.

I'm 100% sure most here would LOVE Apple to launch a Power/Gaming range of machines alongside their more basic range they do now.
They would sell really well.

It's a shame.

Apple isn't into PC games. Their machines are built for office/creative work.

You're more likely to use an eGPU than Apple supporting games.

 

[Piggie]

That's Apple's problem.

They are seen as the Arty/Farty computers.

Fashion/Design/home etc.

Serious needs/Work = get a PC

 

[Piggie]

The puzzling thing is that Microsoft are able to get up on stage.

Rule the world (and we know that's true) when it comes to business, and being taken serious as a brand, and also talk about Xbox without fear of not being taken seriously.

It's a shame Apple cannot be so confident.

 

[hkoster1]

I wouldn't mind having an iMac, but after working on 27 inch displays for the past few year, I can't imagine going back to anything less.

Funny you should say that. I've just built an eGPU for my 2014 base Mac Mini and am running that with an 21.5-inch 1920x1080 monitor, and I quite like it, especially since I sit fairly close to the screen. I could get used to having that size screen for my major desktop computer, especially if it was of Retina quality.

 

[OneMike]

Funny you should say that. I've just built an eGPU for my 2014 base Mac Mini and am running that with an 21.5-inch 1920x1080 monitor, and I quite like it, especially since I sit fairly close to the screen. I could get used to having that size screen for my major desktop computer, especially if it was of Retina quality.

Have you ever used a larger monitor?

It's fine, for me it's just like using a smaller iphone again after having a 6 plus though. Or tv