Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why a larger than 30" iMac? Why not a Mac Studio with one or two high-end monitors?

I can think of one good reason. I hope it is true. An iMac does not need an HDMI or Thunderbolt cable and should not be limited by the HDMI or TB interface. With a direct, no cable interface to the GPU the speed potential is not limited.

I can imagine an 8K screen running at 240 frames per second. Maybe they will connect the GPU directly to the LCD panel and build something with video we've not seen before.

Display Port 2.1 can already 240 Hz at 8K (if at slightly decreased colour fidelity), but 120 Hz is fine. I don't think the connection is the limited option. At 5K, 240Hz is easily with DP 2.1.
 
On college campuses as well. That, or really convincing knockoffs.

As far as the 13" Pro goes, yes, it has an outdated design, but there's a large contingent of kids that get a MacBook for college as a High School graduation gift and spring for the Pro due to prestige or the implied higher performance. Keeping the 13 around provides a (relatively) affordable entry point to the "Pro" Apple ecosystem, and I'm sure that these M chips are produced at such a scale where the savings offset the cost of the minor changes made to the main logic board and other components needed to keep the new chip in the old 2016-era shell.

One other perk of the touch bar-it's the only remaining MacBook where you can easily adjust the keyboard brightness via reconfiguring the control strip. After the asinine changes to the F5 and F6 keys, the only way to regain this functionality on a new Air is to edit a .plist and deal with mismatched key icons. I never understood why they would push dictation and focus modes, both easily accessible in software, to the detriment of a useful hardware shortcut.
and it's easier to adjust volume, screen brightness, forward or reverse video content and access to emojis on the Touch Bar!
It's great, it's only the so called influencers that think it's not or people that have never used it, who think it's better to save $100 😏
The 13" Pro will get a chassis upgrade and people that aren't easily influenced, will still prefer it to the Air!
 
I'm sick of waiting for a proper replacement for my 2017 iMac, so I guess Apple won. I'm buying a Studio Display and a Mac Mini. I tried the Dell 27" 4K monitor for a while, but the scaling issues are terrible, and the image quality isn't anywhere near Apple's. I've waited for the Samsung Viewfinity S9, but I should have known better. Based on the first review, it also sucks.

The only question left: how much am I going to spend? The 2017 iMac was costly then, but I will surely break my personal record at the Apple Store. I just want a speedier machine, screen size is fine. You would expect that a similar, more up-to-date machine would be cheaper, but I need to spend hundreds of dollars more this round to get a similar setup.

A Mac Mini with 32GB of memory, a Studio Display, and an Apple keyboard and trackpad is now $3,646. Yes, it's faster than my current iMac, and I can reuse the display when I upgrade the Mac Mini in a few years, but holy ****, I've never spent so much money on a freaking computer.
I did the same thing last year coming from a 2015 iMac. The real kick in the nuts was when I had to add a keyboard and mouse. I had forgotten about that extra couple hundred bucks!
 
Have a feeling that the M3 won't be that big of a performance change that Apple big selling point will be "it runs cooler". Apple has hit the point of diminishing return on performance for the the bulk of their customers the newer chips mainly just benefit the true professional customers do video processing and rendering for TV and film or recording scores for TV and film that requires hundreds of tracks and many outboard sample libraries. M1 was the major change for Apple's typical customer, M2 was big change for those who hadn't tried M1, M3 and moving to 3nm mainly gets them better cooling spec which means they could bump the clock speed up for some performance, but will it be noticeable to most no.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: soyazul
They said the fonts looked OK, but some also said "it is like watching the world through goggle lenses... which sounds quite perceptible to me.

So even if the clarity is sufficient (and I agree that most don't need 220+ DPI desktop screens either), moving from a 6K (let alone 3-4 5K screens) to a 4K screen is quite the downgrade.
Well, to be honest I have yet to hear those kind of reviewers. I must've watched a dozen of these, and they all say that you can't distinguish the virtual from the reality. Could you link me one or more of those you mentioned?
 
Have a feeling that the M3 won't be that big of a performance change that Apple big selling point will be "it runs cooler". Apple has hit the point of diminishing return on performance for the the bulk of their customers the newer chips mainly just benefit the true professional customers do video processing and rendering for TV and film or recording scores for TV and film that requires hundreds of tracks and many outboard sample libraries. M1 was the major change for Apple's typical customer, M2 was big change for those who hadn't tried M1, M3 and moving to 3nm mainly gets them better cooling spec which means they could bump the clock speed up for some performance, but will it be noticeable to most no.
there are rumors that the GPU in the M3 is supposed to be a significant upgrade.
 
I'd like to see the 24'' iMac with a M3 Pro variant

Torn on this 30'' iMac rumor. 27'' is a sweet spot on screen size for me personally

Of course I am unlikely to buy an iMac as I am not an AIO fan so I guess it's a non-issue since the consumer monitor Apple currently sells is 27'' heh
 
I'm sick of waiting for a proper replacement for my 2017 iMac, so I guess Apple won. I'm buying a Studio Display and a Mac Mini. I tried the Dell 27" 4K monitor for a while, but the scaling issues are terrible, and the image quality isn't anywhere near Apple's. I've waited for the Samsung Viewfinity S9, but I should have known better. Based on the first review, it also sucks.

The only question left: how much am I going to spend? The 2017 iMac was costly then, but I will surely break my personal record at the Apple Store. I just want a speedier machine, screen size is fine. You would expect that a similar, more up-to-date machine would be cheaper, but I need to spend hundreds of dollars more this round to get a similar setup.

A Mac Mini with 32GB of memory, a Studio Display, and an Apple keyboard and trackpad is now $3,646. Yes, it's faster than my current iMac, and I can reuse the display when I upgrade the Mac Mini in a few years, but holy ****, I've never spent so much money on a freaking computer.
I’m on the same boat. I think I’ll wait till the end of the year to pull the plug.
 
I don't want to be toxic but can someone explain to me why people give any sort of relevance to what Gurman said. He said just omega obvious/consensual things all the time.
I get this guy has a good network but what he said is just pointless

You're reading MacRumor's interpretation. If you read the article, it goes into detail on some of the 15 devices.

It's like someone talking about a movie where A B C D and E things happen and MacRumors summarizes it "Protagonist does 5 things to have a pleasant ending". And you're simply saying "well duh the ending is happy. what's the point? that's obvious".
 
I was just watching the 2007 Macworld keynote at which the iPhone was announced, and it made clear to me how involved Steve Jobs was in the whole process of making Apple’s products at that time.

If you look at how many products Apple is putting out now, and how many services they are involved in, it becomes clear that managing product creation at Apple these days must have quite a different style. It’s a much bigger company than it used to be, and I think it is a credit to the leadership team that they’ve managed to keep the company culture intact.

That said, a lot of Gurman’s predictions seem rather pedestrian and predictable.
 
They said the fonts looked OK, but some also said "it is like watching the world through goggle lenses... which sounds quite perceptible to me.

So even if the clarity is sufficient (and I agree that most don't need 220+ DPI desktop screens either), moving from a 6K (let alone 3-4 5K screens) to a 4K screen is quite the downgrade.
They said that about the world which was passthrough looked like through googles...not the text. Pretty sure we read the same reviewer. The passthrough world will be slightly lower because generated by the cameras. The text is generated by CPU and reportedly looked great. However - I have never used one and so maybe it will look terrible. Dont know.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.