Sure is
I used one at a store a while back and I just kept thinking "this screen is so small"
Such an odd product direction decision after all the years of 27" iMacs
(I disregard the 21.5" iMacs totally -- talk about small!)
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's M4 iMac: What to Expect
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sure is
I used one at a store a while back and I just kept thinking "this screen is so small"
Such an odd product direction decision after all the years of 27" iMacs
(I disregard the 21.5" iMacs totally -- talk about small!)
I think they were blindsided how fast AI gained traction into the mainstream.
But I can’t believe they didn’t didn’t know what Qualcomm were up to with their new processors. Granted it took the competition a good 4-5 years to catch up.
I just hope Apple has something in their back pocket with M4 and M5 in the coming years.
They absolutely knew
Qualcomm bought a company that was started by ex Apple Silicon staffers
(the name escapes me at the moment)
It's bizarre to me that Apple, with all their resources, isn't able to figure out how to retain key talent a bit better than this. It's coming back to bite them....right now
The iMac size range used to be 4K 21.5” and 5K 27”. All Apple did was create a 4.5K 24” model that hopefully appeals to buyers of both. The M1 8/8 SoC when playing Diablo 3 using Rosetta 2 was equivalent or better FPS. Unified memory yielded very respectable RAM/SSD performance. I was disappointed that Apple never made a more powerful iMac in a large size featuring at least a M1 Pro SoC, and I still have that opinion. I think the simple update to a M3 is disappointing for how much time Apple had to produce a better performing iMac. The M4 still won’t be enough considering the incremental improvements only to the SoC. They need a better display, and more memory then 24 GB max. Apple needs to not think of the iMac as a marketable toaster and bring back the magic and attractiveness of the iMac line.
I agree totally
They missed the mark
Honestly ... I think they realized the 27" iMac was too good of a value and that was part of the nixing
Sadly, my days are buying the latest and greatest are over. I’ve been getting by on iPads for the last few years and for the most part, it’s worked. Still, there are times when I feel like I’m playing a violin inside of phone booth. 🎻
Last edited:
It still comes with 2 Apple shaped stickers.
I bet most people don't know what to do with them. Now they have a purpose.
Firstly when have you ever had such a choice with an iMac or MacBook for that matter? The first iMacs all had the same bezels regardless of what colour the chassis was. Later iMacs were all with the same colour bezel as were the MacBooks as well.
And who says there is no data? Many are assuming Apple chose the white bezels simply arbitrarily when they may indeed have data on this very thing that influenced their final decision.
I also understood there were supposedly aftermarket masks available to cover the white bezels and make them black.
More seriously nothing is ever perfect—everything involves a compromise or trade-off. If you’re are deterred from a device that suits all your needs simply because of one small aesthetic compromise then there must be some other issue at play.
You haven't ... but when folks were so acclimated to the black bezel that just "disappears" it would be nice to have an option for white or the older black as it's a bit polarizing and a very subjective preference
If you don't have choice of options, there is no way to have good data on what is actually preferred
This is basic A/B testing methodology
You can't do an A/B without offering an A and B
These devices are large and prominent in peoples offices and homes
The aesthetics are a big deal, especially on a typically consumer focused model like the iMac
Aesthetics aren't to be hand waved away like that -- not on an iMac
Worrying - I've got Mateviews too.
I wonder what cable they are using? HDMI could be an issue as HDMI 2.0 only supports up to 4K @ 60Hz so the 4k+ MateView's HDMI input tops out 3840x2560 @ 50Hz and not 60Hz. USB-C to USB-C ought to work at 3840x2560 @ 60Hz though.
Life is replete with things people are long used to until they disappear without apparent explanation and they have to get used to something else or nash their teeth in endless frustration. Just because people are used to something is no guarantee it will remain so indefinitely. Nothing (except death and taxes) is forever. Change is one of the few constants of life.
Last edited:
Yup. 27" is a good size but I found 32" preferable. Over the course of a decade I went from 17" MBP to adding a 24" then 27" then 32" then another 32". Currently a 16" MBP plus two 32" with the (now lame color) 27" unused off to the side. Two 32" side-by-side above the MBP display seems like a sweet spot for my work (standup desk, today). Three external displays plus MBP, although productive, can get visually challenging.
When a Mac Studio finally gets added to the mix I will be curious to see if I still find the two 32" side-by-side display arrangement optimal. My needs and the responsiveness of various apps continue evolving along with the silicon.
Note that the changing nature of computing needs and capabilities over time is why I consider all-in-one computers like iMac poor choices for desktop computing long term. YMMV of course. I have a friend who insists on nothing but a 20-21" iMac and has been through several as either display or mobo have failed over the decades.
Last edited:
Which would be fine for granny with her email and for about a zillion tightly-managed K-12 implementations that need absolutely lowest cost.
It is a very silly argument to simply suggest that cheaper is better. No one with trained eyes/brain would suggest that a cheapy 4k 42" tv is visually the equivalent of an Apple Studio Display. Similarly, folks trained to design sensitivity find the visual design impact of an Apple Studio Display to be superior to most third party computer monitors.
I use very good third party computer monitors for cost reasons but very much wish I could financially justify a couple of the superior Apple Studio Displays instead. Some day perhaps I will.
Last edited:
How would a basic M4 perform vs an M1 Max? I have been thinking about buying an iMac to save space (no more speakers and laptop dock needed) and not have to mess with plugging and unplugging my MacBook Pro from dock and external monitor. Geek bench scores were all over the place.
see https://nanoreview.net/en/cpu-compare/apple-m4-vs-apple-m1-max
We still don't know how much RAM a base M4 can address, however I suspect it's still the odd 24 GB as the base M2/M3 offers.
Advantages of Apple M4
- Newer - released 2 years later
- More modern manufacturing process – 3 versus 5 nanometers
- 57% faster in a single-core Geekbench v6 test - 3810 vs 2431 points
- Around 289.6 GB/s (241%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth (faster unified memory r/w)
- Supports up to 64 GB LPDDR5-6400 RAM
- More powerful Apple M1 Max GPU (32-core) integrated graphics: 10.6 vs 4.1 TFLOPS
Comparison of the current M3 to M1 for current iMac to previous iMac perfromance
Advantages of Apple M3 over a M1
- Newer - released 3 years later
- More modern manufacturing process – 3 versus 5 nanometers
- More powerful Apple M3 GPU integrated graphics: 4.1 vs 2.6 TFLOPS
- Supports up to 24 GB LPDDR5-6400 RAM
- Around 34.15 GB/s (50%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth
- 26% faster in a single-core Geekbench v6 test - 3009 vs 2383 points
Last edited:
Depends on whether or not you need GPU or not. M1 Max would wipe the floor with M4 for GPU.
For CPU, M4 is much faster single-core, and a bit faster multi-core.
So, it really depends on what you plan on doing with it.
Last edited:
Note that "not have to mess with plugging and unplugging my MacBook Pro from dock and external monitor" is in reality a moot point when comparing against a desktop box of any kind, because for pure desktop mode there is no unplugging. And most MBP speakers are quite good, good enough that an iMac would likely not be appreciably better.
I went from using MBP back and forth for mobile and desktop mode driving external displays to now using an M2 MBP in mostly desktop mode and the older Intel MBP for mobile. I find having a (mostly) dedicated desktop box to be quite nice. Nice enough that I will buy a Studio for desktop when it becomes time to fully retire the 2016 MBP and use the M2 MBP for mobile.
As to the question of power, Max chips are by far more powerful. Much more powerful than a generation or two at the basic level (e.g. M1 Max is ~stronger than M3 basic). But you also need to include amount of RAM, which is hugely important in the power consideration under Apple's Unified Memory Architecture.
Certain specialty operations like 3D will specially excel under the most modern chips. Folks using those specific apps generally know who they are.
Last edited:
The Neural Engine and AI will have more to do with it than the 25% performance gain
Its remain to be seen how much is impacted by the improved neural processor in real life. Other platform implementations such as PC use the CPU/GPU as well as if available neural processor. Another 15 days to go.
Last edited:
You are right. I was looking at the wrong scores.