Future iMac = Apple Display with Mac mini stuck to the back?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by booyahbooyah, Dec 16, 2013.

  1. booyahbooyah, Dec 16, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2013

    booyahbooyah macrumors regular

    Sep 11, 2011
    The Situation™
    1) The current iMac is basically a super-thin Apple Display with a mini sized computer embedded in the back.

    2) iMacs (and Desktops in general) have seen declining sales for a long time, and are one of the smallest selling products for Apple.

    3) When an iMac goes out of date, its perfectly functioning monitor has to be thrown into a landfill along with it. What a waste!

    4) Product range complexity is creeping into Apple lately. When Steve Jobs re-joined Apple, he was shocked to discover hundreds of products being made that sold in minute quantities. He slashed their product range down to a handful. Simplify, simplify.

    My Proposed Solution™
    1) End the all-in-one iMac.

    2) Let the new iMac be a combination of a new Apple Display and a new Mac mini.

    3) Make it so that the Mac Mini is small and unobtrusive, and can be coupled with an Apple Display somehow, so that it looks as seamless and unobtrusive as the bulge behind the current iMac.

    4) To encourage people to buy the combination, and not just a Mac mini (with, say, a Dell monitor), give a feature to the Mac mini that will exclusively work on an Apple Display. E.g., retina display.

    5) Maybe even offer a wireless coupling of the Mac mini with the Apple Display (and maybe make this the exclusive feature).

    6) By doing this, Apple will have significantly reduced product range complexity (by eliminating an entire product range, the traditional iMac), and it will reduce waste.

    Your Thoughts? :apple:
  2. Bear macrumors G3

    Jul 23, 2002
    Sol III - Terra
    It would have to be bigger than a Mini to hold the current cpu/gpu/etc in the iMac. The mini just doesn't cut it for me.

    As for wireless displays, that's bad if you want multiple systems in the same area.
  3. cocky jeremy macrumors 68040

    cocky jeremy

    Jul 12, 2008
    Columbus, OH
  4. iSayuSay macrumors 68040


    Feb 6, 2011
    I doubt so. iMac has always been about all in one in mind. It's not a computer for everyone. I've had one and honestly I kinda regret my purchase. One small problem inside and the whole system needs to go down. THE WHOLE SYSTEM. Now as a work computer that's unacceptable.

    However I'd love a consumer grade MacPro a.k.a reinvented Mac Mini a.k.a headless iMac. Maybe a small tower just as big as current Mini but as tall as current Airport Extreme so it could accommodate more hardware. A Mac Mini with desktop CPU, 1HDD + 1 PCIe SSD, 4 RAM slots and beefier graphic would suit my need pretty well.

    I could connect it to any monitor I want (27" Dell Ultrasharp comes to mind), simultaneously with some other peripherals (Macbook, PS/Xbox, STB, or even BD player, anyway you want it), also if somehow the computer goes down I don't have to lug around the heavy chunk of display with it. Most importantly I don't have to waste a perfectly good display when the time comes for upgrade. Less e-waste to the environment ;)

    I doubt that would ever happen though. Apple is all about getting thinner and lighter nowadays, often with some compromises. Sad.
  5. booyahbooyah thread starter macrumors regular

    Sep 11, 2011
    I hear ya -- so I edited it. :)
  6. joe-h2o macrumors 6502a

    Jun 24, 2012
    As long as it could still sport whatever the top of the line mobile GPU of the time was, then it's not out of the question, but it rather detracts from the all in one solution don't you think?

    Apple already sells something like you are suggesting - the Mac Mini and a Thunderbolt display.
  7. Thunderbird macrumors 6502a


    Dec 25, 2005
    1). Yes, but it is still a powerful desktop class computer

    2). Yes, but the iMac is the top selling desktop for Apple

    3). What do you mean "out of date"? Is there an expiry date on the iMac? No it doesn't "have to be" thrown into a landfill, they can be recycled. The iMac has more recyclable and non toxic materials than most computers.

    4). Apple does not currently have "hundreds of products" (I doubt they ever had). The current product list is still a far cry from what it was in the 1990's. The iMac has only one line with two sizes, in contrast with the multi-line of laptops with numerous sizes.

    1). No

    2). God no.

    3). Why should the iMac go down to the Mac Mini's performance level and pathetic graphics?

    4). Oh God.

    5). ????? Seek help

    6). ???? There is no product range complexity
  8. richard13 macrumors 6502a

    Aug 1, 2008
    Mill Creek, WA
    The iMac != Mac Mini + Display.

    If it were, I'd definitely consider the Mini but it just doesn't have the horsepower.
  9. minimalism macrumors member

    Nov 28, 2013
    The whole purpose of iMac is to eliminate clutter at the same time be suitable work and play without the hefty price of a Mac Pro.

    I consider the Mac Mini like a HTPC, which you can integrate with your big screen, watch movies and do casual surfing needs.

    Thunderbolt Display is for those who work with their MBP at home to maximize screen size. You buy MBP for portability, not screen real estate. It is dreadful to work on a tiny screen. Trust me.

    If there's a breed that is about to die, I'd say it is the laptop. More and more people can accomplish tasks using their tablets. Why carry a bulky laptop for browsing, email, and simple tasks when an iPad can do the same?

    Desktop era won't die, there will always be people (like me) who prefer to have an all-in-one desktop rather than a separated one.

    For the OP, the product you're saying already exists, it's in the form of Thunderbolt display and Mac Mini.
  10. Irishman macrumors 68030

    Nov 2, 2006
    And it begins again. People have been asking for a headless, upgrade able iMac (or mid-tower gaming Mac back in the early 2000's) forever! Hell, I was one of the ones calling for it back then.

    But I got over it. It's just not who Apple is and it's not the product they're going to make.
  11. malvicus macrumors member

    Jul 28, 2013
  12. Prise macrumors regular

    Dec 14, 2008
    For me, the iMac has always been an "internet" Mac, where I primarily use to browse the net requiring very little processing power.

    The iMac was never intended to be upgradeable, powerful gaming machine, and powerful graphics rendering work. For gaming, PCs have and always will be a better option than Macs. While for professional graphics work, the Macbook Pros and Mac Pros are much more suitable.

    In my view, there's no need to transform the iMac into a "all general purpose" computer, which would change the purpose for which is was designed--an elegant one in all solution for casual everyday use.
  13. fredr500 macrumors regular

    Apr 12, 2007

    How about a mac mini with an HDMI or DVI input? Have the default power on be HDMI if no response from the internal Mac so even if the computer portion fails you still have a great display.

    Could double as a TV, or monitor for a PC, and be used with a mini (or Pro) when it is time to upgrade.
  14. AndrewMRiv macrumors regular


    Oct 29, 2013
    It is a very interesting idea and I see your point. It wouldn't be a bad idea if they offered that, but I think it overcomplicates things.

    The target audience for iMacs, like others said, are people that want a simple system. Those that want super powerful specs go for a Mac Pro or maybe a custom built Gaming PC.

    There are people that keep their iMacs forever until the whole thing is dying.

    I do see your point, though! It can be seen as a major flaw that if one part fails in the iMac, then the rest of of it (like its display) have to go to waste.
  15. fastlanephil macrumors 65816


    Nov 17, 2007
    I think it's a mistake to use currently available technology to imagine future product solutions. Who knows what Apple is developing in their labs. Don't count on any form factor to be continued indefinitely.
  16. minimalism macrumors member

    Nov 28, 2013
    Highly doubtful. Why use HDMI when you have Thunderbolt cable? Apple usually goes on its own path, and not follow the herd.
  17. fredr500 macrumors regular

    Apr 12, 2007
    I'd settle for Thunderbolt, but I think HDMI would be more versatile since I could hook up a cable box or game system. But I want HDMI that supports full resolution, not just 1920X1080.
  18. jondunford macrumors 6502


    Oct 22, 2013
    Going for a poo Moderator
    where does it say that?
  19. Huddy macrumors member

    Oct 9, 2009
    Somebody didn't read the thread.
  20. jondunford macrumors 6502


    Oct 22, 2013
    Going for a poo Moderator
    i did and it clearly says end the all in one iMac
  21. vincebio macrumors 6502a


    Jun 27, 2005
    He lost me at 'Future ='

    you gotta love mac forums for designer advice.
  22. cocky jeremy macrumors 68040

    cocky jeremy

    Jul 12, 2008
    Columbus, OH
    .. which is kind of the purpose of the iMac.
  23. jondunford macrumors 6502


    Oct 22, 2013
    Going for a poo Moderator
    i never said it wasn't
  24. Kayan macrumors 6502

    Jul 7, 2010
    This seems like a bad idea. I'm sure it's not the first time someone has thought of it (in particular Apple) and shot it down for many reasons. iMac is a great desktop solution.
  25. minimalism macrumors member

    Nov 28, 2013
    Apple is known for its restricted system, look at their charger for their iPhones and iPads compared to the USB charger of Samsung Galaxy.

Share This Page