Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Future of the nR iMac?

H

herr lofi

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 18, 2014
10
0
Hey forum,

I'm wondering what you guys think. Will Apple do a refresh on the non-retina iMacs, or will they collect dust in a corner while slowly being replaced by retina iMacs?

I was hoping for an iMac refresh with the 980m this year, but it didn't happen. The prices didn't drop on the non-retinas either, which was disappointing.

Retina is not essential for me, which is why I'm asking. I work in music, and although more stuff on the screen is welcomed, it's not necessary.

What are your thoughts?
 
I think retina will soon be essential for everyone, and the prices will fall overtime. In a few years, non-retina displays will seem as outdated as CRTs.
 
None of it is absolutely necessary, but you will be amazed how much better Logic Pro is in retina resolution...
 
tillsbury said:
None of it is absolutely necessary, but you will be amazed how much better Logic Pro is in retina resolution...
Click to expand...

Eventually, the Retina Macs will drop into the normal iMac price points, with the possible exception of the base 21", IMHO. It would not surprise me if the 27" non-Retina is dead within a year or two. Basically, look at it like the MacBook Pro line. There will probably be a crap model that will linger for a while to hit a price point, but only people who don't know any better will buy it.
 
Certainly. And the 21" is likely to be 4k or similar very soon. Within a few years non-retina displays will go the way of VGA.
 
tillsbury said:
Certainly. And the 21" is likely to be 4k or similar very soon. Within a few years non-retina displays will go the way of VGA.
Click to expand...

Doubtless true. Let's hope the abomination that is LCD dies along with it.

Poor black levels, clouding, colour inconsistency, lag, ghosting, limited gamut, image retension and screen burn. Not to mention power consumption.

In hindsight we'll (rightly) look back at LCD and say it really wasn't very good. Especially when things like this become mainstream:

http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/product/broadcast-products-professional-monitors-oled-monitors/bvm-x300/overview/
 
Last edited:
the non retina imacs will never get any updates...next year only the 21.5" will get 4k display and thunderbolt 2 with some lower amd chips than 290x
 
Unless the Retina display allows Target Display Mode , which is not possible with current technology, the Retina IMac will remain a separate product.
 
fastlanephil said:
Unless the Retina display allows Target Display Mode , which is not possible with current technology, the Retina IMac will remain a separate product.
Click to expand...

Why? For all twelve people who use TDM? They don't allow it on the 21" anyway, and Skylake will be out in 2015. If they want to bring it back, next year is the time.

(The Mac Pro's Xeon's probably won't get it until the year after.)
 
herr lofi said:
Retina is not essential for me, which is why I'm asking. I work in music, and although more stuff on the screen is welcomed, it's not necessary.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

You don't understand retina. There is no "extra" space on the screen on the new iMac's just higher pixel density.

You can put the iMac retina in to 5K mode (as opposed to retina mode) but good luck being able to read anything on the screen from more than a foot away.

The reason to get the new iMac's for someone like yourself or I is the faster processor and not the screen. I use my iMac for making music and I went for the retina as you can't get the older iMac's with the 4Ghz CPU.
 
jbuk1 said:
The reason to get the new iMac's for someone like yourself or I is the faster processor and not the screen. I use my iMac for making music and I went for the retina as you can't get the older iMac's with the 4Ghz CPU.
Click to expand...

So you paid $550 extra from an 11% increase in performance? I'd doubt a lot of people would do that to be honest.
 
As GPUs are becoming faster, retina will be a non-issue eventually, so it will become a standard. I'm sure, though, that we'll keep getting non-retina iMacs as long as the retina monitors are expensive, in order to keep some more affordable options.
 
antonis said:
As GPUs are becoming faster, retina will be a non-issue eventually, so it will become a standard. I'm sure, though, that we'll keep getting non-retina iMacs as long as the retina monitors are expensive, in order to keep some more affordable options.
Click to expand...

Not for long, I'll bet, outside of the entry level 21". I doubt the nR 27" will exist 24 months from now, and I would not be at all surprised if it is dead next year.

Look at the MacBook Pros for your roadmap. The first rMBP was pushed out in 2012. Two years later, the non-retina MBP is dead (except for the crap model).
 
OP wrote above:
[[ I'm wondering what you guys think. Will Apple do a refresh on the non-retina iMacs, or will they collect dust in a corner while slowly being replaced by retina iMacs? ]]

The surest way for Apple to kill off the iMac line would be to offer only "high-end" retina iMacs, with nothing "down below".

I daresay that not everyone -- in fact, relatively few -- can afford to drop upwards of $2,500 on a personal computer.

When Apple can offer a retina iMac for, say, $1,200 we'll see the entire product line "go retina".

Until then, they'd better keep "the older models" in production...
 
rainydays said:
So you paid $550 extra from an 11% increase in performance? I'd doubt a lot of people would do that to be honest.
Click to expand...
More than a 10th more power is hardly something to sniff at.

It was the right choice for me.
 
jbuk1 said:
More than a 10th more power is hardly something to sniff at.

It was the right choice for me.
Click to expand...

Sure, if you're actually squeezing every clock cycle out of that CPU. The only problem is that if you do then fans will start ramping up.

For the money I would most likely buy a used Mac Mini i7 and use as a slave host for all my VIs and connect them via thunderbolt. Almost twice the power for just a little more.

But I certainly understand the appeal of one powerful CPU setup. Hope you'll make some great music with it! :)
 
Fishrrman said:
OP wrote above:
[[ I'm wondering what you guys think. Will Apple do a refresh on the non-retina iMacs, or will they collect dust in a corner while slowly being replaced by retina iMacs? ]]

The surest way for Apple to kill off the iMac line would be to offer only "high-end" retina iMacs, with nothing "down below".

I daresay that not everyone -- in fact, relatively few -- can afford to drop upwards of $2,500 on a personal computer.

When Apple can offer a retina iMac for, say, $1,200 we'll see the entire product line "go retina".

Until then, they'd better keep "the older models" in production...
Click to expand...

The cheapest real iMac is $1,299, and the cheapest 27" is $1,799.

Ignore the largely irrelevant $1,099 that only fools and institutions buy (I call them fools because they can buy a far better machine refurbished for the same price if they are that cost motivated). This will probably stay non-Retina for years.

Based on that, I'd put their 21" bogey at $1,299-$1,399. And given how prices on 4K monitors have been falling, I don't see any reason why they would not hit that point very soon.
 
The current 21.5" iMac $1099 base will be the 2012 13" Non-Retina MBP of the iMac line up.

$1300-$1800 for a 4K 21.5" iMac, $1999-$2200 for 5K 27" iMac.
 
rainydays said:
So you paid $550 extra from an 11% increase in performance? I'd doubt a lot of people would do that to be honest.
Click to expand...

I'd have paid $550 extra for no increase in performance, just to enjoy how much better Logic Pro is on a retina display...
 
nrubenstein said:
Why? For all twelve people who use TDM? They don't allow it on the 21" anyway, and Skylake will be out in 2015. If they want to bring it back, next year is the time.
Click to expand...

Actually they do allow it on the 21'' since the 2011 model. I was using my 27'' 2010 iMac in Target Display Mode as a monitor for my now headless Mac mini. Turns out it's actually more convenient to have it display in/be controlled from a window anyway; and it, like most of today's Macs, could never take full advantage of a 5K display.

Next year will be the optimal time as the release of DisplayPort 1.3 would allow other Macs to use the 5K display to it's full potential, and also help with bandwidth limitations in the 5K iMac itself.
 
nrubenstein said:
Not for long, I'll bet, outside of the entry level 21". I doubt the nR 27" will exist 24 months from now, and I would not be at all surprised if it is dead next year.

Look at the MacBook Pros for your roadmap. The first rMBP was pushed out in 2012. Two years later, the non-retina MBP is dead (except for the crap model).
Click to expand...

It's all about price, though. Apple has to keep offering a more affordable iMac, at all times. So, they will have to choose one of the two routes:

1. Go retina-only, but manage somehow to keep at least one retina model in lower price
2. Keep a couple cheap models with non-retina
 
rainydays said:
Sure, if you're actually squeezing every clock cycle out of that CPU. The only problem is that if you do then fans will start ramping up.
Click to expand...

That's such a ridiculous statement. I know you're trying to be controversial but a fast cpu isn't only worth it when running all cores at 100% for hours on end (even if you had proof that the cooling can't cope. Which you don't.)

A faster cpu reduces delay even at lower volumes of work.

The iMacs fans are about 33db on full anyway. Hardly an issue and I've not had that happen outside of playing games anyway.
 
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