iMac With M2 and M2 Pro Chips Could Arrive Soon, Says Latest Conflicting Rumor

[JimmyG]

LOL, no, nothing personal. I just view it as environmentally unfriendly. Mini + Monitor seems better, if either fail they are easily replaced. It makes no sense to me that there isn't some kind of switch or part of the main board that would allow a "dead" or no longer useful iMac (processor wise) to function strictly as a monitor.



I disagree with you here. Yes, under very basic use scenarios one might have an iMac for 10 years of daily driving. I think those people are outliers. "Power users" should never have bought an iMac in the first place. A far more like scenario is, as you mentioned, is it becomes too slow for daily use, but as discussed, Apple does not build in any functionality to continue using the screen only as a second monitor. There are probably a ton of 5k iMacs around that are considered too slow to use but the monitor is functioning perfectly well. Couldn't we could all use a secondary market of 5k screens?

I get that people like AIOs, I just don't have the same opinion for the reasons above.

I'll posit that it is less eco-freindly for a user to run two power supplies at home vs. one and that all of the extra materiel that goes into a Mini or Studio (e.g. aluminum structures, etc>) are all superfluous and could easily be eliminated. I have zero interest in adding to the energy expenditures required for the extraction and production of manufacturing materiel. Case in point...

Aluminum production, alone, currently contributes ~2% of the total greenhouse emissions globally...

<<
In addition to being an energy-intensive process, aluminum manufacturing contributes approximately 2% to global
greenhouse gases (GHG), equivalent to roughly 1.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide. More than half of GHG emissions related to aluminum manufacturing come from the generation of electricity used in primary aluminum smelting. A transition to carbon-neutral aluminum is likely to require significant capital investment in decarbonizing the electrical grid and in specific technologies used in primary smelting and recycling.
>>

...from...

Congressional Research Service
"U.S. Aluminum Manufacturing: Industry Trends and Sustainability"
October 26, 2022

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47294

That Apple were to produce a display that acted as the master power supply and modularized their M(x) boards to slot into a non-aluminum display would be the most eco-freindly solution, IMHO.

Win-win, AIO users are satisfied that their desks are clutter free and employing a single power supply, and "upgraders" can easily repurpose their displays with next-gen M(x) modules.

 

[jouster]

I have a Mac Mini M2 Pro together with a 42" OLED, never had a better setup.

My system has a similar form, though more modest specs: a baseline M2 Mini and a 30” monitor. Like you, I’ve never had a better setup.

I can’t imagine wanting another iMac, given how easily I will be able to swap out the Mini or monitor as needed. And having one more power cable to manage is a non-event.

With multiple commercial options for bolting the Mini to the back of the monitor, the entire system is as compact as an iMac.

It’s the perfect mix of compact and upgradeable.

 

[theluggage]

I guess for one, future-proofing. The M1 chip is close to 3 years old at this point, and an M2 Pro Mac is likely to receive software updates for longer.

The obsolescence clock only starts ticking when Apple stop selling the computer - they need 5-6 years support to meet consumer regs in EU/UK/etc. The longer they keep selling the M1, the longer they'll have to provide the bare minimum of updates.

By continuing to sell the M1 Air and the M1 iMac, Apple have effectively made the M1 their "long term support" option.

C.f. the M1 Pro/Max/Ultra which only stayed on the market for 18 months and are already ticking their way towards vintage-ness.

 

[Bug-Creator]

That Apple were to produce a display that acted as the master power supply and modularized their M(x) boards to slot into a non-aluminum display would be the most eco-freindly solution, IMHO.

Just change the MacMini to a USB-C PSU and any current display capable of delivering power could turn into a 1 cable iMac with the help of a simple VESA mount.

 

[azentropy]

It is funny how Apple can't win here -- sell the nice 27" iMac, have everyone **** on the fact the display is throw away. Separate them and bemoan it doesn't exist.

I completely agree for the iMac Pro. The Studio and Studio Display is a MUCH better option and ends up being less expensive that the iMac Pro was and even the last high end non Pro 27" iMac. The issue is for those who what a nice 5K Display, but don't need any performance. The Studio Display paired with a base Mac mini (and keyboard and pointing device) is pretty pricey ($1599 + $599 + $99 + $79 = ~$2400 retail) compared to the old 27" iMac Base model ($1799 but discounted for less). And it gets more expensive from there since the old 27" iMac was easily and inexpensively able to upgrade the RAM. I think a lot of people are on older 27" iMacs and don't want to downsize to the 24", don't want the cost of the ASD paired with something, and don't want less then a 5K monitor. Some of that could be "solved" by Apple reducing the price on the ASD.

 

[Bodhitree]

I think also that Apple’s margin on the iMac is much less than a combination of Studio Display and Mac Studio. Which is why it gets less attention and less frequent updates.

 

[theluggage]

Editing and enjoying HEIF HDR stills and HDR 4K video at full resolution and brightness and with the full color gamut and dynamic range is currently only possible for the deep-pocketed Studio/Mac Pro creators using the now-overpriced-for-its-age-in-the-marketplace 32" XDR display.

If I need to "enjoy" HDR on a budget I've got a very nice 55" OLED 4k TV that my Mac could happily drive as a second display. Other HDR 4k solutions are available in various sizes and technologies.

If I need to edit HDR and can't get by with an OLED TV as a second display, then whoever's paying can buy me a Pro XDR (if that's up to the job - its surely a nice display but its HDR is far from perfect) or a $$,$$$ dual-layer reference display if that's the required standard.

If I'm not "enjoying or editing" HDR - maybe I'm doing audio, coding, DTP, spreadsheets... then HDR is just an expensive way of getting eyestrain.

...and if I want HDR, what size? 27", 30", 32"? OLED? (argh! burn in!) miniLED (argh! blooming!), microLED (arg! vapourware!), dual-layer LCD (argh! the price!) insert-trademark-quantum-dot-whatever-LED...? How many models of iMac should Apple produce?

Then there's the price - yes, Studio Display is arguably over-priced and the Pro XDR is overdue a refresh and price cut - but even with substantial price cuts they're unlikely to be selling for less than $1000 or $2500 (respectively) any time soon, so any iMac using them is going to be really expensive.

IMHO Apple have done the sensible thing and concentrated on making separate computers and displays that you can mix and match (including the Studio Display which is clearly designed largely as a MacBook docking station) - or use with 3rd party displays.

 

[Victor Mortimer]

So “update” the iMac with a chip about to be superseded by M3? Why do they hate the poor iMac so much?

I've been strongly recommending against buying iMacs for a few years now. It's just a bad design at this point, I mean, ethernet in the power brick? A power brick? A small display that's e-waste when the computer is obsolete?

Nope. Just get a mini and a display. The last iMac that I recommended was the 27".

 

[theluggage]

It's puzzling to me why Apple just ignored the 27" iMac owners. And no, Studio is too expensive when you factor in the display along with the computer.

You answer your own question below:

I love the MacBook Pro though, it's a good change for me

...ding! You and anybody else who has the slightest need for mobility.

With Intel, iMacs always had a significant performance advantage over MacBooks, because iMacs could use full-power desktop CPUs and GPUs, and cheap/expandable DDR RAM. With Apple Silicon, they're running the exact same SOCs and have virtually identical performance. Lots of people who once had a MacBook for mobility and an iMac for heavy lifting now only need the MacBook. The trend over the past decade or so has been from desktops to laptops - now add to that the huge shift to "flexible working" over the last few years and laptops are the big game in town.

Apple would love you to buy a Studio Display to go with your MacBook Pro - and the SD has been designed very much as a laptop dock (including the expensive power supply) - personally I think they've overpriced it, but Mac users are not the most price-sensitive so we'll see. Other large screens are available.

Meanwhile, another big chunk of 27" iMac users - who really do want desktops - will likely be rushing to Mac Studios, Minis and Mini Pros now that Apple are finally offering some half-decent headless desktop options after years of pretty much forcing them to buy iMacs. In the laptop-is-king era, one of the reasons for still wanting a desktop is the ability to mix-and-match displays, mice, ketboards etc.

So, I think there is good reason to believe that the potential market for 'large screen' iMacs has been decimated.

 

[JimmyG]

My system has a similar form, though more modest specs: a baseline M2 Mini and a 30” monitor. Like you, I’ve never had a better setup.

I can’t imagine wanting another iMac, given how easily I will be able to swap out the Mini or monitor as needed. And having one more power cable to manage is a non-event.

With multiple commercial options for bolting the Mini to the back of the monitor, the entire system is as compact as an iMac.

It’s the perfect mix of compact and upgradeable.

So, I suppose every AIO iPhone and MBP should come with detachable displays just so the world can have the, er, convenience of carrying around an external A(x)/M(x) device and power supply?! It should be a "non-event", no?! LOL

Also, let's be very clear here, I pay for my electricity and am personally responsible for my own carbon footprint, not any other forum user. It's not just a question of cable management and all the extra and unnecessary e-waste that it entails, but, also, paying for what goes through that cable in real dollars and added GHG emissions.

The math is very simple here, a single power supply for the display and processors with a swappable processor module is what is being asked for for future iMacs. For those that absolutely need the extra I/O and ports for their work, then, sure, their are external solutions in existence.

FWIW, I currently shoot 4K/6K/8K HDR footage, which is pretty processor intensive but can be easily handled by my M1 Max MBP, however, the 16.2" XDR display is wholly inadequate to get work done. Wanting an 6K and/or 8K XDR iMac to handle that workload is a simple request. Apple's own Pro Display XDR is way over-priced vs its time in the market and is an energy- and materiel-hog compared to the integrated battery-driven XDR panel in my MBP. Clearly, mini-LED display technology has advanced and a more-eco-freindly XDR iMac solution seems the next logical product for those wanting to enjoy their HEIF HDR images and HDR videos at the full resolutions, brightness, gamut and dynamic range as they were shot.

One cable to rule them all, 32"/6k and 42"/8k XDR iMacs! Let's get on it, Tim!

 

[antonrg]

With Intel, iMacs always had a significant performance advantage over MacBooks, because iMacs could use full-power desktop CPUs and GPUs, and cheap/expandable DDR RAM. Lots of people who once had a MacBook for mobility and an iMac for heavy lifting now only need the MacBook.

You have described exactly the setup I had until my recent purchase of the MacBook Pro. I have managed to use a 12" Macbook 2016 model and a late 2015 5K iMac as my two machines. One was for travel and light work, the other- for creative design and video - the industry I'm in. I was reluctant about getting a MacBook Pro at first, but after looking around for a while, it just made perfect sense to me.

I doubt I need another display hanging about in the house, so no Studio Display for me. And it's surprising to me how big and immersive the 14" feels on the latest MacBook Pros. It's just a pity that there are so many of us, iMac owners, who are left with a slow machine that we cannot even hook up to another, newer Mac laptop that we already PAID Apple for. The least they could have done is have support for new MacBook owners with these iMacs. Now I have a beautiful display sitting on the desk, gathering dust.

And I still use the 12" MacBook for everything light. It's excellent at doing light work. So the more expensive of the older machines is the one that's being used the least nowadays. Just terrible.

 

[cocoua]

I guess imacs are less given to be substituted in short term as mac minis are as Mac mini comes just with the mac mini and wall plug, so you keep your long lasting components as screen, keyboard and mouse for longer, and upgrading the main computer makes more sense.

imacs 24 are more like 4-6 years computer for kids, offices, shops, ETC, so the power of the M1 is just enough for light tasks 10 years from here. You will have everything you need until the screen goes off.

iMac 27 was different bussines, as it was Apple's more powerful computer besides the super expensive mac pro, and it was necessary to keep it on top.

But an affordable imac 24" M2 makes a lot of sense in the upcoming M3 era as represents the desktop Mac for everyone.

 

[jouster]

So, I suppose every AIO iPhone and MBP should come with detachable displays just so the world can have the, er, convenience of carrying around an external A(x)/M(x) device and power supply?! It should be a "non-event", no?! LOL

Not sure how you get to iPhones and MBPs from my post, which was intended to contrast iMacs with modular Apple systems. Those will always have the advantage of not needing replaced all at once. I am not sure of the power draw comparisons, but my baseline Mini draws very little.

Your proposed iMac with a replaceable computing component sounds great. Alas, I think there’s virtually no chance of Apple ever offering it.

 

[BeatCrazy]

I’m done buying expensive Macs, including the iMac. Get a Mini with upgraded RAM and a really nice monitor. Replace the Mini as necessary, keep the display. iMac displays are useless unless it’s being used as an iMac display. These newer Minis scream for most tasks and typically only need to be replaced to keep up with security updates.

Depends on the situation and the price. I picked up the upgraded/$1499 iMac for $999 and couldn’t be happier. The display and footprint and aesthetics can’t be matched by a mini + monitor combo at that price.

 

[JimmyG]

If I need to "enjoy" HDR on a budget I've got a very nice 55" OLED 4k TV that my Mac could happily drive as a second display. Other HDR 4k solutions are available in various sizes and technologies.

If I need to edit HDR and can't get by with an OLED TV as a second display, then whoever's paying can buy me a Pro XDR (if that's up to the job - its surely a nice display but its HDR is far from perfect) or a $$,$$$ dual-layer reference display if that's the required standard.

If I'm not "enjoying or editing" HDR - maybe I'm doing audio, coding, DTP, spreadsheets... then HDR is just an expensive way of getting eyestrain.

...and if I want HDR, what size? 27", 30", 32"? OLED? (argh! burn in!) miniLED (argh! blooming!), microLED (arg! vapourware!), dual-layer LCD (argh! the price!) insert-trademark-quantum-dot-whatever-LED...? How many models of iMac should Apple produce?

Then there's the price - yes, Studio Display is arguably over-priced and the Pro XDR is overdue a refresh and price cut - but even with substantial price cuts they're unlikely to be selling for less than $1000 or $2500 (respectively) any time soon, so any iMac using them is going to be really expensive.

IMHO Apple have done the sensible thing and concentrated on making separate computers and displays that you can mix and match (including the Studio Display which is clearly designed largely as a MacBook docking station) - or use with 3rd party displays.

The point of using my 4K/6K/8K HDR "power needs" as an example is to make the point that usage needs for the vast majority of Mac users is way overstated when it comes to arguing for a stand-alone Studio model. Clearly, my M1 Max in my battery-driven MBP handles such a heavy workload and a Studio is both overboard and e-wasteful I would argue for mine and most anyone's needs.

The "separate and preservable" monitor argument is assuaged were Apple to merely modularize the M(x) boards, this eliminates all the high-GHG materiel (aluminum housing, extra power supply, cabling to make all that work, etc.). This should be a finger snap for the folks in Cupertino...

Image found at ifixit (https://www.ifixit.com/News/57898/mac-studio-teardown).

As for the mini-LED panels, Apple is already manufacturing their battery-driven 3456-by-2234 mini-LED XDR displays for the MBPs, quad-sizing those panels to 32.4" result in low-energy 6,912-by-4,468 XDR displays. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Plug in one's display power cord, snap on/in a processor module to suit one's needs and likings, clean-and-greener, one and done.

Annual net savings in global aluminum mining, smelting, manufacturing, packaging, shipping, and end-user energy costs...er, "priceless" as the commercial says! LOL

One cable to rule them all!

 

[Bug-Creator]

Apple to merely modularize the M(x) boards, this eliminates all the high-GHG materiel (aluminum housing, extra power supply, cabling to make all that work, etc.).

While this sounds super cool for us geeks it would be a total nightmare for a mass consumer oriented company.

So many things that could go wrong and over time you might end up with a form factor that just doesn't make sense (just look a modern PC still ruled by designs made 40+ years ago).

For it to make sense it would be a MacMini that is still 100% useable without attaching it to the special monitor or hunting down a case to put it in.

 

[JimmyG]

While this sounds super cool for us geeks it would be a total nightmare for a mass consumer oriented company.

So many things that could go wrong and over time you might end up with a form factor that just doesn't make sense (just look a modern PC still ruled by designs made 40+ years ago).

For it to make sense it would be a MacMini that is still 100% useable without attaching it to the special monitor or hunting down a case to put it in.

Nightmare?! It would be no harder than plugging in a lamp.

The true nightmare is the one we're currently living, unnecessary external computing devices made out of superfluous high-GHG raw materiel and consuming superfluous extra energy. Studio+32" Pro Display XDR or 32" XDR iMac, the latter please.

 

[SoldOnApple]

Tim Cook is so unassuming. He has all the power, a lot of the money and influence of Steve Jobs, but even in this promo photo he just looks like a regular guy. He’s obviously a genius, Jobs said so himself in his biography, but he comes across as so regular and down to earth. Like a normal guy you’s bump into at the shops, vs Steve Jobs who was a psychic force you’d never forget. I think Cook understands Apple as a business better than Jobs ever did tbh.

 

[MBAir2010]

BLUE BLUE BLUE!
hopefully the new iMac is available in that BLUE!
that iMac would look so gorgeous on this desk!
if not I will settle for the m1


I would purchase a new M1 iMac BLUE but really do not need one.

 

[theluggage]

Clearly, my M1 Max in my battery-driven MBP handles such a heavy workload and a Studio is both overboard and e-wasteful I would argue for mine and most anyone's needs.

Well - that's the other argument against iMacs - there's no longer any performance advantage now that MacBooks are sporting the exact same Mx Pro/Max CPUs and GPUs. As for e-waste, though - don't forget that honking great battery and the (partly inevitable) lack of repairability of laptops vs. desktops (Apple may have plenty of room for improvement - but it will always be harder to make a laptop repairable).

The "separate and preservable" monitor argument is assuaged were Apple to merely modularize the M(x) boards, this eliminates all the high-GHG materiel (aluminum housing, extra power supply, cabling to make all that work, etc.).

I don't think anybody would say "no" to the ability to upgrade Macs when newer processors come out - it even happened once or twice in the distant past. It would be more easily done with headless desktops than all-in-ones though, since the thermal constraints are so much easier (heck, the whole Mini/Studio form factor is designed around a CD/DVD drive!) Apple could very easily have offered M2/pro/max upgrades for the Mini and Studio if they felt so inclined - not holding my breath.

...that's how most of the PC desktop market always worked, with standard formats for motherboards, power supplies etc. If Apple made a mini-tower system at Mini/Studio prices and committed to several generations of logic board upgrades, that would be... interesting. But then the "ATX" PC concept dates back to the days when even a basic PC needed the motherboard, a video card, a sound card, a HDD controller card, and Ethernet or modem card - all of which could be chosen independently and upgraded. These days all those basics are typically soldered onto the mainboard - especially with AS Macs - the logic board is going to account for the majority of the price of the machine, so those upgrades wouldn't be compelling.

I'm not sure about the "environmentals" though - the aluminium case and all of those copper-laden wires and transformer coils are all eminently recyclable, and Al/Cu smelting already tends to be done where cheap (and incidentally green) hydroelectric or geothermal power is available. Instead, you're encouraging people to replace and chuck their old mainboards (which may have traces of difficult-to-extract precious metals, but are otherwise straight-to-landfill/incinerator - they're the real e-waste).

If you want to be green the only real answer is to keep your old computer for a couple more years and/or hand it down to a good home as a working concern. Apple could help that by ditching the never-to-be-sufficiently-cursed annual OS update saga and not obsoleting old hardware so quickly.

 

[Bug-Creator]

It would be no harder than plugging in a lamp.

Well you showed a bare PCB in your suggestion, so unless you have a different way of plugging in lamps then most of us....

I still stand by the compute module to work on it's own, cos the last thing I would want is to be caught up into an Apple special sauce ecosystem every time I need to replace it or the screen.

 

[JimmyG]

Hrmm, is it that some posters don't read all the posts in a conversation or simply choose to ignore salient information when it comes to understand total global environmental costs in manufacturing their products? Folks wanting (or feeling that they absolutely necessitate) a slab of extra aluminum on their desks to accomplish their daily tasks, don't worry, Tim will get right on it for you...

How It's Made - Aluminium or Aluminum - YouTube

...just don't convince yourself that it's a green solution. (see first post on this page)

 

[smulji]

I think Jobs understood the distinction between "appliance" computers (the no-user-serviceable-parts inside iMac) and serious/pro computers (the blue/white G3 towers with easy tool-free access to the innards).

A great philosophy for desktop computers.

 

[jouster]

The e-waste advantage of iMacs proposed earlier doesn't work for me. If I bought an iMac, I'd obviously be buying a built-in monitor. But I already own a monitor. It's very old--an Apple Cinema HD, from about 2009 as far as I know. I use with my Mini and it works very well--not 4k or HDR, but I don't need those.

The single best way to minimize your e-waste signature is to avoid buying any new components. Thinking about it after the fact, a Studio would probably have been a better purchase for me than a Mini, as it will likely be able to run the OS/apps better over the long term.

 

[Motorola68000]

Why do most here take that rumour as gospel? We simply don't know yet. Wait and see as in my opinion we'll know before November.

As for those critical of AIO's. Its horses for courses, and there's no better Mac for education than the AIO iMac. Even for those heavy keyboard users, I suggest a laptop may succumb to problems more than the AIO, but where keyboard can be replaced on AIO in seconds, same with mouse.

Schools, colleges and universities are the ideal place for the AIO, and the M1 iMac was super. Of course universities engaged in high computing will likely have other resources to use.

Desks lined up with iMacs, easy to maintain, easy to network, and aesthetically good provide a super workhorse for teaching purposes.

Like the studio, Mac mini, laptops, its just a question of what is best for the user and included in that repertoire is and will remain the AIO.

I don't know whether iMac 24in. will be bastardised to take m2 chips, but I suspect there's a surfeit of those as to me it was always going to be a lacklustre chip upgrade.