Is this product stuck in a rut?

[steve62388]

Again it depends on your situation. You may well have access to Superfast fibre BB. However, that is not the case in many parts of the UK. I will be lucky to see 20mbps BB where I live in my lifetime never mind Superfast fibre BB. Surely a product should take it's customers needs into account?

No, you're assuming that your need is widely held, I'm telling you it's not. Any product is a compromise, a company will have a target market and design their products for it.

If your internet connection sucks then blame government policy or private companies for not rolling out broadband in your area, not Apple because they cater to the large majority of their users. Most of us don't want an optical drive if it means any of the compromises I mentioned in my previous post.

Apple products are typically aimed at people with a large disposable income in first world countries and therefore by extension broadband, not rural communities in developing countries with no internet connection. This is part of Apple's policy of pushing things forward, you just can't make up your mind what you want.

To sum up then what you are really hinting at is the iMac has reached it's evolutionary end, it cannot be improved beyond a few minor speed bumps and so that is it, same design until the end of time or end of the Desktop. Your rather glib response to get a PC tends to confirm this view does it not?

No, I just think you're whinging is misguided. One second you moan about lack of progress and the next you want a CD drive. It just occurs to me that maybe you're not Apple's market and so you should switch to a PC, that way you can fill your computer with as much old junk as you like in whatever ugly box you choose.

 

[tyche]

Give me a 24" 4k matte display!

 

[Lankyman]

Apple products are typically aimed at people with a large disposable income in first world countries and therefore by extension broadband, not rural communities in developing countries with no internet connection. This is part of Apple's policy of pushing things forward, you just can't make up your mind what you want.

Seriously my friend, you consider rural England to be a 'developing country'? Are you aware that geographically not by population more of the UK doesn't have fibre than does?

No, I just think you're whinging is misguided. One second you moan about lack of progress and the next you want a CD drive. It just occurs to me that maybe you're not Apple's market and so you should switch to a PC, that way you can fill your computer with as much old junk as you like in whatever ugly box you choose.

When I quoted a CD drive I was simply responding in line with the first paragraph of this post. I have a CD drive? Why should I switch to a PC, why not a Mac Mini as I had previously. Why would having a PC mean I could fill it with whatever junk I like? Why do you feel the need to resort to rudeness in order to try and make your point?

When you're rude you argue from a position of weakness not strength, has know one ever explained this to you?

 

[Lankyman]

I think you just want to see something new, like maybe an iMac without "chin" (the aluminium stripe) at the bottom to call it a new one because you see something different and not the same as all the years.

Yes no one can tell if you have a beefy BTO imac/macbook or from which year it is or the lowest end model but who cares. Only if you have to justify it to yourself or to anyone that it is something new just because it looks different.

Clearly you dont care about internals because all your office work can be done on an older one. Guess what, a 2010 would do it too.

Even though you dont care about internals an SSD would "feel" like an new iMac but it doesnt look like it. If you where in the Apple store testing an newer iMac, the chance it was a 21 iMac >with< SSD is slim. Because I havent ever seen the specced up Models with SSD and everything standing there. Because of that you didnt experience any difference in using it because it has the same harddrive.

What would you do when you have an mini + monitor? Change the monitor to a different model 2 years later because the monitor design looks different its innovation? The mini didnt change much the last years either.

You are right, all my needs could be met by a 2010 model with perhaps the exception of W8.1 on Parallels. In fact if I could get Parallels to run on Yosemite like it has on all previous versions of OS X then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You mention the Mini and why I might go back to it. It was a machine I simply loved, can't even tell you why, it was just one of those things. In some ways I simply find the iMac a bit clinical and a bit restrictive in what I can do with it.

If I were to spend another £1200 GBP on a new iMac then it dammed well needs to look substantially different than my old model.

I have been buying the same German car for the last fifteen years. However, if I looked at the first model I bought against my present one they are light years apart both in looks and performance.

The present iMac is boring - simple as that. It may have looked nice 6 years ago and I except it still performs well, but really come on, it is way past its shelf life looks wise in 2015.

 

[steve62388]

Seriously my friend, you consider rural England to be a 'developing country'? Are you aware that geographically not by population more of the UK doesn't have fibre than does?

You hit the nail on the head there. You're exactly right if you live in a low population area don't expect companies to roll out broadband if it's not economically viable, if you want to make a considerable personal investment you have options.

If you choose to live where you do because it's close to your job, family, housing is cheaper, has beautiful views or whatever then that's up to you. I wouldn't let the lack of broadband sway my decision on these much more important factors, but I wouldn't moan about it. You're in the minority and most people don't care about your travails. The whims of a tiny few customers should not be wagging the dog.

None of this is Apple's fault and they don't have any influence over it. Blame the right people.

When you're rude you argue from a position of weakness not strength, has know one ever explained this to you?

And I could say exactly the same thing about you being patronising. The reality is nobody important with influence cares about what you think and nothing is going to change. Your choices are to suck it up and deal with it, keep moaning and annoy people, or buy a PC. Which would you prefer?

 

[joema2]

...I'm talking about the base iMac, the replacement model for my mid-2011 iMac...Yes I could add lots of whistles and bells or get the more expensive models but then it wouldn't be a like for like replacement....in four years the like for like replacement has hardly moved on. ...

You have to define what you mean by "like for like". If you mean the lowest-end base iMac 21.5 of 2011 vs 2014, then your 2011 iMac is actually *faster* than a 2014.

If you mean price vs price in normalized dollars, then you can get one somewhat faster than you paid for your 2011 iMac.

If you mean some contrived comparison where 2011 and 2014 versions have the same CPU or clock speed, that wouldn't be a fair comparison since you've controlled it to ensure the outcome, then complained about the outcome you yourself crafted.

You initially said your concern was your old iMac was too slow, but have spent more time talking about non-performance superficial aesthetics of the design. You need to get in your head what you want. Do you want performance? If so you can get that. Do you want superficial changes in exterior shape, color, layout? Apple doesn't change Mac exteriors that often, preferring to focus on internal engineering improvements.

Another approach is upgrading your current 2011 iMac with an SSD. There are kits for this, but the work is fairly involved:

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/DIYIM21SSD11/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOf0svk5FdY

 

[Lankyman]

You have to define what you mean by "like for like". If you mean the lowest-end base iMac 21.5 of 2011 vs 2014, then your 2011 iMac is actually *faster* than a 2014.

If you mean price vs price in normalized dollars, then you can get one somewhat faster than you paid for your 2011 iMac.

If you mean some contrived comparison where 2011 and 2014 versions have the same CPU or clock speed, that wouldn't be a fair comparison since you've controlled it to ensure the outcome, then complained about the outcome you yourself crafted.

You initially said your concern was your old iMac was too slow, but have spent more time talking about non-performance superficial aesthetics of the design. You need to get in your head what you want. Do you want performance? If so you can get that. Do you want superficial changes in exterior shape, color, layout? Apple doesn't change Mac exteriors that often, preferring to focus on internal engineering improvements.

Another approach is upgrading your current 2011 iMac with an SSD. There are kits for this, but the work is fairly involved:

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/DIYIM21SSD11/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOf0svk5FdY

I do not talk about the iMac Air I have established this pages back. I make the comparison with what was the base model before the introduction of the Air without any added costs for options.

I still maintain that looking at that particular model and that one only with no BTO options not much has changed.

Next add to that what is now a pretty dated design and I think it's way past time that Apple stopped milking the consumer and came up with something new and exciting.

If consumers want to spend there hard earned cash on same old same old then fine, but it's not for me.

----------

You hit the nail on the head there. You're exactly right if you live in a low population area don't expect companies to roll out broadband if it's not economically viable, if you want to make a considerable personal investment you have options.

If you choose to live where you do because it's close to your job, family, housing is cheaper, has beautiful views or whatever then that's up to you. I wouldn't let the lack of broadband sway my decision on these much more important factors, but I wouldn't moan about it. You're in the minority and most people don't care about your travails. The whims of a tiny few customers should not be wagging the dog.

None of this is Apple's fault and they don't have any influence over it. Blame the right people

And I could say exactly the same thing about you being patronising. The reality is nobody important with influence cares about what you think and nothing is going to change. Your choices are to suck it up and deal with it, keep moaning and annoy people, or buy a PC. Which would you prefer?

You obviously have a problem with debating issues so best leave it at that eh?

Why you keep referring to a PC has me puzzled? I have mentioned the Mini a number of times yet you ignore this. I must assume it doesn't suit your argument.

 

[matreya]

Next add to that what is now a pretty dated design and I think it's way past time that Apple stopped milking the consumer and came up with something new and exciting.

Sure it's a dated design, it's basically a screen with a computer attached to the backside, and there's little to improve upon that other than better screen (which the retina iMac certainly has), faster CPU (check), faster GPU (check), faster internal drive (SSD is blade now, check).

If you just want change for change's sake, then build your own PC every 6 months.. you'll soon appreciate Apple's design progression then.

 

[steve62388]

You obviously have a problem with debating issues so best leave it at that eh?

Why you keep referring to a PC has me puzzled? I have mentioned the Mini a number of times yet you ignore this. I must assume it doesn't suit your argument.

So you have chosen to keep moaning and annoy people.

There are plenty of people on this thread that disagree with you and you continue to debate, yet when a poster agrees you say it's a 'well reasoned argument'. Nobody is going to change their mind, it's human nature to have entrenched opinions but don't start a thread like this without expecting to court controversy.

All your complaints against the iMac, no significant redesign except being smaller/thinner and incremental upgrades can be levelled at the Mac Mini, more so.

My point is that based on sales, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and all sorts of other criteria most people are happy with their iMac. You can argue until you're blue in the face but your sense of self entitlement is not going to change a single thing one iota. iMacs are not perfect (has anyone ever owned a complicated product which was?), but they're the best example on the market and you pay for that.

It must suck arguing from a position knowing you're never going to get what you want. I'm glad I'm a normal person and fit into the large category of people that Apple design their computers for.

 

[Lankyman]

Sure it's a dated design, it's basically a screen with a computer attached to the backside, and there's little to improve upon that other than better screen (which the retina iMac certainly has), faster CPU (check), faster GPU (check), faster internal drive (SSD is blade now, check).

If you just want change for change's sake, then build your own PC every 6 months.. you'll soon appreciate Apple's design progression then.

I have built many a PC which is a rewarding experience so don't accept your assumption.

Again your spec check is not what I referred to.

----------

So you have chosen to keep moaning and annoy people.

There are plenty of people on this thread that disagree with you and you continue to debate, yet when a poster agrees you say it's a 'well reasoned argument'. Nobody is going to change their mind, it's human nature to have entrenched opinions but don't start a thread like this without expecting to court controversy.

All your complaints against the iMac, no significant redesign except being smaller/thinner and incremental upgrades can be levelled at the Mac Mini, more so.

My point is that based on sales, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and all sorts of other criteria most people are happy with their iMac. You can argue until you're blue in the face but your sense of self entitlement is not going to change a single thing one iota. iMacs are not perfect (has anyone ever owned a complicated product which was?), but they're the best example on the market and you pay for that.

It must suck arguing from a position knowing you're never going to get what you want. I'm glad I'm a normal person and fit into the large category of people that Apple design their computers for.

Well there it is, an argument rarely improves for repeating it.
Not sure how you define normal but I'm glad I am me and not you.

 

[redheeler]

No I mean four years! My iMac is for years old hence I was looking at a like for like model replacement. Look at my previous post regarding Retina. If the iMac doesn't receive a comprehensive re-design then likely as not I will go back to a Mini or something similar and use my 24" TN monitor.

That should tell you how much emphasis I place on 'retina'.

I would rather see retina than a "comprehensive re-design" because retina enhances usability while a re-design is purely aesthetic.

If you can't appreciate the difference retina makes (likely because you've never used it before) that's fine, because many people (such as myself) do see and appreciate the difference.

 

[steve62388]

Not sure how you define normal but I'm glad I am me and not you.

Normal.
Adjective.
1.1 (Of a person) free from physical or mental disorders.

Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/normal

 

[Bryan Bowler]

Lankyman,

I've gone to great lengths to give you helpful advice (just as many others here have to) but it's now clear to me that you are in this thread just to stir the pot.

The reason I say this is you claim that computers have not improved and there are no real advancements in technology in the last 4 years, but you only want to consider the base model in a specific category and nothing else. Well, I got news for you. There's been a ton of advancements in technology and I encourage you to look beyond the cheapest model that a company offers and then you'll realize the advancements have been made. If you can't understand this, then I encourage you to educate yourself more on graphics cards, processors, fast I/O interfaces such as Thunderbolt 2, USB 3, and what is probably the most important advancement, and that is ultra high definition displays. There's an entirely new and fresh world out there if you look beyond the cheapest base model. Otherwise, your points have no merit.

Bryan

 

[Lankyman]

Normal.
Adjective.
1.1 (Of a person) free from physical or mental disorders.

Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/normal

But who makes that call, perhaps some who not agree that you are normal, after all you obviously abhore change.

----------

Lankyman,

I've gone to great lengths to give you helpful advice (just as many others here have to) but it's now clear to me that you are in this thread just to stir the pot.

The reason I say this is you claim that computers have not improved and there are no real advancements in technology in the last 4 years, but you only want to consider the base model in a specific category and nothing else. Well, I got news for you. There's been a ton of advancements in technology and I encourage you to look beyond the cheapest model that a company offers and then you'll realize the advancements have been made. If you can't understand this, then I encourage you to educate yourself more on graphics cards, processors, fast I/O interfaces such as Thunderbolt 2, USB 3, and what is probably the most important advancement, and that is ultra high definition displays. There's an entirely new and fresh world out there if you look beyond the cheapest base model. Otherwise, your points have no merit.

Bryan

Bryan, you have got me completely wrong about this. I want to compare like with like as that is the price point I am prepared to pay.

Look, when I go to change my BMW I always try to change like for like. If the salesperson said to me you can't have what you had before without changing model and price point I wouldn't be best pleased.

I have never had to do this due to advancements and design change. Can you see where I am coming from now?

 

[matreya]

Bryan, you have got me completely wrong about this. I want to compare like with like as that is the price point I am prepared to pay.

Look, when I go to change my BMW I always try to change like for like. If the salesperson said to me you can't have what you had before without changing model and price point I wouldn't be best pleased.

I have never had to do this due to advancements and design change. Can you see where I am coming from now?

The cost of a fully optioned out iMac Retina is about 1/15th the price of your BMW, no?

Why are you so cheap when it comes to computers?

 

[steve62388]

But who makes that call, perhaps some who not agree that you are normal, after all you obviously abhore change.

Most people on this thread disagree with you and you're looking pretty silly. Some have more patience than I and have tried to educate but you're pig headed. I'm just making fun of you now.

Little troll should go back in their box. I'm not the first to call you out.

 

[joema2]

...I want to compare like with like as that is the price point I am prepared to pay....

Despite the long thread, until now you haven't clearly defined what you want. "Like with like" could mean anything -- same point in product line, same approx config, same money.

If now you are saying you want a like for like comparison based on money paid in 2011 for a 21.5" iMac vs what that same money would buy today, then it would have been good to state that up front and it might have avoided a lot of confusion.

To make this comparison, look up what you paid in 2011, adjust for inflation in your local economy, then look at the Apple site and what those inflation-adjusted dollars would buy in a current 21.5" iMac in your local currency.

Since we don't know exactly what you paid in 2011 or what your local economy inflation is, only you can do this. However I think in general you could get a somewhat better iMac today for the same constant dollars that you paid in 2011.

Edit/add: If you are in the UK the approx inflation adjustment from 2011 to 2015 is 10%. IOW for a like for like cost comparison, paying 1000 pounds for an iMac in 2011 would equal paying 1100 pounds today.

 

[QuantumLo0p]

I have a mid-2011 iMac base i5 2.5ghz 500g HD with RAM increased to 20gigs. As it's coming up to 4 years old I started to think about the future i.e. maybe a replacement.

However, when I look at the like for like replacement at the Apple store I see not that much has changed in the intervening 4 years. I really don't want a 27" screen and so have come to the conclusion that although my current model may not be quite as nimble as she once was a replacement wouldn't offer me much more than I already have.

Is it lack of innovation by Apple or is the technology simply not moving forward a pace anymore? Normally the price of computers tends to stay the same but four years on you get a lot more bangs for your buck.

IMO it completely depends on what you are going to do with it. If you are not a power user then, most likely, the only aspect of a new machine that you will see a significant benefit is a ssd. Techies like to have the latest, greatest, fastest and most powerful but...*sigh*, it will not make you edit a doc any faster. Encode a movie, manipulate huge cad/cam models, get 50fps on a super rez game? Then it will. Don't let anyone talk you into a new machine if you just listen to music while you read your email.

Flame on...

 

[Lankyman]

Despite the long thread, until now you haven't clearly defined what you want. "Like with like" could mean anything -- same point in product line, same approx config, same money.

If now you are saying you want a like for like comparison based on money paid in 2011 for a 21.5" iMac vs what that same money would buy today, then it would have been good to state that up front and it might have avoided a lot of confusion.

To make this comparison, look up what you paid in 2011, adjust for inflation in your local economy, then look at the Apple site and what those inflation-adjusted dollars would buy in a current 21.5" iMac in your local currency.

Since we don't know exactly what you paid in 2011 or what your local economy inflation is, only you can do this. However I think in general you could get a somewhat better iMac today for the same constant dollars that you paid in 2011.

Edit/add: If you are in the UK the approx inflation adjustment from 2011 to 2015 is 10%. IOW for a like for like cost comparison, paying 1000 pounds for an iMac in 2011 would equal paying 1100 pounds today.

Quite simple the model one up from the iMac Air. If you check original post the info on mine is there. I want the same model in the range.

 

[matreya]

Quite simple the model one up from the iMac Air. If you check original post the info on mine is there. I want the same model in the range.

WTF is an iMac Air?

 

[Lankyman]

The cost of a fully optioned out iMac Retina is about 1/15th the price of your BMW, no?

Why are you so cheap when it comes to computers?

If you check out my original post you will note the useage, basically just office work, surfing, iTunes and some photos.

Spending loads on things such as SSD etc. would be wasted. I was only considering a change because Parallels Windows VM has become problematic since Yoesmite upgrade.

Why do people have to be so combative simply because I say it's about time Apple redesigned the iMac and I have no interest in Retina etc. Example Steve23094, so rude and aggressive, it's not warranted and so unnessary.

I assume he's only young, schoolboy maybe, even so his responses really turn people off either seeking advice or purchasing Apple.

----------

WTF is an iMac Air?

That's how lots of people refer to the base iMac as it uses the Air CPU.

 

[bennibeef]

If you check out my original post you will note the useage, basically just office work, surfing, iTunes and some photos.

Spending loads on things such as SSD etc. would be wasted. I was only considering a change because Parallels Windows VM has become problematic since Yoesmite upgrade.

Maybe you have to shift your thoughts here. Today you dont spend "loads" on SSDs anymore. Whatever size you buy is worth it. Yosemite itself is kinda at a crawl on computers without an SSD itself. Then you put second OS on the same mechanical drive which has to its own small file reads and writes all the time, the virtual machine also accesses data. And now you've doubled the work the HDD has to do managing 2 OS'ses.

I would today not even use a Yosemite Mac for office work without an SSD, wont even think about doing serious work with virtual machines.

Many people say once you go SSD you dont go back. And its true the snappyness addicts you and a 5400rpm harddrive feels soooo slow for everything.

 

[matreya]

Spending loads on things such as SSD etc. would be wasted. I was only considering a change because Parallels Windows VM has become problematic since Yoesmite upgrade.

Personally, as someone that has been using SSDs for a couple of years now, I'd never go back to a regular hard drive.

I bet you'd find the same thing... it really is once you go SSD, you never go back

 

[lowendlinux]

Why not just back to 10.9 and do the Parallels and Windows 8 thing again. Or try a trial to VM Ware and see if it's better?

 

[Bryan Bowler]

Why do people have to be so combative <cut>

Because everyone keeps giving you sound advice, but you (seemingly) refuse to consider it.

Spending loads on things such as SSD etc. would be wasted. I was only considering a change because Parallels Windows VM has become problematic since Yoesmite upgrade.

From the beginning, you have shunned SSDs and any mention of the 5K screen. As has been stated already, an SSD will vastly improve your machine's performance when running two operating systems. This would solve what appears to be the only problem with your existing machine and it would make your user experience far more enjoyable. As for a 5K display, they are absolutely fantastic to work on, but it's understandable if its out of your budget for a computer. That will change over time.

If you check out my original post you will note the useage, basically just office work, surfing, iTunes and some photos.

You do not need a new computer at all. It takes some work to install an SSD in your 2011 iMac, but $200 and a couple of hours of your time is all it would take to extend the life of your 2011 a few more years and it would more than handle your needs.

That's it. This advice has been given to you over and over, but up until now, you've shunned it as poor advice. < That is why you've left everyone here scratching their heads.

Bryan