Is this product stuck in a rut?

[lowendlinux]

Small light and thin is fine if you have a computer that is big fat and configurable to do the big work when/if you need it. The loss of ports and flexibility is another reason people don't dig thin, if I need to connect to something I just need to. Apple has continually removed ports or expansion that's really a no fly for some. Apple builds pretty and sometimes interesting stuff but it's not for everyone.

 

[driftless]

Small light and thin is fine if you have a computer that is big fat and configurable to do the big work when/if you need it. The loss of ports and flexibility is another reason people don't dig thin, if I need to connect to something I just need to. Apple has continually removed ports or expansion that's really a no fly for some. Apple builds pretty and sometimes interesting stuff but it's not for everyone.

No, not for everyone. The nMP, iMac, and the rumored 12" MBA are Apple's roadmap for storage, connectivity, etc.

 

[panzer06]

Actually, I think that those looking fondly back to their '11 Macs and bulky, configurable machines of the past are the ones in a rut. I find it fascinating that so many on macrumors appluade Apple for being innovative and then whine and diss every innovative product that Apple introduces. What does your idea of the future look like? Small, lighter, and more mobile devices to do the work that our bulky, configurable machines of the past used to do is what I see.

Haha, I hardly think a 2011 iMac is bulky but I do see your point. Apple's newest computers look pretty and for most of what folks do they are more than capable.

However at the premium price point I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Apple to innovate in ways we haven't seen before to provide better expansion options.

I think it's rather silly that Apple never embraced mSATA or M.2 SSD drives which are standard in so many other manufacturer's offerings. They are very small and extremely thin and significantly less expensive than the Apple SSD options. Sure they were a bit slower than their 2.5" counterparts but so much faster than the 3.5" or 2.5" HDD. For what Apple charges for an iMac you'd think the spinning HDD would have been dropped years ago. Adding a simple panel, hatch or slot to upgrade ram or add tiny SSD cards would be innovative.

Unfortunately, it's about money and profit. Keeping a tiered system similar to the iDevices (no SDcard slot) helps drive buyers to the more expensive mid and upper tier products. It's understandable and so long as the customers keep buying they will keep building and selling such products.

It doesn't mean they are all that innovative. It means Apple knows how to make a nice looking product that does a reasonable job at a price point someone is willing to pay while making significant profit. Apple is a for-profit corporation. I can't fault them for that.

It just means some existing customers will eventually fade away to be replaced by new customers who are pleased with the computer products Apple offers.

Cheers,

 

[Lankyman]

Actually, I think that those looking fondly back to their '11 Macs and bulky, configurable machines of the past are the ones in a rut. I find it fascinating that so many on macrumors appluade Apple for being innovative and then whine and diss every innovative product that Apple introduces. What does your idea of the future look like? Small, lighter, and more mobile devices to do the work that our bulky, configurable machines of the past used to do is what I see.

You are talking Apples we are talking Pears. You mention mobile devices - a totally different product to a Desktop. Give me one good technological reason why the iMac has had to go so thin?

There are plenty of mobile solutions, fine we get that, however, Desktops don't fit into that category - thank goodness.

 

[driftless]

You are talking Apples we are talking Pears. You mention mobile devices - a totally different product to a Desktop. Give me one good technological reason why the iMac has had to go so thin?

There are plenty of mobile solutions, fine we get that, however, Desktops don't fit into that category - thank goodness.

Actually the nMP is pretty darn mobile. I am also talking desktops.

 

[joema2]

You are talking Apples we are talking Pears. You mention mobile devices - a totally different product to a Desktop. Give me one good technological reason why the iMac has had to go so thin?...Desktops don't fit into that category - thank goodness.

There need not be a technological reason. If you look at the design of items around you -- automobiles, toasters, chairs, power tools, etc, there need not be a technical justification for every little detail. The motivating factors can aesthetic, manufacturing, company identity, etc.

The history of industrial design covers a wide range of motivating factors: http://www.designishistory.com/

Whatever the justifications for Apple's design priorities, using this method they've grown to the largest corporation on earth.

If you don't like the thin iMac design you can always get a Dell XPS 27: http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item2068/small_dell-xps-27-1.JPG

It is Dell's version of the iMac. It has about the same performance and price but looks like it was designed in the former Soviet Union. IOW if Herman Munster was a real person it would be his all-in-one computer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Munster

 

[yoshiii335]

Since you said your old Mac isn't "as nimble as she once was", you obviously noticed that. If you want a vastly faster iMac, you can get one because technology has progressed a lot. In fact you can get an iMac that's faster than a quad-core Mac Pro.

If instead you're looking for superficial styling changes (like "racing stripes"), Apple doesn't do that. E.g, the 2014 MacBook Air looks just like the one from 2008.

So your first step is decide what you want -- are your priorities a faster iMac with more capability, more storage, faster disk, better I/O expansion, vastly better GPU -- one far more "nimble" and pleasurable to use? If so you can get one. OTOH if your priorities are to get something that looks different for the sake of frivolous, cosmetic change, you can probably find a decal kit with racing stripes or lightning bolts for your present iMac.

Which iMac is faster than a quad core Mac Pro?

 

[joema2]

Which iMac is faster than a quad core Mac Pro?

The top-spec 4Ghz Retina iMac is a little faster than the quad core Mac Pro at most things. At the specific task of exporting single-pass H.264 video, it is probably 3x or 4x faster due to Quick Sync: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video

However the Mac Pro is a quiet, well-designed, expandable machine with good thermal management. The Mac Pro can be equipped with a much faster dual D700 GPU. For certain workloads that can be beneficial. There is a reason professionals often use the Mac Pro. The 8-core and above Mac Pros are especially useful at heavily multithreaded tasks like video editing.

 

[yjchua95]

The top-spec 4Ghz Retina iMac is a little faster than the quad core Mac Pro at most things. At the specific task of exporting single-pass H.264 video, it is probably 3x or 4x faster due to Quick Sync: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video

However the Mac Pro is a quiet, well-designed, expandable machine with good thermal management. The Mac Pro can be equipped with a much faster dual D700 GPU. For certain workloads that can be beneficial. There is a reason professionals often use the Mac Pro. The 8-core and above Mac Pros are especially useful at heavily multithreaded tasks like video editing.

Plus, the nMP is also easily upgradeable.

The CPU can be upgraded with any LGA2011-0 CPU (Sandy Bridge-E/EP and Ivy Bridge-E/EP).

The RAM can be upgraded with any 1866MHz ECC sticks.

The GPU isn't all that upgradeable, considering the lack of D-series FirePros pulled off other nMPs on eBay.

The SSD is completely upgradeable, with upgrade kits from OWC being available (PCIe ones).

 

[driftless]

The GPU isn't all that upgradeable, considering the lack of D-series FirePros pulled off other nMPs on eBay.
.

I would think that if you opted for the D700's you would be set for a while.

 

[yjchua95]

I would think that if you opted for the D700's you would be set for a while.

Yup, but not everyone can buy a D700 from the start.

Myself, I maxed it all out from the start to save myself the hassle of upgrading myself down the road.

 

[redheeler]

Small light and thin is fine if you have a computer that is big fat and configurable to do the big work when/if you need it. The loss of ports and flexibility is another reason people don't dig thin, if I need to connect to something I just need to. Apple has continually removed ports or expansion that's really a no fly for some. Apple builds pretty and sometimes interesting stuff but it's not for everyone.

The thin iMacs have the same amount of ports as the thick ones and are actually more powerful since they have newer hardware. Not sure what you're getting at here 😕

 

[Lankyman]

The real issue here is aesthetics versus user upgradability.

I'm sure if Apple had a mind too they could combine the two. However, they can make plenty more money on BTO items, so have done their best to make the products tamper proof.

What's worse is that they haven't finished yet and I suspect future models will be virtually off limits to the upgraider.

Upgraiding the 2011 models is relatively straight forward. I have seen videos online for removing the screen on the latest iMacs and TBH it isn't something I would like to do if I owned one. This is why I will think long and hard before I get a replacement. I'm not saying it can't be done, simply I wouldn't want to do so.

 

[panzer06]

The real issue here is aesthetics versus user upgradability.

I'm sure if Apple had a mind too they could combine the two. However, they can make plenty more money on BTO items, so have done their best to make the products tamper proof.

SNIP

So the actual "REAL" issue is PROFIT above all else.

 

[Lankyman]

The real issue here is aesthetics versus user upgradability.

I'm sure if Apple had a mind too they could combine the two. However, they can make plenty more money on BTO items, so have done their best to make the products tamper proof.

SNIP/QUOTE]

So the actual "REAL" issue is PROFIT above all else.

I'm not sure it's so clear cut. Obviously they are a business so profit must be their mantra. However, I also think there's a company philosophy that they know what's best for the consumer whatever the consumer may say. You then have to factor in their obsession with design.

 

[panzer06]

I'm not sure it's so clear cut. Obviously they are a business so profit must be their mantra. However, I also think there's a company philosophy that they know what's best for the consumer whatever the consumer may say. You then have to factor in their obsession with design.

Somewhat agree, however, I don't think anyone can argue Apple CAN'T add the capability to add an extra socket or port to slide in a SSD M.2, mSATA or their blades.

Same with MicroSD on iPhones. The want to maximize profit by maintaining artificial tiers for consumers to buy.

Also, I personally believe the "Apple knows best" argument is a partial fallacy. While that may be true in iDevices where they hold significant marketshare, it is not true in computers.

Apple provides what it believes are best of breed designs in configurations that maximize profits tailored to very particular market segments. Apple doesn't care about the larger population of computer users at all. They carve out specific market segments that prefer Apple designs and a certain "coolness factor" and are willing to pay a premium. Included as a subset of these groups are the consumers that prefer OS X to Windows.

I completely understand the business reasons. I just think we should really stop trying to argue Apple CAN'T make an upgradable system that meets their industrial design aesthetic. They just WON'T because it is not in their business model to do so.

So compter users that don't want to be so constrained have no alternative but to look elsewhere and Apple is completely fine with that.

Cheers,

 

[UniDoubleU]

Haha, I hardly think a 2011 iMac is bulky but I do see your point. Apple's newest computers look pretty and for most of what folks do they are more than capable.

However at the premium price point I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Apple to innovate in ways we haven't seen before to provide better expansion options.

I think it's rather silly that Apple never embraced mSATA or M.2 SSD drives which are standard in so many other manufacturer's offerings. They are very small and extremely thin and significantly less expensive than the Apple SSD options. Sure they were a bit slower than their 2.5" counterparts but so much faster than the 3.5" or 2.5" HDD. For what Apple charges for an iMac you'd think the spinning HDD would have been dropped years ago. Adding a simple panel, hatch or slot to upgrade ram or add tiny SSD cards would be innovative.

Cheers,

Wait a sec, Apple never embraced mSATA? They're over that by now mate. I just upgraded my rMBP '12's SSD last month and they sure used mSATA. Now they've moved on to PCIE SSDs already, which is faster than any mSATA or M.2 SSDs, and again before it is in anyway popular with the '13 Macs.

I've also got RAM upgrade slots in my iMac 5K's back panel which I've added 16 GBs of generic Kingston RAMs to. And tiny SSD cards... you mean these?

http://www.amazon.com/Transcend-Jet...20941&sr=8-3&keywords=Transcend+jetdrive+lite

Cheers!

 

[panzer06]

Wait a sec, Apple never embraced mSATA? They're over that by now mate. I just upgraded my rMBP '12's SSD last month and they sure used mSATA. Now they've moved on to PCIE SSDs already, which is faster than any mSATA or M.2 SSDs, and again before it is in anyway popular with the '13 Macs.

I've also got RAM upgrade slots in my iMac 5K's back panel which I've added 16 GBs of generic Kingston RAMs to. And tiny SSD cards... you mean these?

http://www.amazon.com/Transcend-Jet...20941&sr=8-3&keywords=Transcend+jetdrive+lite

Cheers!

Apple has never used standard mSata connectors. There's a reason you can only buy Apple capable SSD drives from Apple or OWC.

SDcards use USB Interfaces and are way too slow for most folks. As I said, Apple's product designs are all about enhancing profit and that's understandable.

Just don't act like that's not the case. Apple could do more to offer easy to perform and inexpensive upgrades. They don't because it's not as profitable to do so.

Cheers,

 

[Fishrrman]

Apple's iMac is not "stuck in a rut".

There's only so much that can be done with a personal computer designed for mass consumption.

Apple has updated the iMac well from one iteration to the next. It might even be said that they have for too long overemphasized "style" over "substance".

If one needs "more" than what the current line of iMacs can provide, one buys a Mac Pro.

 

[UniDoubleU]

Well, compared to a competitor like say, Dell XPS 27" AIO PC, we're getting a much better deal.

http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-27-272...&cid=285111&lid=5447194&acd=12309209382278673

With the top model, with comparable price to iMac 5K, you're getting 1440p display, with i7 4770m and Geforce 750m, and slow arse HDD with 32GB SSD, Wireless N, and many more outdated stuff. As for upgradeability, they have 2 RAM slots, of which I don't see an upgrade hatch around. And no sight of M.2 upgrade hatch either.

 

[panzer06]

Well, compared to a competitor like say, Dell XPS 27" AIO PC, we're getting a much better deal.

http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-27-272...&cid=285111&lid=5447194&acd=12309209382278673

With the top model, with comparable price to iMac 5K, you're getting 1440p display, with i7 4770m and Geforce 750m, and slow arse HDD with 32GB SSD, Wireless N, and many more outdated stuff. As for upgradeability, they have 2 RAM slots, of which I don't see an upgrade hatch around. And no sight of M.2 upgrade hatch either.

Yes, there's not a lot of good AIO desktops out there. There's a limited market for AIO computers and no one is better than Apple at creating one.

However, that doesn't mean they can't do better. Doesn't mean they will but they certainly can.

 

[inhalexhale1]

The real issue as I see it is that seen from the front there is no visual difference between my present iMac and the one in the Apple store. If you take away the BTO option and go on a like for like basis then it could be argued the model has gone backwards with the slower HDD.

My point is that four years on the customer would be expecting either a completely new design or an evolution of the existing design. I'm not sure we have either.

The screen on the newer iMac is much better than pre-2012. I have both in my home, and the reflections and colors are much better on the newer model.

Also, I'm not sure what you're getting at. There was an evolution of the existing design. They improved the screen, made it thinner, and added the best mGPUs available (until the m295x 😀).

 

[Lankyman]

Well, compared to a competitor like say, Dell XPS 27" AIO PC, we're getting a much better deal.

http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-27-272...&cid=285111&lid=5447194&acd=12309209382278673

With the top model, with comparable price to iMac 5K, you're getting 1440p display, with i7 4770m and Geforce 750m, and slow arse HDD with 32GB SSD, Wireless N, and many more outdated stuff. As for upgradeability, they have 2 RAM slots, of which I don't see an upgrade hatch around. And no sight of M.2 upgrade hatch either.

Why do people make such posts? If you are in business you should be saying - this is my product, this is what I am currently doing, what is it that I could be doing better.

Any company that makes the comparison you make is sure not going to stay in business for long.

 

[lowendlinux]

Why do people make such posts? If you are in business you should be saying - this is my product, this is what I am currently doing, what is it that I could be doing better.

Any company that makes the comparison you make is sure not going to stay in business for long.

Because it "proves" that Apple is better. *shrug*

 

[Lankyman]

Apple's iMac is not "stuck in a rut".

There's only so much that can be done with a personal computer designed for mass consumption.

Apple has updated the iMac well from one iteration to the next. It might even be said that they have for too long overemphasized "style" over "substance".

If one needs "more" than what the current line of iMacs can provide, one buys a Mac Pro.

This is the like for like replacement for my mid-2011 iMac -21.5-inch:
Specifications
2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i5
Turbo Boost up to 3.2GHz
8GB (two 4GB) memory
1TB hard drive
Intel Iris Pro Graphics

Don't forget the HDD is 5400.

This is my current iMac -
Mid-2011
2.5 GHz i5
20 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512 MB
500 gig hard drive - 7200

Have we really moved on that much in 4 years?

Please don't respond with a heap of BTO options or models higher in the range. I am comparing my model with its replacement.

----------

Because it "proves" that Apple is better. *shrug*

Well I sincerely hope you don't run your own business if you think that philosophy is the right one?