Mini-LED iMac Pro to Launch in Mid-2022, Not Expected at Spring Event

[CWallace]

It would be nice if Apple were to offer a stand alone 32” display for customers who need more screen space but priced for prosumers, not video editors who can spend $6000 on a calibrated monitor.

Well there is the report that there are new standalone monitors coming in 24", 27" and 32" sizes from either LG or Apple.

That being said, I expect the 32" will still be very expensive, especially if it does have an A-series SoC in it as Bloomberg has reported since that seems unnecessary for a "prosumer" monitor.

LG Possibly Developing Three New Apple Displays, Including Pro Display XDR With Apple Silicon Chip

LG is developing three new standalone displays that may end up being for Apple, including one based on the current 24-inch iMac, one based on the upcoming 27-inch iMac, and a 32-inch model that may be a new Pro Display XDR with an Apple silicon chip, according to Twitter account @dylandkt, who...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[jeffpeng]

You make some good points, you might well be right.

The only thing that makes me wonder if you're wrong, is the rumours of the M2 MBA's due out this year. However, the rumours might be partly off, and the new MBA's might still rock the M1, but with an updated design otherwise. Or alternatively, they might update the base M1 chip yearly, but only update the Pro/Max/Duo/Quadro every two years. However, if they did that, there would be naming issues, but I suppose they could just skip from M1 Max, straight to M3 Max.

I guess we will see soon enough.

Here's what I think will happen:

We'll get the iMac Pro with M1 Pro/Max, possibly even a Jade-2C Die (although at that point I'd have a hard time seeing a clear distinction from the Mac EvenMorePro for 95% of users) at WWDC. I guess same goes for the Mac Mini - minus Jade-2C Die there, not because it couldn't handle it, but for segmentation purposes. I'm not entirely sure the Mac Pro will get an update as I can fathom them selling it like "yeah, now you have these tiny machines that are even more Pro than the Mac Pro so stop complaining". And they are not totally wrong for said 95% of users (the remaining 5% probably are fine for 2 more years since they "just" invested 20K+$ into a computer). So I guess.... either iMac Pro with Jade-2C and no Mac Pro, or no iMac with Jade-2C and that exclusively for the Mac Pro. I'd bet the former. Jade-4C ... I don't think that exists outside of a lab, at least for this generation.

Then we'll get a lot of iPhones with even more/wider cameras, some killer influencer gadget no sane person needs, and a new A16 processor fabbed on TSMC N3 in September that again nobody will actually need considering the competition hasn't even caught up to the A14. Won't be much faster, but will use notably less energy, again. Battery life sells, they have finally taken that hint.

Then, October/November we'll celebrate the finished 2 year transition with the first entry of the next generation Apple Silicon devices: The new MBA with whatever they call that chip, I'll guess M2, since, again, them being out of step is intentional. It'll be based on the A16, just more cores, bigger caches, higher clocks, basically the A16X plus x86 emulation junk, just like M1 was to the A14. Maybemaybe even a new Mac Mini in the new design we've seen at WWDC, but I can also see a future where the Mac Mini slides back into the "Pro" segment, relegating "Plebs" to using either a MacBook or an iMac 24". It would make sense from the perspective that the overwhelming majority of M1 users bought the MBA, not the Mac Mini, but it also would cause some well earned outrage from people that just want a decently fast, quiet and affordable Mac and a screen of their choosing, but don't require insane cpu/gpu core counts - like me.

I'm afraid the MacBook NotSoProButSortaAir is dead. Apple had a hard time justifying that thing over the MBA last time around, and between the MBA, MacBook KindaPro (6+2/14) and the... eh... iPadBookPro there really aren't any niches left to fill, especially if the MBA gets Mini LED as well. They will keep selling that thing until they run out of left over 2017 MBP chassis and touchbar strips, but then silently fade it out.

Overall I think people will be disappointed with the speed gains comparing M2 to M1 since Apple played it's biggest card already switching from x86 to a much wider, much faster (in terms of ST perf) ARM design, loaded with a lot of fixed function accelerators the intel machines simply didn't have. Still, we should see about 20% gen over gen, with most of it coming from higher clocks the new process allows at the same power draw, and some of it coming from incremental improvements.

Or maybe none of that. ?

 

[Juuro]

We'll get the iMac Pro with M1 Pro/Max, possibly even a Jade-2C Die (although at that point I'd have a hard time seeing a clear distinction from the Mac EvenMorePro for 95% of users) at WWDC. I guess same goes for the Mac Mini - minus Jade-2C Die there, not because it couldn't handle it, but for segmentation purposes. I'm not entirely sure the Mac Pro will get an update as I can fathom them selling it like "yeah, now you have these tiny machines that are even more Pro than the Mac Pro so stop complaining". And they are not totally wrong for said 95% of users (the remaining 5% probably are fine for 2 more years since they "just" invested 20K+$ into a computer). So I guess.... either iMac Pro with Jade-2C and no Mac Pro, or no iMac with Jade-2C and that exclusively for the Mac Pro. I'd bet the former. Jade-4C ... I don't think that exists outside of a lab, at least for this generation.

I think it would make perfect sense to have an iMac Pro with a Jade-2C with a (heavily binned) 12 core SoC AND a Mac Pro with the full Jade-2C and a Jade-4C SoC. Also it would make sense to release both machines together so they can introduce that SoC at one event and don't have to pretend the 12 core SoC is the fastest thing thing they have when they release the iMac Pro before the Mac Pro.
Also they need something like the Jade-4C in the Mac Pro to reach the expected performance. Only two times the performance of an MBP would be not sufficient for some Pros, I think.

I'm afraid the MacBook NotSoProButSortaAir is dead. Apple had a hard time justifying that thing over the MBA last time around, and between the MBA, MacBook KindaPro (6+2/14) and the... eh... iPadBookPro there really aren't any niches left to fill, especially if the MBA gets Mini LED as well. They will keep selling that thing until they run out of left over 2017 MBP chassis and touchbar strips, but then silently fade it out.

I suppose they will kill the Air name and bring back the MacBook. The next M2 MacBook will be thinner than the existing MacBook Air but it will feel a little thinker because it is not wedge shaped anymore.

Overall I think people will be disappointed with the speed gains comparing M2 to M1 since Apple played it's biggest card already switching from x86 to a much wider, much faster (in terms of ST perf) ARM design, loaded with a lot of fixed function accelerators the intel machines simply didn't have. Still, we should see about 20% gen over gen, with most of it coming from higher clocks the new process allows at the same power draw, and some of it coming from incremental improvements.

We probably will never see a performance and efficiency increase like the M1 introduced. Maybe when Apple switches to another completely different technology in about 15 years, but not while Apple stays with Arm.

But yeah, it's all speculation at this point. ? I just hope the iMac (with Jade-2C) will be released at WWDC at the latest. ?

 

[jeffpeng]

I think it would make perfect sense to have an iMac Pro with a Jade-2C with a (heavily binned) 12 core SoC AND a Mac Pro with the full Jade-2C and a Jade-4C SoC. Also it would make sense to release both machines together so they can introduce that SoC at one event and don't have to pretend the 12 core SoC is the fastest thing thing they have when they release the iMac Pro before the Mac Pro.
Also they need something like the Jade-4C in the Mac Pro to reach the expected performance. Only two times the performance of an MBP would be not sufficient for some Pros, I think.

I'm not saying it wouldn't make sense, just that I'm not sure how Apple would segment a Jade-2C iMac against a Mac Pro with similar configuration. They could even put that in the Mac Mini, but then what's the point of the Mac Pro except for those that want to run heaps of expansion cards, most of which will not work anyways, at least not off the bat. Many you will be able to fix with drivers, others that rely on x86 quirks too much you won't.

The reason I do not believe Jade-4C is a thing is this tweet from Hector Martin:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1456920567659909122

, and even more precisely this one:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1457016143336468483

.

Apparently there really is no hardware support for more than two dies, but it also confirms that there is support for two dies, so this is real. If it's in the public kernel it is real.

And I agree: they won't get away with selling a new Mac Pro that has 16+4 CPU cores in the maximum configuration. Also 32+32 GPU won't cut it if you compare it to two Vega II Duo cards. That's why I believe there won't be a Mac Pro for now, and they will kinda talk themselves out of it claiming that the 2C machines are faster regardless - and fix the appropriate graphs to "prove" it.

But I also think the rumors of a slightly updated intel Mac Pro are true. I'm pretty sure they initially aimed at doing it with a Jade 4C, I would even believe that they tested this in a lab at some point, but I also think they realized that you can sorta-kinda-woulda peer-network two SoCs and have okay results, but that everything above that would require dedicated controller hardware, at least for the memory. I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple actually followed AMDs lead on this and have the M2 Pro/Max be actually an MCM design. No idea how they would explain why this is better now when they JUST explained why it is better to have everything on one die, but ... yeah. They got marketing for that.

I suppose they will kill the Air name and bring back the MacBook. The next M2 MacBook will be thinner than the existing MacBook Air but it will feel a little thinker because it is not wedge shaped anymore.

Yes. Absolutely. In general I think they will thin out the Mac lineup a bit. They have 3 and a half tablets for every person on the planet. They have 5 iPhones for every person on the planet. But have 4 notebooks, three desktops and potentially three all-in-ones for the smallest market they are servicing? Nah I don't think so. MacBook, MacBookPro 14, MacBook Pro 16, low end iMac 24, Pro/Max iMac 27+, maybe with a 2C option, Pro/Max Mac Mini, and a Mac Pro every half a decade - or so. That's it. I wouldn't even be surprised if they actually eventually killed the iPad air since that thing has been searching for a sensible spot to occupy for quite some time now.

We probably will never see a performance and efficiency increase like the M1 introduced. Maybe when Apple switches to another completely different technology in about 15 years, but not while Apple stays with Arm.

I know never say never, but Apple has unprecedented influence with ARM and TSMC. They have been spearheading ARM developement since the A7. They basically floated the bill for TSMC to bring both N7 and N5 - and now N3 - to maturity. They have one architecture for the entire stack, from basically mircocontroller-ish SoCs in the watch to potentially workstation level computers. Unless something comes along that is consistently outclassing ARM perf/watt and/or some chipmaker has exclusive access to a process that is at least one generation ahead of what Apple has access to this won't happen. And with ARM and TSMC being both not owned but primarily financed by Apple I don't see how this would happen as long as Apple is essentially printing money.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I still say we may see a 24" iMac with the M1 Pro SoC in March. The bigger iMac Pro with the circa 27-28" display will probably arrive middle of 2022.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Here's what I think will happen:

We'll get the iMac Pro with M1 Pro/Max, possibly even a Jade-2C Die (although at that point I'd have a hard time seeing a clear distinction from the Mac EvenMorePro for 95% of users) at WWDC. I guess same goes for the Mac Mini - minus Jade-2C Die there, not because it couldn't handle it, but for segmentation purposes. I'm not entirely sure the Mac Pro will get an update as I can fathom them selling it like "yeah, now you have these tiny machines that are even more Pro than the Mac Pro so stop complaining". And they are not totally wrong for said 95% of users (the remaining 5% probably are fine for 2 more years since they "just" invested 20K+$ into a computer). So I guess.... either iMac Pro with Jade-2C and no Mac Pro, or no iMac with Jade-2C and that exclusively for the Mac Pro. I'd bet the former. Jade-4C ... I don't think that exists outside of a lab, at least for this generation.

Then we'll get a lot of iPhones with even more/wider cameras, some killer influencer gadget no sane person needs, and a new A16 processor fabbed on TSMC N3 in September that again nobody will actually need considering the competition hasn't even caught up to the A14. Won't be much faster, but will use notably less energy, again. Battery life sells, they have finally taken that hint.

Then, October/November we'll celebrate the finished 2 year transition with the first entry of the next generation Apple Silicon devices: The new MBA with whatever they call that chip, I'll guess M2, since, again, them being out of step is intentional. It'll be based on the A16, just more cores, bigger caches, higher clocks, basically the A16X plus x86 emulation junk, just like M1 was to the A14. Maybemaybe even a new Mac Mini in the new design we've seen at WWDC, but I can also see a future where the Mac Mini slides back into the "Pro" segment, relegating "Plebs" to using either a MacBook or an iMac 24". It would make sense from the perspective that the overwhelming majority of M1 users bought the MBA, not the Mac Mini, but it also would cause some well earned outrage from people that just want a decently fast, quiet and affordable Mac and a screen of their choosing, but don't require insane cpu/gpu core counts - like me.

I'm afraid the MacBook NotSoProButSortaAir is dead. Apple had a hard time justifying that thing over the MBA last time around, and between the MBA, MacBook KindaPro (6+2/14) and the... eh... iPadBookPro there really aren't any niches left to fill, especially if the MBA gets Mini LED as well. They will keep selling that thing until they run out of left over 2017 MBP chassis and touchbar strips, but then silently fade it out.

Overall I think people will be disappointed with the speed gains comparing M2 to M1 since Apple played it's biggest card already switching from x86 to a much wider, much faster (in terms of ST perf) ARM design, loaded with a lot of fixed function accelerators the intel machines simply didn't have. Still, we should see about 20% gen over gen, with most of it coming from higher clocks the new process allows at the same power draw, and some of it coming from incremental improvements.

Or maybe none of that. ?

I think you're also forgetting that the base M1 chip has very limited ports, limited external screen connectivity, and produces less heat, thus requiring simpler cooling. Thus massively differentiating the MBA vs MBP w M1 Pro/Max. There's a huge segmentation right there. Those differences are built into the actual chip.

There's also a big difference in audio and screen quality in MBA vs MBP, which is independent of the chip, but things like that allow even more product segmentation.

They also segmented the MBA vs MBP by making the MBA fanless. This results in a guaranteed quiet machine, but also means it will throttle. Thus, choosing the 8 core over the 7 core is almost pointless. The M1 Pro/Max can also throttle, especially the Max, but the fans allow much higher and longer sustained power before throttling.

This is also why I think there really will be a Mini vs Mini Pro. I think the Mini Pro hasn't come out yet, because it will be in a bigger case to allow more efficient cooling, including a fan. The Mini Pro will have the M1 Pro/Max, with bigger case, more ports, and more screen connectivity.

The Actual Mac Pro will indeed be updated, with the M1 Duo/Quad, bigger again than the Mini Pro to allow not only even more cooling, and also to allow plug-in off-SoC Ram, so that it can at least match the 1.5TB max RAM of the current Mac Pro. Without that extra RAM ability, the Mac Pro would be a joke for serious, high level, pro usage.

The iMac Pro would most likely have just the M1 Pro/Max, but who knows, they might even put a Duo/Quad in it.

It really does annoy me that they segment on screen size too. It's infuriating for those of us that want a big screen but don't need high power otherwise, or for those that need the high power, but want the extra portability of a smaller screen. And yes, I need a laptop, so the Mini doesn't help me out. Even amongst the MBP, the minimum chip spec of the 16" is higher and more expensive than the 14" minimum chip spec, resulting in a huge price diff between 14" and 16" if you don't need a high power chip. In fact, I'd be perfectly happy with the base 7 core M1 in a 16".

 

[CWallace]

This is also why I think there really will be a Mini vs Mini Pro. I think the Mini Pro hasn't come out yet, because it will be in a bigger case to allow more efficient cooling, including a fan. The Mini Pro will have the M1 Pro/Max, with bigger case, more ports, and more screen connectivity.

Jon Prosser claims that the "Mac mini Pro" will actually have a slimmer case than the current Mac mini (one inch or less compared to the M1 1.4 inches), though it will have more connectivity (4xUSB4 | 2xUSB-A | RJ-45 | HDMI | MagSafe).

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Jon Prosser claims that the "Mac mini Pro" will actually have a slimmer case than the current Mac mini (one inch or less compared to the M1 1.4 inches), though it will have more connectivity (4xUSB4 | 2xUSB-A | RJ-45 | HDMI | MagSafe).

Cool, that's a possibility. They *might* make an M1X that is just the M1 with more ports, and put it in a thinner, fanless Mini. In which case, that could be the chip they put in the redesigned upcoming 13" MBP too. I have my doubts they would bother, but hey maybe. This vid is 8 months old too, I'm not buying it.

A Mini Pro would surely have the the M1 Pro/Max, which would have to have beefed up cooling, including a fan, and would likely be thicker, not thinner.

The new Mac Pro wouldn't bother with the M1 Pro/Max, it would jump straight to the Duo/Quad.

Three headless design segments, three complete different price ranges, three different physical sizes and cooling requirements. Mini with M1(or M1X), Mini Pro with Pro/Max, Pro with Duo/Quad. That's what makes sense to me.

 

[jeffpeng]

There's also a big difference in audio and screen quality in MBA vs MBP, which is independent of the chip, but things like that allow even more product segmentation.

If the MBA gets Mini LED I don't think there is enough segmentation to actually justify the "small" MBP, unless they give it 120hz. Then maybe. Then again: why bother

They *might* make an M1X that is just the M1 with more ports, and put it in a thinner, fanless Mini. In which case, that could be the chip they put in the redesigned upcoming 13" MBP too.

They won't commit newly designed silicon just to beef up on ports. And since I guess we'll see magsafe return to the MBA as well I'm not sure they feel the need to add more ports on that device. And even if they wanted to: M1 has two USB3.1 ports that go unused with the portables, and USB3.1 is plenty for pretty much everything you throw at it except displays and really, really fast storage.

As for the Mini .... it has so little market share they wouldn't commit new silicon just for that thing if it was Tim Apple's personal passion project. And daily driving a Mini for work and personal stuff .... I don't see how a smaller selection of ports is that big of a deal on a stationary device. You can plug in fast external storage and two monitors and still have two left over ports for your USB hubs. I really see how having to bring dongles everywhere you go, but with a Mac Mini you don't really go anywhere.

Nah, if there is a Mini with more ports it'll be sporting an M1 Pro at the very least. And yes, I think they can make the M1 Pro / Max work in a chassis much smaller than the current Mac Mini, especially if the put the power supply into a brick (no reason to believe they won't). Even at 110 Watts the M1 Max is still below what the 2018 i7 used for power, albeit slightly. And even at halt height the Mini would be much easier to cool than a MBP.

 

[chucker23n1]

I think you're also forgetting that the base M1 chip has very limited ports, limited external screen connectivity, and produces more heat, thus requiring better cooling. Thus massively differentiating the MBA vs MBP w M1 Pro/Max. There's a huge segmentation right there. Those differences are built into the actual chip.

The M1 should produce less heat than the M1 Pro/Max. It has more efficiency cores, it's built with the same process node, and it has a smaller overall package.

 

[Juuro]

A Mini Pro would surely have the the M1 Pro/Max, which would have to have beefed up cooling, including a fan, and would likely be thicker, not thinner.

Why do you think the M1 Pro/Max needs so much cooling it has to be thinker than the existing M1 mini? The M1 mini has a huge amount of unused space in its enclosure, as you can see in this teardown. It already has a fan. The Pro/max would surely need a bigger fan, but the Mac mini has so much space that it would be no problem at all with the current design. And I'm sure if you design it cleverly and pack it tighter you can get away with a smaller case. Just think of the 14" MacBook Pro. Compared to the Mac mini doesn't need speakers and no battery. If you remove that from the base of the MacBook Pro you get a Mac mini wich is smaller than the current one with an M1 Max.

 

[jeffpeng]

Why do you think the M1 Pro/Max needs so much cooling it has to be thinker than the existing M1 mini? The M1 mini has a huge amount of unused space in its enclosure, as you can see in this teardown. It already has a fan. The Pro/max would surely need a bigger fan, but the Mac mini has so much space that it would be no problem at all with the current design. And I'm sure if you design it cleverly and pack it tighter you can get away with a smaller case. Just think of the 14" MacBook Pro. Compared to the Mac mini doesn't need speakers and no battery. If you remove that from the base of the MacBook Pro you get a Mac mini wich is smaller than the current one with an M1 Max.

Correct. In fact the current design has a 145W PSU and used to house a CPU that drew up to 120 Watts. Even the M1 Max doesn't get to those levels, but caps out around 90 Watts package power. So the current Mac Mini design is more than capable of housing the biggest CPU Apple can throw at it. You would probably hear the fan if you managed to push the system to full load on both CPU and GPU for a prolonged period, but that's it.

Again, if the next Mini comes with an external power brick, which, looking at the iMac 24, seems to be a rather sensible prediction, there should be ample opportunity to shrink the case while still offering a M1 Pro/Max configuration.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

The M1 should produce less heat than the M1 Pro/Max. It has more efficiency cores, it's built with the same process node, and it has a smaller overall package.

Oh yeah, obviously I meant less heat, not more heat. Typo.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Why do you think the M1 Pro/Max needs so much cooling it has to be thinker than the existing M1 mini? The M1 mini has a huge amount of unused space in its enclosure, as you can see in this teardown. It already has a fan. The Pro/max would surely need a bigger fan, but the Mac mini has so much space that it would be no problem at all with the current design. And I'm sure if you design it cleverly and pack it tighter you can get away with a smaller case. Just think of the 14" MacBook Pro. Compared to the Mac mini doesn't need speakers and no battery. If you remove that from the base of the MacBook Pro you get a Mac mini wich is smaller than the current one with an M1 Max.

You're right, a redesigned base Mini could likely end up smaller. What I am trying to say, is I think there will be two different case sizes for the Mini. One for the Mini with just the M1 and fanless, and a larger one for the Mini Pro with M1 Pro/Max, with a fan. Keep in mind, packing tighter means less efficient heat management, there needs to be good air flow, especially if you're going fanless. Note the new 14/16" MBP's are thicker than the previous generation, as well as having more efficient fans, more efficient and more accurately engineered heat sinks, and better heat pipes, because Apple didn't want the machines with their own silicon to have the same substandard heat management design that Apple carelessly threw at the previous generation MBP/MBA's.

 

[jeffpeng]

You're right, a redesigned base Mini could likely end up smaller. What I am trying to say, is I think there will be two different case sizes for the Mini. One for the Mini with just the M1 and fanless, and a larger one for the Mini Pro with M1 Pro/Max, with a fan. Keep in mind, packing tighter means less efficient heat management, there needs to be good air flow, especially if you're going fanless. Note the new 14/16" MBP's are thicker than the previous generation, as well as having more efficient fans, more efficient and more accurately engineered heat sinks, and better heat pipes, because Apple didn't want the machines with their own silicon to have the same substandard heat management design that Apple carelessly threw at the previous generation MBP/MBA's.

I don't think the new design would be fanless, and I also don't think there will be two different cases, so I guess neither would be fanless. There really are a few very good arguments why a device that is constantly emitting heat should not skip on ventilation. You can kinda get away with that if your surface area is big enough to passively radiate that heat away, but there is a reason the MBA's SoC has no thermal link to the chassis. It would get quite hot to the touch. So you essentially soak the air inside the.... eh... Air .... and then you throttle at equilibrium. This doesn't happen when you basically idle 95% of the time (browsing, office work, etc), but it's really not great if you do something more demanding. Plus, something people keep forgetting: the hotter a conductor is the higher the resistance. So your CPU will draw more power for the same work if it is hotter, and also produce more heat if it is hot.

I mean, yeah, I kinda see how not having ventilation is an advantage for a device that gets into all kinds of dirty and dusty areas like a thin-and-light ultrabook would at your local Starbucks, but for any device that is supposed to do actual work this is a clear disadvantage. Plus you don't need to remove the fan to not hear a fan. I haven't heard my M1 Mini's fan once in over a year, and that's with playing games on it that really do stress the little fella to its maximum. Warm to the touch - yes. Fan noise - not once.

So I feel this entire hype around fanless devices is just that - a hype. I would always prefer a device that has (silent) ventilation over a device that doesn't.

 

[JacquesleMac]

Whatever config the Mini turn out to have, it seems we will have to wait until June for the M1 Pro/Max or M2 iMac. And I need an iMac, not a Mini + monitor – unless someone can point me to a 27-inch 5K display that’s as good as my late 2014 5K iMac and doesn’t cost a fortune.

 

[jeffpeng]

Whatever config the Mini turn out to have, it seems we will have to wait until June for the M1 Pro/Max or M2 iMac. And I need an iMac, not a Mini + monitor – unless someone can point me to a 27-inch 5K display that’s as good as my late 2014 5K iMac and doesn’t cost a fortune.

Wasn't that LG 5K Ultrafina the exact same panel?

 

[Tagbert]

Wasn't that LG 5K Ultrafina the exact same panel?

mostly.
People with the LG reported some display unevenness. They also had problems with light bleed around the edges of the case and problem with thunderbolt connectors coming lose. It seems like it wasn't as well constructed as the iMac case.

 

[JacquesleMac]

Wasn't that LG 5K Ultrafina the exact same panel?

Yes, but it’s £1150 (and hard to find) + £1300 for a decently specced (16GB/1TB) current Mini. And that combo won’t be anywhere as appetising as the forthcoming 27-inch iMac (for which I’m budgeting £2500, but will probably end up spending more).

 

[jeffpeng]

mostly.
People with the LG reported some display unevenness. They also had problems with light bleed around the edges of the case and problem with thunderbolt connectors coming lose. It seems like it wasn't as well constructed as the iMac case.

That's a shame. I always wondered why not more people got it. Seemed like a good option .... minus the Apple-Logo, of course.

Yes, but it’s £1150 (and hard to find) + maybe £800 for a decently specced Mini, whenever that arrives.

Well that comes pretty close to what a "decently specced" iMac will cost you. And I wouldn't bet that the "entry level" 27 inch iMac will come as "cheap" as 2K. But .... I wouldn't jump the gun either, especially not with new standalone screens being rumored. It's kinda a stupid period with the current machines being not just out of date, but outright obsolete. If an iMac is what you want, and there are good reasons for that, I guess waiting is the name of the game. There literally is no monitor other than that 5K LG thingy with the same pixel density.

 

[JacquesleMac]

That's a shame. I always wondered why not more people got it. Seemed like a good option .... minus the Apple-Logo, of course.


Well that comes pretty close to what a "decently specced" iMac will cost you. And I wouldn't bet that the "entry level" 27 inch iMac will come as "cheap" as 2K. But .... I wouldn't jump the gun either, especially not with new standalone screens being rumored. It's kinda a stupid period with the current machines being not just out of date, but outright obsolete. If an iMac is what you want, and there are good reasons for that, I guess waiting is the name of the game. There literally is no monitor other than that 5K LG thingy with the same pixel density.

Sorry, I updated and expanded my post to clarify what 'decently specced’ means to me. I agree with your comments. Waiting is painful when I urgently need a second iMac but don’t want to invest in the current dated-from-new Intel model.

 

[jeffpeng]

Sorry, I updated and expanded my post to clarify what 'decently specced’ means to me. I agree with your comments. Waiting is painful when I urgently need a second iMac but don’t want to invest in the current dated-from-new Intel model.

The thing that keeps baffling me is why they didn't "just" gave the iMac the same "old design new bowels" treatment they gave the Mini, MBP and MBA. Board design is cheap, especially for such a low power device, especially with so few actually interconnected parts. No memory tracing, no VRM design to speak of, mostly USB for data traces. An electronic engineering student can build that in a week.

And it would have provided a very effective stopgap solution that's, in all honesty, still good enough for most people. The M1 Macs are decently fast even for actual work, as long as you don't cheap out on the memory. If all you do is browsing and office 8 gigs are even pretty much okay. Plus, and that's just my opinion, the old iMacs actually looked much nicer than the new ones do. Recently seen an old 2017ish iMac 27 beside a new 24. The 27 looks as stellar as ever. The 24 looks like an awkward office monitor for the mid 2000's. #notafan

But now they got people waiting 2 years before they can buy a new device, not adding shipment delays and supply bottlenecks when they could have sold still-more-than-good-enough iMacs for two years. I can't imagine many people went out and said "yeah let's get a new iMac!" after that WWDC announcement. Well except for that diminishingly small crowd that bought Macs for the looks, but ran Windows on them.

Boggles the mind.

 

[bushman4]

Worth the wait. Hopefully they’ve shrunk the Chin and Bezels
But I’ll go with the old adage ‘Don’t expect to much and you won’t be disappointed’

 

[jeffpeng]

Worth the wait. Hopefully they’ve shrunk the Chin and Bezels
But I’ll go with the old adage ‘Don’t expect to much and you won’t be disappointed’

I kinda do hope we'll get a no-chin iMac, and standalone screens that look the same. But hey, here's wishing, ey?

 

[JacquesleMac]

Plus, and that's just my opinion, the old iMacs actually looked much nicer than the new ones do. Recently seen an old 2017ish iMac 27 beside a new 24. The 27 looks as stellar as ever. The 24 looks like an awkward office monitor for the mid 2000's.

Agreed. I don’t want lollipop kiddy colours (especially when colour balancing Photoshop images), I’m not bothered about the ‘chin’ in the slightest, and while narrower bezels would be nifty, they would make no difference to my intent to purchase.

While I appreciate Apple may have supply chain problems they could, as you say, have created a stopgap machine that would have suited very many users. Delaying until WWDC is bad strategy on Apple’s part.

Though Apple have comprehensively leaked what’s coming out in March, maybe we could have one more One More Thing moment...