So much for the "Intel are the ones holding Apple back from regularly updating Macs". While Apple Silicon has many benefits, I knew the whole blaming Intel for laziness with Mac updates was nonsense.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New iMac Not Expected to Launch Until Late 2023 at Earliest
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
With any Apple Silicon Mac, a decent amount of RAM is expensive. Even with the 2020 iMac, a decent sized SSD was expensive. I paid well over 3 grand for my 2020 iMac and that didn't include the RAM I installed separately.
I would have happily paid more to not have an all-in-one but the only Mac with user expandable RAM that was not all-in-one was and is the 2019 Mac Pro which is absurdly expensive.
I feel that it's the enthusiasts who are championing expandability, because they like the idea of being able to pay the absolute minimum for a Mac and then save by buying their own ram and storage online for the lowest possible price and upgrading the device themselves. I feel there isn't really much overlap with professionals, who simply want the best product possible for the job, see the price as simply the cost of doing business, and don't necessarily even bother to upgrade their own computers.
There is also the issue that the design of the M1 chip does not really support expansion either way, since all parts are soldered directly onto it.
You used to be able to conflate the two back when PCs sucked and you need a high-end computer for any real work. But then off-the-shelf computers started getting good enough even for heavy tasks. A Mac Studio and Studio display setup will be amazing for people working from home in creative fields, and I don't think they really care about the limitations that you have raised.
^ I find it comical this idea that "Pro's" don't care about saving money, that they are happy to pay Apple 2-3x the price a 3rd party sells the same parts for, or that they can't be bothered or don't know how to do these upgrades which makes their hardware investment last many more years - making them an even more profitable investment. I guess I have been working on the wrong video games and movies the last 20 yrs to have not acquired a Faberge egg collection to convert into Mac computers on a whim.
It might be comical, but these are the Pros Apple wants to sell to, yes.
I'm sure Apple doesn't care much about pros that don't upgrade when Apple ships new hardware.
Apple doesn't want to sell the same parts that other manufactures have.
Apple doesn't want anyone to upgrade.
Apple is very clear with the ARM transition: if you want "same parts", upgradability, or computers to be a long term investment, leave the Mac platform for other operating systems.
That's simply untrue.
The Mac Studio & Studio display would be an even MORE amazing purchase for people working from home in creative fields if they could replace the storage and increase the RAM.
It's a myth that professional users don't care what sums they pay for the equipment they use...of course they do.
The cost of doing business still needs to be kept to a minimum...that maximises profit.
However it's more than that, needs can change. Replaceable storage for example offers redundancy. When storage dies it can be replaced rather than having to replace the whole product, same goes for RAM. So it lengthens product life and allows the business to scale over time in a way that a sealed system cannot.
The M1 chip design doesn't support user expansion (allegedly), but Intel's chips did, yet Apple still chose to constrain them anyway. So it's a limitation Apple CHOSE to impose, not one that was forced upon them.
The Mac Studio...It's just a rebranded Mac Mini. There's little you can do with a Mac Studio that can't be done a with Mini, so its simply another tier of an existing product (given a new name) rather than a different product.
Apple has a very poor diversity of products at the moment.
The iMac is the prime example of a product whose USP has been reduced to coming in a choice of colours and having a screen - in every other way it's no different to a Mini, MacBook Air or Studio.
In 2012 ALL Apple's products were user expandable to some degree, which made them all scalable.
The 2012 Mac Pro wasn't any less 'Pro' despite it only costing $2499 ($3100 allowing for inflation). It starts at $5999 now so the cost of doing business with Apple has doubled in 7 years.
I cannot understand why anyone reasonable would come onto a forum and argue that it's a good thing.
I believe if the iMac is selling poorly it is not because people no longer want iMacs, but because in it's current iteration it is poor value for money.
Last edited:
Personally, I don't think I ever said it was a good thing.
I would just say: it is the choice Apple has made and I'm confident that Apple will continue to make it for about 10 more years. Apple has written off any previous customers who don't like it, and expecting or hoping Apple will change any time soon is pointless.
I've been using iMacs for a couple decades, my most recent being the 27" 2013 i7 and then I upgraded to the 27" 2019 i9. Long story short, I also used a 2017 3.1 13" MBP for my day-to-day work. I ended up getting a used M1 MBA to replace the Intel MBP in the spring of 2022, and was blown away by the speed, silent operation, and the fact the thing just never heats up. (Intel MBP heats up with several browser pages open)
Everything I read said the M1 iMac would be just as fast as the i9 Intel iMac for the way I use it, in some cases even faster. Plus the M1 iMac is DEAD SILENT and a whole heck of a lot more energy efficient. I somewhat miss the 27" screen, but the 24" is growing on me, plus I would rather have the quiet operation, lower power usage, and what is sure to be better future proofing. The touch keyboard is FANTASTIC for those times you need to use passcodes. I doubt I will buy another iMac for many, many years to come.
Anyone on the fence, I'd say GO FOR IT to replace an Intel model and just get the M1 now. Intel is end-of-life for Apple, and the M1 is just so energy efficient and quiet and powerful. You can get good deals on refurbs at Apple, or, to save even more, buy used on eBay, which is how I bought both my M1 machines. I'm loving the M1 processor and was glad to ditch Intel.
If you are using a 2013 or earlier iMac like some have posted, I wouldn't worry about the wait for M1 vs M3. The difference in speed will not be that great, at least as not as great as your old Intel to the M1. I imagine the M1 will power whatever Apple does for at least the next decade. The 2013's are already a few OS's behind, right? To each his own, but the M1 processor is fantastic.
Everything I read said the M1 iMac would be just as fast as the i9 Intel iMac for the way I use it, in some cases even faster. Plus the M1 iMac is DEAD SILENT and a whole heck of a lot more energy efficient. I somewhat miss the 27" screen, but the 24" is growing on me, plus I would rather have the quiet operation, lower power usage, and what is sure to be better future proofing. The touch keyboard is FANTASTIC for those times you need to use passcodes. I doubt I will buy another iMac for many, many years to come.
Anyone on the fence, I'd say GO FOR IT to replace an Intel model and just get the M1 now. Intel is end-of-life for Apple, and the M1 is just so energy efficient and quiet and powerful. You can get good deals on refurbs at Apple, or, to save even more, buy used on eBay, which is how I bought both my M1 machines. I'm loving the M1 processor and was glad to ditch Intel.
If you are using a 2013 or earlier iMac like some have posted, I wouldn't worry about the wait for M1 vs M3. The difference in speed will not be that great, at least as not as great as your old Intel to the M1. I imagine the M1 will power whatever Apple does for at least the next decade. The 2013's are already a few OS's behind, right? To each his own, but the M1 processor is fantastic.
The main program I’m concerned about is SketchUp, which has just been optimized for Apple Silicon.
My concern is RAM. I presently have 32GB RAM with an Intel i7 2600s and 500GB SSD on my mid 2011 21.5 iMac. So will a current M1 iMac with 16GB RAM and 512-1TB SSD significantly outperform my current setup with SketchUp?
The crux of it is that SketchUp uses only a single core to run. So it’s not a question of having multiple cores—the M1 will unquestionably smoke my old Intel i7. But I still have to use MaxWell Render to render my models—-will stepping down to 16 RAM be worse than the 32 RAM I currently have?
Thats what I’m on the fence about.
Note, too, Maxwell Render highly advises 16GB RAM. But Maxwell is not yet optimized for Apple Silicon and presently requires Rosetta to run on M1.
My concern is RAM. I presently have 32GB RAM with an Intel i7 2600s and 500GB SSD on my mid 2011 21.5 iMac. So will a current M1 iMac with 16GB RAM and 512-1TB SSD significantly outperform my current setup with SketchUp?
The crux of it is that SketchUp uses only a single core to run. So it’s not a question of having multiple cores—the M1 will unquestionably smoke my old Intel i7. But I still have to use MaxWell Render to render my models—-will stepping down to 16 RAM be worse than the 32 RAM I currently have?
Thats what I’m on the fence about.
Note, too, Maxwell Render highly advises 16GB RAM. But Maxwell is not yet optimized for Apple Silicon and presently requires Rosetta to run on M1.
No one ever says "I bought too much RAM"
True.
I think I am basically in a holding pattern. I like Apple’s AIO iMac design, and my gut feeling is the current M1 iMac would work for me, but I can wait to see what the M3 iMac has to offer. The M2 devices offer 24GB RAM so the M3 should offer at least that. I’ll simply have to temper my impatience.
I have considered the Mac Studio, but then I have to buy a good display for it. And no matter how you cut it if I buy a decent display for the Studio it will all cost me more than a spec’d iMac.
Last edited:
If a program you have needs lots of RAM, it will still need lots of RAM on Apple Silicon, and I would try and get close to the same amount.
If you are only tight on RAM because of the number of programs running, Virtual Memory paging on Apple Silicon will probably be fast enough.
The secret to buying lower cost Mac displays is:
1) Just get a 110 DPI screen.
2) Get a 4K screen and run it at 86 DPI equivalent 2x retina mode (so things will look good, but everything will be a bit big.
Of course, the constant rule of buying computers: if you can wait, you will get something better; if you can't wait, go for it.
The base Mac Studio is a really great, well rounded, machine; but, it is a huge leap up from the iMac. Perhaps a an M2 Mac mini with 24GB of RAM, or an M2 Pro Mac mini with 32GB of RAM would be "fine"?
Finally found a video review of SketchUp Pro 2021 (not optimized for Apple Silicon) on an M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM.
The review is quite positive given that this version would have been running with Rosetta. SketchUp Pro 2022/23 is optimized for apple Silicon and would not require Rosetta.
The review is quite positive given that this version would have been running with Rosetta. SketchUp Pro 2022/23 is optimized for apple Silicon and would not require Rosetta.
The more I think about it, Apple could produce an M2 or M2 Pro-base 24" iMac very soon. Reason: they could put in a better fan to cool the M2 or M2 Pro SoC without needing to change the design of the whole case.
If they can put an M2 without fan in a MacBook Air then an M2 in an iMac is a piece of cake. The M2 in MacBook Pro 13 (which has a fan) is essentially proof of it.
I’m curious what else Apple might do to the iMac besides upgrade it to M3. New features? Additional ports? New colours? Who knows.
I’m curious what else Apple might do to the iMac besides upgrade it to M3. New features? Additional ports? New colours? Who knows.
I think you are not gonna see a M2 iMac.. maybe M3 is the first as old rumours suggested long ago because there is no room for it in the current AS ecosystem. Why buy a mac mini or mac studio when you can get a 5k screen thrown in for another $200?
In another thread they are talking about how the New Mac M2 Mini overlaps the base M1 Mac Studio.. and in another thread, the Mac Studio not getting a refresh to an M2 Ultra because it will overlap with whatever the AS Mac Pro will be.
There is a log-jam of products all using very similar parts, maybe by M3 the spread between a max, pro and ultra will be greater. But I think the iMac lands right on in the middle of an already crowded space.
In another thread they are talking about how the New Mac M2 Mini overlaps the base M1 Mac Studio.. and in another thread, the Mac Studio not getting a refresh to an M2 Ultra because it will overlap with whatever the AS Mac Pro will be.
There is a log-jam of products all using very similar parts, maybe by M3 the spread between a max, pro and ultra will be greater. But I think the iMac lands right on in the middle of an already crowded space.
No, I’m pretty sure we’re not going to see an M2 iMac. Thats why I keep referring to a forthcoming M3 iMac.
That's why said could produce an M2 iMac. But Apple will likely wait for M3 because it would mean they don't have to redesign the iMac case to acommodate a bigger cooling fan system.
I got an M1 iMac last Christmas, maxed out 1TB with 16 GB ram.
It does everything I want it to do, and more. It screams.
I do basic podcast editing in GarageBand, internet, email, and some Youtube. I FINALLY found a decent game on the Mac app store... "resident evil village". It's only had 1 hiccup since I started playing it, the iMac randomly shut off. Hasn't done it again.
I really wish more games like this were on App Store. I know apple isn't committed to gaming. But my point is, it runs it quite well, and that's by far the most intensive task I use this machine for.
I had a 2009 21.5 iMac for MANY years, and was my daily driver. I gave it to a friend several years ago. I have a 2008 iMac sitting in my garage that was my grandmother's who passed in 2018. I won't get rid it for for sentimental reasons. The iMac gets a bad rep, I think it's the best product apple offers. It does everything I need it to do.
If M1 is "outdated" tech, then I am cool stuck in the past. I love this machine. My current MBD is now 4 years old; I am going to try and squeeze another year out of it before upgrading.
It does everything I want it to do, and more. It screams.
I do basic podcast editing in GarageBand, internet, email, and some Youtube. I FINALLY found a decent game on the Mac app store... "resident evil village". It's only had 1 hiccup since I started playing it, the iMac randomly shut off. Hasn't done it again.
I really wish more games like this were on App Store. I know apple isn't committed to gaming. But my point is, it runs it quite well, and that's by far the most intensive task I use this machine for.
I had a 2009 21.5 iMac for MANY years, and was my daily driver. I gave it to a friend several years ago. I have a 2008 iMac sitting in my garage that was my grandmother's who passed in 2018. I won't get rid it for for sentimental reasons. The iMac gets a bad rep, I think it's the best product apple offers. It does everything I need it to do.
If M1 is "outdated" tech, then I am cool stuck in the past. I love this machine. My current MBD is now 4 years old; I am going to try and squeeze another year out of it before upgrading.
There is one other little thing I’d like to see on the M3 iMac: please put the Apple logo back on the chin.
Another small thing, well maybe not so small, might be to tweak the colours. In that I mean make the pedestal’s metallic finish the same on the back of the iMac. They already do that with the silver colour so why not with the others?
I don’t what they can do about the colour on the chin itself, but those pastel hues look rather meh. The chin on the pink iMac actually looks like a flesh tone—not so nice.
Space Grey might be played out, but I think it could look good on the iMac.
Another small thing, well maybe not so small, might be to tweak the colours. In that I mean make the pedestal’s metallic finish the same on the back of the iMac. They already do that with the silver colour so why not with the others?
I don’t what they can do about the colour on the chin itself, but those pastel hues look rather meh. The chin on the pink iMac actually looks like a flesh tone—not so nice.
Space Grey might be played out, but I think it could look good on the iMac.
Btw, why doesn't Apple make the 24" iMac the "iMac Air" (thin, light, multiple colors) and bring out a 27" or 30" "iMac Pro" to match the iPad and Macbook Pros; then call the Mac Pro the "Mac Studio Pro"? They're all over the place with product differentiation, it drives me crazy.
Branding is hard:
Apple is just super conservative in branding, and almost never rebrands its products. The biggest transition was from PowerPC to Intel as Apple moved away from the "Power" brand, but Apple is loath to get rid of a brand that seems to have worked (i.e. "iMac" and "MacBook Air").
I should do a rebranding experiment.
It's not THAT hard.. At this point I'm so used to it, a streamlined naming practice might confuse me. I guess they effectively convey they have a wealth of products? And snare customers in a web of comparison and choice..?Branding is hard:
Apple is just super conservative in branding, and almost never rebrands its products. The biggest transition was from PowerPC to Intel as Apple moved away from the "Power" brand, but Apple is loath to get rid of a brand that seems to have worked (i.e. "iMac" and "MacBook Air").
I should do a rebranding experiment.
I don't know enough to infer anything about their product differentiation, but from the outside it makes no sense. Hopefully there's some rationale for it.. they have marketing data, usage data, goals for their supply chain and manufacturing relationships, costs to keep down..
Yea what happened? Even since the half dozen Yellow iPhone articles it's been crickets.