Sidebar Sidebar
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

jimothyGator said:
How about a monitor with built in speakers and webcam? Something like the Apple Studio Display?
Click to expand...

ASD costs $1,599. That, combined with the cheapest M2 Mac mini (which is an 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD machine) along with a numeric keyboard and trackpad, costs $2,506 before tax.

You can get a M1 iMac 24" with 16 GB RAM and 512 GB SSD, a trackpad, and a numeric keyboard for $1,979 before taxes.

Most would argue that the M1 IMac is a better configuration for a cheaper price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedomlinux, escargot3 and henry72
ResPublica said:
At least you could upgrade that HD and move up to an SSD later...
But I'm sure many people started to hate their Mac because of it and some iMacs might have been thrown away because they were 'unusable.'
Click to expand...
I’ve encountered quite a few who didn’t know they could upgrade the RAM let alone think about replacing the hard drive with a SSD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ResPublica and escargot3
I love the M1. It was the perfect computer for my kid's room. He uses it for homework, Google Classroom stuff, making Pokémon tier lists, watching YouTube, and making songs in Garageband with a synth connected. We went with the yellow. It's the most Apple of all the Macs for almost 2 decades. Would love to see it continue. For a "family computer" and front of house machine for hotels, reception desks for businesses, it's the most perfect machine Apple makes. I'd love to see the yellow on the back be a bit more canary yellow (vs. an almost greenish golden yellow). More broadly, I'd love to see continual colour updates as the line continues. This friendly Apple is the one I fell in love with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula and Rokkus76
Well duh. Clearly there's no way releasing an iMac now when M3 Macbooks are just right around the corner. Anybody with half a brain can deduce this.
 
Apple_Robert said:
For the average homeowner, the M1 is more than capable and will last many years. Only tech nerds trying to chase tech complain there aren't yearly updates.
Click to expand...
People like to get things that last. I had a 2013 high spec iMac and was able to comfortably get the M1 mini when it came out.

Now assuming I bought a 2014 iMac and was in the market right now. I have a choice of M1 (that’s already 2 years old at this point) or waiting. M2 already exists. So people in that market are rightly annoyed at having to wait. I certainly would not be buying something as old as M1 even if it does support your needs people like to have something that can support their needs for longer or as they grow/change.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula, Rokkus76 and JazzyGB1
ian87w said:
Well duh. Clearly there's no way releasing an iMac now when M3 Macbooks are just right around the corner. Anybody with half a brain can deduce this.
Click to expand...
Not everything transitions easily to 3nm which M3 is suppose to be utilizing.

analyticsindiamag.com

TSMC's 3nm: Lost in Memory Lane | AIM

While the logical circuits have been scaling well, SRAM, the memory infrastructure, is unable to keep pace
analyticsindiamag.com analyticsindiamag.com
 
HowardEv said:
No it doesn’t. It is the exact same chips as in the MacBook, at the same clock speed. It shouldn’t need to stay plugged in anymore. It should have a much smaller case, and needs a battery like the MacBook and iPhone.
Click to expand...
Get yourself a Mac mini, try it without plugging it in, and let us know how that goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G5isAlive
What was the point of launching such a radical redesign if you're not going to update it for almost 3 years? It's like they want to juice as many sales of an M1 model as much as possible so they don't have to offer an M2 model for the same price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula and turbineseaplane
HowardEv said:
Oh come on. I’m saying, the old Intel Mini used a high wattage “desktop” chip that wasn’t used in the low power MacBooks. Now, the Mini uses the same chip as in the MacBooks, so it doesn’t NEED to be plugged in anymore, but Apple still puts it in the old Intel-era case because they suck.
Click to expand...
A smaller case would require more agressive cooling, and thus higher fan RPMs and more noise. IMO, it's not worth giving that up just to make a case that's already quite small even smaller.

In fact, there are reports (see linked video) the M2 Pro Mini, which has a significantly higher TDP than the M1 Mini, can (unlike the M1 Mini) generate fairly audible noise under load...so if anything you might want an even larger case to ensure it stays quiet. To my mind, given how small the case is now, making it somewhat bigger to ensure quiet operation would be a good tradeoff. I mean, it sits on your desk; how much difference would it make if it were, say, a cm or so taller?

[Though because companies like MacStadium use so many of them, they probably won't make it bigger.]

 
Last edited:
Nimoy said:
They should really just get these on an annual cycle. I would hate to be in the market for an iMac right now and forced to choose between the M1 and waiting for a year or more for the M3.
Click to expand...
I think you may be disappointed in the future. The product line is very much mature. I do not know much about chips and am happy to be educated, but I believe a lot of the recent gains in power and efficiency come out of or are related to reducing the manufacturing process size. I have read that as the processes get smaller and smaller, it is more challenging to further reduce the process size. If this is accurate, I kind of expect that update cycles will be less regular and longer.
 
For years the fanbase begged for an X-Mac, a prosumer level Mac with a separate display. We got what we asked for.

Today Apple is essentially right back where they were 20 years ago. The colourful iMac for consumers, desktop computers with separate displays, consumer laptop and pro laptop.

20 years ago nearly all Mac desktop buyers purchased 3rd party displays. Apple eventually stopped selling their own line of displays because they wouldn't compete on price/performance. It looks like history is repeating itself.

Is there anyone who doesn't think they're being overcharged for the Studio Display (US$1699) when two years ago that same screen came with a full computer inside (US$1799 iMac) that Apple had to pay a premium to Intel and other suppliers for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula, loby and Abazigal
Andres Cantu said:
What was the point of launching such a radical redesign if you're not going to update it for almost 3 years? It's like they want to juice as many sales of an M1 model as much as possible so they don't have to offer an M2 model for the same price.
Click to expand...
You have to think in the current new Apple mindset. This is the Apple who would discontinue even the iPhone mini when it didn’t meet their sales expectations, and I’m willing to bet Apple sold more iPhone minis than iMac.

Apple’s main Mac bestsellers are the MacBooks, and this has been the case for years. Laptops are outselling desktop YoY. The iMac is still Apple’s consumer desktop face, but it will be relegated to step child status for refreshes. It’s been the case since the intel days as well. When Apple had switched all their laptops to SSDs, the iMac was still on 5400rpm drive as their default preconfigured models.

The current Apple is about pushing volumes. iPhones and laptops. Less moving models will be getting less and less attention.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula and Tagbert
hagar said:
Exactly. Not to mention the iMac is quite wasteful. Throwing away an entire desktop because the CPU is outdated is just crazy.
Click to expand...
Well don’t forget the studio display has an a13 processor in it. What happens when that’s obsolete? They also used dated tech in the display when they coulda used mini LED and promotion 🤷🏻‍♂️ personally I loved getting a fancy new display with each new mac I purchased… and it’s much easier to convince the boss at work to buy an iMac than a Mac Studio and she’ll out extra just for a display. He’s wind up buying a cheap third party 4k one like most people
 
Rychiar said:
This is just stupid. The 24” iMac as it stands is a low end Mac just like the Mac mini. There’s zero reason M2 shouldn’t be in it . Not like it would take much for them to slap one in it. So sick of apples nonsense release strategy and keeping the prices high on dated tech.
Click to expand...
It could be Apple is finding that the iMac is not actually selling well. Consumers would buy laptops, while Pros would prefer a standalone unit with monitor of their choice. Thus Apple is updating the Mac mini and even added the M2 Pro in it. Producing the iMac must cost quite a bit as well, for a slow moving lineup. Thus Apple would not put too much focus on it.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: jimothyGator and Tagbert
I think the iMac is victim of the same issue with the AS Mac Pro.., and possibly lack of M2 update for the Mac Studio.. There just is not enough performance difference across the AS chips. The iMac would overlap heavily with the mini and studio.. just as the Studio ultra will potentially with the AS Mac Pro.. The mac pro however might have some features/capabilities the Studio will not.
Apple has too many products in the same performance bands, but they want to have clear price brackets for them. I guess the strategy is to wait for AS to mature and in theory a M3 is a bigger jump from pro -> max -> Ultra.. that or Apple does this horrible thing where they stagger when each device gets the latest tech and artificially hold stuff back to make artificial performance moats .. ie. you can only get an M3 in a Mac Pro in 2023.. and have to wait till 2024 for it to show up in a MBP?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert and Adelphos33
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back