Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There's more. and unfortunately I don't really feel like giving ytou a complete business 101 course and rundown on how removal of choice and options are used in modern day business to steer other product sales that typically have higher margins to them.

Oh, I wouldn't DREAM of taking up your valuable time, teacher :rolleyes: I don't need to be taught anything by you. I simply disagree that the lack of an SD port is primarily a money-driven decision (if it were, they'd never have included them before).

I'm going to leave it at that.
 
  • Love
Reactions: DanTSX
Oh, I wouldn't DREAM of taking up your valuable time, teacher :rolleyes: I don't need to be taught anything by you. I simply disagree that the lack of an SD port is primarily a money-driven decision (if it were, they'd never have included them before).

I'm going to leave it at that.

Cool

so you don't understand what you're talkin about an aren't willing to learn ;)
 
Spoiler: it will probably have exactly the same performance as the M1 Mini and M1 13" MBP, and a slight advantage over the M1 MBA due to being better cooled.

...which is perfectly fine as a replacement for the 21.5" iMac it replaced, which it should conclusively thrash - maybe not quite as thoroughly as the Mini/MBP beat their Intel counterparts because the 21.5" Intel iMac did at least have a discrete GPU.

What it's mainly lost is the ability to support 2 external displays, which is not good but probably not a dealbreaker for the target market. The target market - especially for the cheapest model with just the two TB ports and no Ethernet - probably won't care about the ports, either. The two TB ports presumably - like the other M1 machines - each have a separate controller now, so the I/O bandwidth has doubled c.f. the 21.5" and now you can get more TB ports via a hub. (I'd prefer more ports but, frankly, using a hub/dongles with a desktop isn't as stupid as with a laptop where you have to carry them around).

However, Apple need to get a wiggle on with the M1X/M2 whatever, and the "pro" Macs using them.
Or it could be clocked to 3.6 at 20w due to better cooling, non-battery power. We won’t know.
But I was surprised it had 2 fans if it was going to stay the same. That’s why I am wondering if it might have a higher clock.
 
Any engineering reason why the ‘chin’ is there at all? Is it a place for the logic board away from the display?
6x Speakers for one thing. That and you aren't going to fit the board + heatsink + fans into an 11mm case behind a display.
 
My cameras all have CF Express type B and every pro camera of the last two decades has had CF, XQD, CFast, or now CF Express in either A or B variants.

But we aren't talking about pro's we are talking about a consumer computer and consumer format. Consumer DLSR's and point and shoot cameras died now that (to the user) you can get a comparable image on your smartphone. Even then it is arguable if the user of a Canon Rebel wouldn't just plug their camera directly into the computer over USB.

Pro's never used the built-in SD reader, our cameras at that era used CF right up to the Canon 5D Mark IV. Nikon were a wee bit ahead of the curve and pushed XQD in the D850 and D5. But even the D5 came in dual CF or dual XQD versions. Canon's 1-series line had dual CF, CF+CFast, and now dual CF Express type B.
Is there any equivalent to a 600 mm telephoto lens for your iPhone? How can you shoot macro on an iPhone and not be 3 cm away from the subject? How do you attach strobe lights to your iPhone? I see consumers out all the time taking nature and bird photographs with digital camera's not iPhones. Kind of hard to get a shot of a bird 60 feet away with an iPhone 12. Now if you are into taking selfies or your plate of food, then an iPhone is fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rokkus76
What I don't understand is why is it important to make an iMac, which is a desktop computer so thin at the expense of useable ports and higher end graphics? Yet Apple makes the iPhone, that you carry or put in your pocket thicker and bigger. I can see making the portable device smaller and thinner, but would't you rather have the desktop a few mm thicker and more ports and hardware? This whole idea with the desktop that less is more, leaves you with a mess of cables and adapters.
 
What does circling back to Apple's roots by including fun colors have to do with ports? Here's a look at all of those "unprofessional" iMac's ports:

View attachment 1761564
But, if you break it down, the functionality of all those ports is 100% replicated on the new iMac, plus WAY more considering the power and speed of USB-C and Thunderbolt 4.
 
Not very many average consumers need anything more by way of "ports" than what is offered on this iMac. If they do, then they can buy a USB-C hub for cheap that will permanently sit on their desk beside the base of the iMac's stand. I truly do not understand the controversy.
 
This whole idea with the desktop that less is more, leaves you with a mess of cables and adapters.
For my use case it would leave me with nice tidy workstation.

I use wireless for the internet, the only external drives I have are USB-C, and for that one external mixer, I have a C to B cable.
 
Goes for the black bezel as well...
The black bezels Looked great when turned off.

This won’t. Not unless Apple has something in mind for always on with low power usage...(maybe after an annual update or two?)
 
My problem isn't with the white bezel per se but with the way it goes together with the coloured chin. Against a light background, the bezel recedes and all you see is the screen and the - slightly wider - chin, which looks awkward to me. A fully-white front (which is what most of the earlier machines had - the original iMac had a couple of splashes of colour but not a solid slab).
If I understand correctly, I agree the issue is the chin and not the white bezels.

I think Apple is going back to the design language of white or light signals entry-level or home consumer level and black or dark signals professional or higher-demand consumer level (or, prosumer if you're into terrible portmanteaus). I really don't mind this, and actually like that contrasting design colors signal intended markets. The notable exception is the white iPhone 12 Pro.

But that chin is ugly as heck. I'd much rather an iMac, even with white bezels, that is 3x thicker but has no chin, has an integrated power supply (it is an "all-in-one" after all), and has all the ports on the back.
 
This is the first thing I thought, if it has the same chip as the Mac Mini why would you spend the extra. The display does look great but for the extra money I'd want something with more power in it.
Will the improved cooling on the iMac not give better performance than the mini?

If not I think I'm looking for a mini and a monitor.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.