The new iMac has to be a Trojan Horse

Zellio

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 7, 2012
1,131
450
It's clearly made as an option to make the higher priced iMacs more attractive looking in price to 95% of people who look at them.

.... Right? :rolleyes:
 

Nismo73

macrumors 6502a
Jan 4, 2013
886
481
I would say it does two things: It's good a option for people who by in quantity to get that model, but in the store it would push people to get the Iris Pro model.
 
Last edited:

SandboxGeneral

Moderator emeritus
Sep 8, 2010
26,387
9,823
Detroit
I'd have to say it's a step to help boost Mac sales by offering a less-expensive option for new Mac buyers to get their foot into the Apple product line.
 

fuchsdh

macrumors 68000
Jun 19, 2014
1,606
970
Agreed--why can't it be both? For volume pricing, cheaper models matter more, and hence this Mac for schools--soldered RAM is irrelevant as they aren't going to be upgrading anything after the fact.

And for a lot of people it increases the perceived quality of the next tier.

I'm only a little sad that the new iMac doesn't fill a meaningful niche outside those two markets--if it was $999 with even a 500GB 7200RPM drive I'd say it'd be a perfect computer for a lot of regular folks too, but I can't recommend a 5400RPM drive to anyone I love :)
 

xWhiplash

macrumors 68020
Oct 21, 2009
2,095
1,113
Why are people so upset about the pricing? Other than an SSD, it is the same as the Macbook Air right? You DO know that the iMac displays cost more than the air's displays right? It is 10 inches bigger and has 1920x1080 resolution. Therefore, it would have to be a higher price than the Macbook Air.

So please, what is so unbelievably horrible about the iMacs pricing, yet the Air's pricing is fine?
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
66,775
33,718
Boston
It's clearly made as an option to make the higher priced iMacs more attractive looking in price to 95% of people who look at them.

.... Right? :rolleyes:
I'd disagree, because look at the inexpensive Mini and how popular that is, or the MacBook Airs and how popular they are. I think its a distinct product that will fit the needs of certain users. Pure and simple.
 

MacCruiskeen

macrumors 6502
Nov 9, 2011
321
5
So please, what is so unbelievably horrible about the iMacs pricing, yet the Air's pricing is fine?
The Air is kinda pricey for what you get in it (but then, it's a Mac, right?). You're paying a premium for the lightness and portability. For some people, I guess, that premium is worth paying for. With the iMac, all you're getting is a lower-powered machine for a small discount. Again, for some people it might be a fine choice. In the education market, every dollar counts. Apple has certainly in the past made market-specific hardware for education, though usually separate from their retail lines.
 

MartinAppleGuy

macrumors 68020
Sep 27, 2013
2,244
888
The Air is kinda pricey for what you get in it (but then, it's a Mac, right?). You're paying a premium for the lightness and portability. For some people, I guess, that premium is worth paying for. With the iMac, all you're getting is a lower-powered machine for a small discount. Again, for some people it might be a fine choice. In the education market, every dollar counts. Apple has certainly in the past made market-specific hardware for education, though usually separate from their retail lines.
read: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1746302/
 

FreakinEurekan

macrumors 68040
Sep 8, 2011
3,437
402
Eureka Springs, Arkansas
It's clearly made as an option to make the higher priced iMacs more attractive looking in price to 95% of people who look at them.

.... Right? :rolleyes:
I like it, wish it were another $100 or $200 cheaper but still for a basic computer it would do just fine. I'd love to be able to get that model with the 256 SSD for around $1,200 and right now it's $1,349.

My wife uses an older iMac (upgraded with SSD) and a 2013 MacBook Air for her work, the MacBook Air's power is just fine but she does like having a dedicated desktop computer with 2nd display for use in her home office. She uses Word, Excel, Mail, and Safari - no problem even for her old Core2Duo iMac.

Which is a long way of saying - some people buy a computer to use, not to tinker with or to push to performance extremes. And for many of those users, the new iMac will do the trick quite well.

We're kind of hoping the old iMac will die so we can justify getting her the new one, mainly so she can get Mavericks (her old model tops out at Lion). But the darn thing won't break :p
 

animatedude

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2010
1,098
67
students and kids don't need an iMac with 1 TB storage....Apple should've released this cheaper option two years ago when they launched the new iMacs.

Actually, i think Apple need to release an even cheaper option with 256 GB option.
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
66,775
33,718
Boston
students and kids don't need an iMac with 1 TB storage....Apple should've released this cheaper option two years ago when they launched the new iMacs.

Actually, i think Apple need to release an even cheaper option with 256 GB option.
Apple has an inexpensive model already - the Mac Mini.
 

FreakinEurekan

macrumors 68040
Sep 8, 2011
3,437
402
Eureka Springs, Arkansas
Apple has an inexpensive model already - the Mac Mini.
Sort of. The base Mini is inexpensive, but no SSD option. The cheapest config of a Mini with SSD is $999, and by the time you add a display, mouse, and keyboard you're pretty darn close to the $1,349 minimum SSD config of an iMac. Match the iMac's 8GB RAM and at that point the price is a wash.
 

Oracle1729

macrumors 6502a
Feb 4, 2009
638
0
Why are people so upset about the pricing? Other than an SSD, it is the same as the Macbook Air right? You DO know that the iMac displays cost more than the air's displays right?
And that's the problem....you're paying a huge premium for an under-powered ultra-mobile power saving cpu. FOR A DESKTOP.

Stop drinking the kool-aid and realized this product for the utter stupidity that it is. All the perfomance drawbacks and price premiums of an a ultra book. And the form factor of an AIW desktop. :rolleyes:
 

hleewell

macrumors 6502a
Oct 22, 2009
544
62
They should offer the 512 GB SSD for the low end iMac. Don't mind the soldered RAM. I want this so bad as a back-up PC in an alternate room....
 

Lava Lamp Freak

macrumors 65816
Jun 1, 2006
1,470
538
And that's the problem....you're paying a huge premium for an under-powered ultra-mobile power saving cpu. FOR A DESKTOP.

Stop drinking the kool-aid and realized this product for the utter stupidity that it is. All the perfomance drawbacks and price premiums of an a ultra book. And the form factor of an AIW desktop. :rolleyes:
I think the iMac is a great deal for some people. For example, my Mom is currently using an early 2009 20-inch iMac. I'd have no qualms recommending it to her. Not everyone needs a fast quad-core processor.

If price is the main concern, Dell has much better options at all price points. That's why I currently have a Dell XPS 8500 and an Ultrasharp display instead of an iMac.

If you want an iMac and don't do much more than web and email, you can now get one for $200 less. If you want something cheap, get a Dell.
 

0dev

macrumors 68040
Dec 22, 2009
3,947
23
127.0.0.1
if it was $999 with even a 500GB 7200RPM drive I'd say it'd be a perfect computer for a lot of regular folks too, but I can't recommend a 5400RPM drive to anyone I love :)
Couldn't agree more, in fact I think it's ridiculous Apple still sells computers with 5400RPM HDs in 2014. It's not like 7200RPM drives are an expensive luxury. The only reason they do it is to make them appear significantly slower compared to the super expensive SSD models.

Can you replace the HD in this machine though? That's the question. If yes I'd say it's still worth the price because a 1TB 7200RPM HD is like £50 these days.

----------

I think the iMac is a great deal for some people. For example, my Mom is currently using an early 2009 20-inch iMac. I'd have no qualms recommending it to her. Not everyone needs a fast quad-core processor.

If price is the main concern, Dell has much better options at all price points. That's why I currently have a Dell XPS 8500 and an Ultrasharp display instead of an iMac.

If you want an iMac and don't do much more than web and email, you can now get one for $200 less. If you want something cheap, get a Dell.
If you want really good value just build your own PC. It's not even difficult, just watch some tutorials on YouTube, get an antistatic band, and make sure the parts are compatible. You can build a computer with the specs of a £1,000 iMac for ~£500 including a 1080p monitor.
 

rotorblade69

macrumors regular
Jul 1, 2006
157
8
North West Georgia
Looks fine to me. If my '07 MBP as my desktop will last until this iMac hits the refurb store...

EXACTAMUNDO!!!!!!!

Customer realizes a 5400 rpm hd is a POS turtle shoved into the body of a mustang. Customer returns computer. Later I pounce on computer for 600 at refurb store with full one year warranty. Walk away like a boss. :cool:

Might even get lucky and get one with SSD drive.

Just priced this base model iMac with a 256 SSD and it was $1349.00. Now thats up there in price for what you get. BUT I wonder if a retailer could order big batches with the SSD installed and get the price to $1199.
 
Last edited:

Mal67

macrumors 6502a
Apr 2, 2006
518
35
West Oz
This imac is not that cheap and is closer in cost to one imac model that was released 2 or 3 years ago I think from memory. Considering the deal with the processor graphic combination and the use of a hard drive I would have thought this model would have been sold for a lot less. Also they could have just put the board into the mini and sold that as the new mini upgrade which would have been an option that might have appealed to more than a few users. Anyway bulk buyers aside why buy this when for a couple of hundred extra you can get the better processor and iris in the current models.
 

Lava Lamp Freak

macrumors 65816
Jun 1, 2006
1,470
538
This imac is not that cheap and is closer in cost to one imac model that was released 2 or 3 years ago I think from memory. Considering the deal with the processor graphic combination and the use of a hard drive I would have thought this model would have been sold for a lot less. Also they could have just put the board into the mini and sold that as the new mini upgrade which would have been an option that might have appealed to more than a few users. Anyway bulk buyers aside why buy this when for a couple of hundred extra you can get the better processor and iris in the current models.
Why buy something used off of Craigslist when you can get something new for $200 more? Why wait for a refurb to be delivered when you can just walk into the Apple Store today and get it $200 more? Why wait until your state's Sales Tax Holiday to buy something when you can get it now?

I imagine that the target market for the new iMac doesn't care about the things that we care about.
 

Lava Lamp Freak

macrumors 65816
Jun 1, 2006
1,470
538
Bad comparison. The air's value is based on thinness and portability, not internals. Desktops value is based on internals. You are comparing products that have two different uses. The desktop has NONE of the lightness, portability value.
Well, that is your opinion. Not everyone sees it that way. Read through the forum and you'll find people comparing MacBooks and iMacs without regard to portability. Seven years ago my desktop was a MacBook Pro, and it never left my house. It is perfectly reasonable to compare a MacBook Air and an iMac. Everyone has different needs and opinions.
 

MartinAppleGuy

macrumors 68020
Sep 27, 2013
2,244
888
Bad comparison. The air's value is based on thinness and portability, not internals. Desktops value is based on internals. You are comparing products that have two different uses. The desktop has NONE of the lightness, portability value.
Opoliges as the comparison was really made for someone I know ( and I'm sure there are more people) who use the MBA as a desktop.
 

Cave Man

macrumors 604
OK, just tried one of these at our campus bookstore yesterday. They had Aperture on it and I loaded a Nikon D600 (24 mp) RAW file and the computer handled edits in real-time. I was kind of surprised - no lags or stuttering at all. I understand Aperture uses the gpu a lot so the HD5000 could account for it. They let me download and install Intel's cpu monitoring application and when I was using the blur brush in Aperture the clock frequency ramped up to 2.7 ghz almost immediately. When the computer was idle it dropped down to about 800 mhz. My understanding is that when the turbo kicks in it shuts down one of the cores, so this is probably just a single core running at 2.7 ghz.

I don't know how it will do with other things, but is seems like this new iMac is a much better computer than many people think - including myself.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.