Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

These Are Apple's Oldest Products Still Sold Today

nvmls said:
Less efficient & natural doing what? You name it.
I'm talking about real productivity (as in media editing, layer based post production, vector & graphics manipulation, coding, multitasking, documentation, spreadsheets, DBs, 3D modelling, intense browser navigation, inspecting & debugging, etc).

Please don't tell me banal stuff like "pinching to zoom". Also, it's totally fine to prefer either one. Just saying that productivity speed & efficiency isn't necessarily a result of "feels nice" emotions.
Click to expand...
I don't know why you are such on the defensive, I just said it's fine to prefer one over the other. I shared an opinion, not a fact (and so did you). You are not the only one doing 'real' productivity, and my point was not related to gimmicky features, but real efficiency improvement when using the trackpad over the mouse. I do find it better for my own workflow, which includes notably spreadsheets, multitasking, video production and documentation.

But I will state it again so you don't feel attacked, my experience is not the one that everyone here should have, you might find the Magic Mouse as a better tool for your workflow and it's totally fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎 and Tim Apple’s Glasses
fwmireault said:
I don't know why you are such on the defensive, I just said it's fine to prefer one over the other. I shared an opinion, not a fact (and so did you). You are not the only one doing 'real' productivity, and my point was not related to gimmicky features, but real efficiency improvement when using the trackpad over the mouse. I do find it better for my own workflow, which includes notably spreadsheets, multitasking, video production and documentation.

But I will state it again so you don't feel attacked, my experience is not the one that everyone here should have, you might find the Magic Mouse as a better tool for your workflow and it's totally fine.
Click to expand...
Not defensive, just saying it's not more efficient. Glad you like it better, still doesn't make it more efficient, but also, you don't have to particularly care about it, clearly many don't.
 
XDR Display with an OLED panel, Airpods Max with lossless audio, and a Homepod with a small screen will be day 1 purchases for me - LFG Apple
 
This list excludes previous-generation Apple products still sold, such as the iPhone 13, and products unlikely to be updated again, such as the SuperDrive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Matsamoto said:
I’m just guessing here, but I think Apples plan for the iMac is an update every two years.
So I think with the new M3 they will release an updated machine.

Or at least I hope🙂
Click to expand...

I would agree. The current iMac is absolutely fine for anyone who'd ever buy this device. It doesn't need more power, it doesn't need updating. It probably won't need updating when the M3 comes along either but it keeps it relevant for another 2-3 years.

It's clearly a nice looking all in one that sits on the desk of non-tech interesting people who like to write, surf the web, run a little home business on etsy maybe etc etc. This machine will be more than capable of doing that for the next decade or more!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Apple not updating the larger iMacs or iMac Pro's in YEARS is a slap in the face to all those that can't pay or refuse to pay the ridiculous high prices of the Mac Pros and Monitors. They are trying to win a war of attrition. Screw you, Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️ said:
I hope Apple never ever discontinues the iMac.
Click to expand...

The iMac is the spiritual successor to the original Mac and a defining product in Job's reinventing of Apple so I believe it will be in the product line for as long as Apple continues to make Macs which will probably be for decades to come. I think as far as Macs go, the iMac, Mac Mini, and MacBook Air product names will all be equally as safe for the long-term.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
bsbeamer said:
If Apple expects people to upgrade iMac's every few years, they need to figure out a way to extend the life of an iMac as a target display or even scheduling service to swap out a SOC module. Hard to claim they're being green when users literally have to trash (or recycle) a perfectly fine 4.5K monitor as part of an upgrade. As it stands right now, more people are better off with mini/studio + monitor to fulfill the iMac need. Even a case to be made for one of the MacBookPro options + monitor.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree with this! I had my '11 27" iMac in its box for years in the closet, I swear it had issues I never could figure out during it's "official" lifespan, but after I had moved on from it because it wouldn't take modern OS or updates (Safari had stopped allow some functionality) I was ready to put it out to the trash...UNTIL I found the Luna Display and can now use my big ol' 27" screen as an ancillary dashboard/Spotify player/calendar, etc.!
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
JitteryJimmy said:
The two longest lived Apple products near me, in daily use:

  • 8 Years old: My Apple TV HD. It is rock solid and still updated.
  • 15 Years old: My neighbor still runs her Airport Express N v1. A 15 year run is pretty good, although the software is no longer being updated and the device has been declared obsolete.
Click to expand...
I have 2x Airport Express v.1 that still works very nicely too - amazing and great of Apple to keep them updated since their stone-age.

When they stop caring for them, I'll guess I probably haver to buy some more HomePod Mini's or maybe 2 HomePod's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
crsh1976 said:
I wouldn't worry so much about peripherals and accessories, they don't need to be updated often to stay relevant, but the iMac is really in dire need an update.
Click to expand...
Why exactly? They can literally update the SoC and wireless. Ports won't change, display won't change, accessories unlikely to change. It's not even like a MacBook Pro where you get 8K HDMI.

The amount of people with Wi-Fi 6e has got to be <1% of households.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎 and Tagbert
bsbeamer said:
If Apple expects people to upgrade iMac's every few years, they need to figure out a way to extend the life of an iMac as a target display or even scheduling service to swap out a SOC module. Hard to claim they're being green when users literally have to trash (or recycle) a perfectly fine 4.5K monitor as part of an upgrade. As it stands right now, more people are better off with mini/studio + monitor to fulfill the iMac need. Even a case to be made for one of the MacBookPro options + monitor.
Click to expand...
Apple doesn’t expect iMac to be upgraded every few years. I wouldn’t be surprised if they are one of their computers that get upgraded the least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎 and visualseed
BeatCrazy said:
Why exactly? They can literally update the SoC and wireless. Ports won't change, display won't change, accessories unlikely to change. It's not even like a MacBook Pro where you get 8K HDMI.

The amount of people with Wi-Fi 6e has got to be <1% of households.
Click to expand...
That's all I meant really, there's no reason the iMac is still sporting a M1 chip when the M2 has been out for over a year now - I was not pushing for a design overhaul, just a spec bump to keep up with the latest stuff available.

The M3 is probably so close now that it wouldn't make sense to update it with the M2 at this point, tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
crsh1976 said:
That's all I meant really, there's no reason the iMac is still sporting a M1 chip when the M2 has been out for over a year now - I was not pushing for a design overhaul, just a spec bump to keep up with the latest stuff available.

The M3 is probably so close now that it wouldn't make sense to update it with the M2 at this point, tho.
Click to expand...
I think M2 for the iMac makes more sense. M3 is going to be low volume/low yield for a while, and those should go into higher-priced MacBooks. Plus, any efficiency gains from the M3 would be wasted in an iMac.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎 and Tagbert
BeatCrazy said:
I think M2 for the iMac makes more sense. M3 is going to be low volume/low yield for a while, and those should go into higher-priced MacBooks. Plus, any efficiency gains from the M3 would be wasted in an iMac.
Click to expand...
I'm just guessing really, Apple seems to have this base->pro/max->ultra chip roll-out "pattern" (for all of two recurrences so far), where they start with entry-level models that use the base chip like the MBA and 13-inch MBP - and iMac, had it been updated with the M2 chip.

But then again, I'm not sure Apple has a pattern yet, all options are possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Most Pro Display users don’t want a web cam and speakers. If you have a 2 or 3 screen set up, you don’t need multiple cams and speakers. If you’re video editing you probably have a good set of monitor speakers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
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