What's pathetic are the posters here hammering Apple for this. It's a low-end Mac. Get over it. People here on this forum for some reason think that what's best for them surely should be the standard for everyone else. Not.
I agree. What part about "low end" do these whiners not get?
Is English not their native language, or do they simply need to remove their heads from their butts?
Would I personally buy this iMac? No, I require more power, but luckily I'm not moronic enough to live inside my own delusional bubble and declare it a bad machine, simply because it doesn't meet my particular needs. For many people, this will be all that they need for their tasks.
The Geekbench marks for this machine are equivalent to my 2007 iMac.
Yeah, I can imagine all of those women, OAPs and casual users who just surf the web, read emails, FaceBook and Skype friends, who want to get a new computer.
The first they are going to do is check out and compare Geekbench scores.:rolleyes:
Yeah, I can imagine all of those women, OAPs and casual users who just surf the web, read emails, FaceBook and Skype friends, who want to get a new computer.
The first they are going to do is check out and compare Geekbench scores.
So true.
iMacs are not for us here. Now in addition to a screen failure trashing it, ram failure can too.
Apple learned nothing from the 5c, going cheap won't cut it.
Yeah, as with the 5c, Apple is going to be so disappointed when people go in the shop, attracted by the low price option, and then are easily upsold to an even better machine. What are they thinking?!
[...] What part about "low end" do these whiners not get?
I don't know if I count as a whiner (I think 8GB is plenty for this machine and soldering it in is fine), but the part about low end I don't get is the price.
I think (and it's just my opinion, not a scientific analysis) that the price point this unit hits is too high to attract the kind of buyers at which it seems to be targeted. How many of the people who only want an internet appliance are shopping in the >$1000 range? I'm sure there are some who see the value of Photostreams and other iCloud benefits, but I don't think MOST computer-as-appliance buyers are going to see this as good value. I'm not even sure *I* do. That's pretty long coin for such a basic machine.
In a couple of years 8GB will feel like 4GB today.
..and 4GB feels absolutely fine today, so am not too worried about that. Also, I doubt it. Memory requirements, especially for desktops, are not going to keep doubling linearly. I do heavy lifting in all the adobe applications daily on 4GB of RAM - the average user doesnt do 10% of what I do. What mainstream task exactly do you presume will need 16GB of RAM 2 years from now? Nothing. Also, OSX is getting MORE memory efficient, not less. This is a complete non-issue for the target audience.
I agree. What part about "low end" do these whiners not get?
Is English not their native language, or do they simply need to remove their heads from their butts?
Would I personally buy this iMac? No, I require more power, but luckily I'm not moronic enough to live inside my own delusional bubble and declare it a bad machine, simply because it doesn't meet my particular needs. For many people, this will be all that they need for their tasks.
It's fair enough to say there are plenty of potential users for whom this machine will have adequate specs, but it is also fair to say the price is too high for something with those specs.
I for one totally agree with Apple][ and SolipsismX!
This is an entry-level machine for people who don't want to even know what "RAM" means, or who don't intend to ever tinker with what's inside the aluminium.
If it had 4GB RAM, it would be more of a concern but 8GB is plenty for an entry machine and I'd even say 4GB is adequate. The RAM in the other 21.5" models is stuck behind a glued-on screen so although it can be upgraded, it's not easy and given the move to DDR4, DDR3 might be stuck at 16GB max anyway. I wouldn't be surprised to see more models solder RAM in with DDR4. I could see them making the two entry 21.5" models with 8GB soldered and the top 21.5" with 16GB or have it BTO; the 27" ones with 16GB and just the top-end with a 32GB upgrade but all soldered.
The laptops make up over 75% of Apple's sales and except for the cMBP (should be dropped soon), they all have soldered RAM so the vast majority of Apple's customers don't mind buying machines with soldered RAM.
An alternative to the entry iMac would be to buy a Macbook Air for $899 with a $200 IPS display. For the same price you get the same performance, 128GB SSD, portability and a larger display but 4GB RAM - it's $100 more for the 8GB. I'd personally go for the Air + display but for someone just getting a basic desktop, you'll get a similar experience to the Air.
PC manufacturers are pushing AIOs and the sales volume is increasing quickly. They now go below $500. A $1099 model isn't going to rival that price but it's a lot better than $1299.
Each article on this is for a particular time zone. Sometimes you jump into a thread when it has already died because you are in a different time zone.
This way, people from every time zone can complain about this iMac!
You can say that AI is an equal opportunity click-bait site!
What's pathetic are the posters here hammering Apple for this. It's a low-end Mac. Get over it. People here on this forum for some reason think that what's best for them surely should be the standard for everyone else. Not.
I can count on one hand the number of people I've known that have ever upgraded the RAM on their PC's since they purchased them. It's the norm, not the exception.
8GB is fine for the folks the market the iMac is meant for. As long as Apple doesn't do this to their higher-end models, I couldn't care less.
"If" Apple does decide to do this to the higher models, they better price the memory competitively or there will be a rebellion. From a reliability standpoint, I think soldering it to the board is a good idea simply because it eliminates yet another potential issue caused by the interface connection.
I've maxed out the RAM in every computer I've ever owned, given availability. That includes two macmini's and a laptop. You're right people generally don't upgrade their devices, but that's usually because by the time the device is showing it's age, the availability of upgrade parts have disappeared or now are more expensive than buying new. We have a really wide window right now for upgrading because the performance increase from the Sandy Bridge parts through to the current parts is negligible, while the DDR3 memory have been going down in price. So if you can, you max out the RAM before DDR4 comes out. Once it comes out there will be a fire sale on DDR3 parts. DDR4 will be expensive for 3-4 years. When I worked for a computer store, only two upgrades were ever asked for. RAM and Hard drive, and the latter was usually because they dropped the laptop and killed the hard drive.
Yeah, I can imagine all of those women, OAPs and casual users who just surf the web, read emails, FaceBook and Skype friends, who want to get a new computer.
The first they are going to do is check out and compare Geekbench scores.:rolleyes:
So true.
iMacs are not for us here. Now in addition to a screen failure trashing it, ram failure can too.
This is a volume Mac for the casual masses!
Apart from the fact that Apple can replace the RAM if it fails, and that the RAM is more reliable than that used in any other desktop because it’s soldered, and is therefore less likely to fail.
This is not a big deal for reasons already stated. The average user never upgrades anything. 8GB is plenty for the average user. I always love how power users argue this point but they are always wrong. One thing Apple does well is spec the machine for who the machine is intended for. Not just to satisfy the spec chasers who need the enhanced performance.
It's a low-end iMac for ~$1000. It's an entry point into the Apple ecosystem that will last the *casual* user quite a long time. Entry level iMac is entry-level iMac.
It is an iMac (well-made, well-designed), and it is a platform from which to enjoy the Apple ecosystem. Seems a perfectly reasonable price for what it is and for all you're getting. This isn't some OEM junk-PC with the latest awful version of Windows.
Comments
What's pathetic are the posters here hammering Apple for this. It's a low-end Mac. Get over it. People here on this forum for some reason think that what's best for them surely should be the standard for everyone else. Not.
I agree. What part about "low end" do these whiners not get?
Is English not their native language, or do they simply need to remove their heads from their butts?
Would I personally buy this iMac? No, I require more power, but luckily I'm not moronic enough to live inside my own delusional bubble and declare it a bad machine, simply because it doesn't meet my particular needs. For many people, this will be all that they need for their tasks.
Yeah, I can imagine all of those women, OAPs and casual users who just surf the web, read emails, FaceBook and Skype friends, who want to get a new computer.
The first they are going to do is check out and compare Geekbench scores.:rolleyes:
Yeah, I can imagine all of those women, OAPs and casual users who just surf the web, read emails, FaceBook and Skype friends, who want to get a new computer.
The first they are going to do is check out and compare Geekbench scores.
So true.
iMacs are not for us here. Now in addition to a screen failure trashing it, ram failure can too.
This is a volume Mac for the casual masses!
Yeah, as with the 5c, Apple is going to be so disappointed when people go in the shop, attracted by the low price option, and then are easily upsold to an even better machine. What are they thinking?!
Breaking News - Apple has introduced the first desktop with no way to upgrade the RAM.
Absolutely fine for this unit. (and most certainly for Mac OS X)
[...] What part about "low end" do these whiners not get?
I don't know if I count as a whiner (I think 8GB is plenty for this machine and soldering it in is fine), but the part about low end I don't get is the price.
I think (and it's just my opinion, not a scientific analysis) that the price point this unit hits is too high to attract the kind of buyers at which it seems to be targeted. How many of the people who only want an internet appliance are shopping in the >$1000 range? I'm sure there are some who see the value of Photostreams and other iCloud benefits, but I don't think MOST computer-as-appliance buyers are going to see this as good value. I'm not even sure *I* do. That's pretty long coin for such a basic machine.
In a couple of years 8GB will feel like 4GB today.
..and 4GB feels absolutely fine today, so am not too worried about that. Also, I doubt it. Memory requirements, especially for desktops, are not going to keep doubling linearly. I do heavy lifting in all the adobe applications daily on 4GB of RAM - the average user doesnt do 10% of what I do. What mainstream task exactly do you presume will need 16GB of RAM 2 years from now? Nothing. Also, OSX is getting MORE memory efficient, not less. This is a complete non-issue for the target audience.
It's fair enough to say there are plenty of potential users for whom this machine will have adequate specs, but it is also fair to say the price is too high for something with those specs.
This is an entry-level machine for people who don't want to even know what "RAM" means, or who don't intend to ever tinker with what's inside the aluminium.
The laptops make up over 75% of Apple's sales and except for the cMBP (should be dropped soon), they all have soldered RAM so the vast majority of Apple's customers don't mind buying machines with soldered RAM.
An alternative to the entry iMac would be to buy a Macbook Air for $899 with a $200 IPS display. For the same price you get the same performance, 128GB SSD, portability and a larger display but 4GB RAM - it's $100 more for the 8GB. I'd personally go for the Air + display but for someone just getting a basic desktop, you'll get a similar experience to the Air.
PC manufacturers are pushing AIOs and the sales volume is increasing quickly. They now go below $500. A $1099 model isn't going to rival that price but it's a lot better than $1299.
It is a good machine for the money and has good value also.
And...that's article number four
Each article on this is for a particular time zone. Sometimes you jump into a thread when it has already died because you are in a different time zone.
This way, people from every time zone can complain about this iMac!
You can say that AI is an equal opportunity click-bait site!
Apart from the fact that Apple can replace the RAM if it fails, and that the RAM is more reliable than that used in any other desktop because it’s soldered, and is therefore less likely to fail.
Apple learned nothing from the 5c, going cheap won't cut it.
What exactly was there to learn from the 5C?
Oh, I know...the 5C is a failure, right?
It's a low-end iMac for ~$1000. It's an entry point into the Apple ecosystem that will last the *casual* user quite a long time. Entry level iMac is entry-level iMac.
It is an iMac (well-made, well-designed), and it is a platform from which to enjoy the Apple ecosystem. Seems a perfectly reasonable price for what it is and for all you're getting. This isn't some OEM junk-PC with the latest awful version of Windows.