It seems like every day I wish AI had an editor to catch all the typos and bad grammar in their articles.
Be careful of what you wish for. If you really want properly edited articles, ask for a paying a subscription that can fund an editor, amongst other things. Then, there needs to be enough subscriptions for it to really work. If they don't have a direct stream of money from subscribers, they'll fund an editor by way of advertising.
I really like AI's fairly minimal advertising, and it's especially non intrusive ads. They can do this with a minimal crew. If they need to make enough money for editors and such, you will more than likely end up with websites like iMore, Verge, Anandtech, so on and so forth. A veritable vomit of advertising and trackers right in front of your eyes. It's amazing to hear these managing editors, the tastemakers of good design, critique a product's design while their websites are abominations of design with all the advertising and tracking they spew.
The content displacement tricks where they time an inline ad to displace the website's content just before you click or tap so you hit the ad instead of link. Not a coincidence. The scroll jacking where if your finger doesn't scroll the web page anymore if your finger starts the scroll from the ad? You then have to find a sliver of non ad content to actually scroll. Some websites audio jack where it takes over the audio going to your headphones. Never mind the continuous tracking of what you do and the selling of your habits and contact info, which results in advertising to you in all communications channels, from your telephone, paper mail, to your IP based channels.
Yeah, I would rather suffer through a few typos than have AI be turned into iMore or 9to5Mac. Either that, or a paid subscription.
Sigh. Yet more whining about bezel sizes. This is one of the stupidest “consumer complaints” I think I’ve seen, next to “it looks the same as last year’s model”.
The thinner machines get, the more thermal issues they have. The smaller the bezels get, the more difficult it is to prevent light bleed from the display backlights.
Please stop promoting the nonsense about needing smaller or zero bezels. It’s ludicrous.
I agree... as old as this design is, it's still the most elegant, beautiful all-in-one in the industry imho. When one considers how ugly the WinTel PC's are, even the iMac knockoff versions, I have zero problem with Apple continuing this design. Those that continue to complain about this design to the point of refusing to buy an iMac for this exact reason either would never buy an iMac anyways, or have other issues.
I suspect when Apple introduces the ARM iMacs, it will be basically a sealed iPad Pro running MacOS. If they think the current iMacs are difficult to upgrade, wait till the new ones come out. You want thin bezels, and super-thin format? Expect every component to be soldered, including RAM and SSD. My guess but still...
Meanwhile, I'm still excitedly waiting for my 8TB, 128GB 2020 iMac that I purchased a week ago! Might as well make my last Intel iMac a keeper!
I used one for a couple of days and was extremely happy with it - I just wish they added targeted display. I don’t have the desk real estate at home to have this for personal and then my work MacBook and 2nd screen. I thought the bezel was going to be annoying but it oddly enhanced the screen which because of it being black was probably designed to do.
So glad I’m not the only one who gets annoyed by the complete lack of editorial oversight. At first I thought “ok, typos here and there no big deal”. But then I got to the storage comment and decided I had to comment. Come on people, take the time to have someone else look at your work before you upload.
The terms here are apparently literally against posting complaints about typographical errors. This is what we are dealing with at AI. Otherwise I’d be posting the same commentary because this crap irritates the hell out of me.
eh, this is just what happens you let bots write articles.
I suspect when Apple introduces the ARM iMacs, it will be basically a sealed iPad Pro running MacOS. If they think the current iMacs are difficult to upgrade, wait till the new ones come out. You want thin bezels, and super-thin format? Expect every component to be soldered, including RAM and SSD. My guess but still...
Yes, there are going to be some lamentations when Apple Silicon Macs come out. Odds are very imo that nothing will be upgradeable except for the Mac Pro equivalent desktop machine. Even warranty busting upgrades like you can do with some Macs today where there are internal DIMM slots or socketed CPUs won't be available.
But I'll take a 32" iMac with an iPad Pro form factor: 0.25 inches thin. USBC/TB only. A 30 W SoC or thereabouts. Likely not possible though. That's a a really large object that have to make flat and thin, and pretty hard to make where every machine off the assembly line has perfectly straight edges. So, maybe 0.4 mm.
Having an iMac that is thinner and smaller than a typical external display of the same size presents some interesting multiple monitor setups. If I want 2 displays on my desk, does it mean I can get 2 iMacs? And is it possible for one iMac to extend its display to the other iMac and also be able to use the computing bits inside in at least a cluster arrangement? Like a Handbrake job where I can distribute the transcoding to both machines? Also, if they can keep the power budget of the iMac less than 100 W, it can be lowered with USB-PD, so an iMac can be USB-PD bus powered from the other host iMac?
I still think it is a beautiful machine, the best looking computer on the market. It should get a higher score than 4/5 except for the non upgradable internal storage. That said, because you have to attach an external TB3 drive and ruin those lovely, lovely aesthetics, or pay two to three times commercial rates for Apple to add more internal storage at the time of purchase really, really shits me.
But attaching a keyboard, trackpad, and multiple monitors doesn’t detract from the aesthetics? How about all the other junk in your desk?
Most external storage can easily be hidden behind the display, and there are many options that are almost as fast as the built-in storage.
If only the iMac came with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Oh, wait...
Again! The effing external drive wrecks the aesthetics which is one of the reasons people buy imacs. Of course you can do that. I have done it myself with my older iMac with a thunderbolt external drive. So what!
I hate that iMac buyers are forced to do that to increase capacity as opposed to a more elegant internal solution. Loathsome.
Is that a correct speed test, or just an illustrative picture taken from elsewhere? If so, both the 13" and 16" MacBook Pro handily outpace it, which is strange for an otherwise more powerful desktop. Even Thunderbolt interface external drives are faster. Further, is there a difference in SSD speeds for the various sizes (256GB to 8TB) available?
The max is only 8TB. You still need external drives for more storage and for backing up at any rate. Just hide it behind the imac. I have a four bay OWC thunderbolt drive setup, plus backup drives. You are not going to fit that many drives or TB within the iMac.
I suspect when Apple introduces the ARM iMacs, it will be basically a sealed iPad Pro running MacOS. If they think the current iMacs are difficult to upgrade, wait till the new ones come out. You want thin bezels, and super-thin format? Expect every component to be soldered, including RAM and SSD. My guess but still...
Yes, there are going to be some lamentations when Apple Silicon Macs come out. Odds are very imo that nothing will be upgradeable except for the Mac Pro equivalent desktop machine. Even warranty busting upgrades like you can do with some Macs today where there are internal DIMM slots or socketed CPUs won't be available.
But I'll take a 32" iMac with an iPad Pro form factor: 0.25 inches thin. USBC/TB only. A 30 W SoC or thereabouts. Likely not possible though. That's a a really large object that have to make flat and thin, and pretty hard to make where every machine off the assembly line has perfectly straight edges. So, maybe 0.4 mm.
Having an iMac that is thinner and smaller than a typical external display of the same size presents some interesting multiple monitor setups. If I want 2 displays on my desk, does it mean I can get 2 iMacs? And is it possible for one iMac to extend its display to the other iMac and also be able to use the computing bits inside in at least a cluster arrangement? Like a Handbrake job where I can distribute the transcoding to both machines? Also, if they can keep the power budget of the iMac less than 100 W, it can be lowered with USB-PD, so an iMac can be USB-PD bus powered from the other host iMac?
Two iMacs acting as extended displays to one another is an interesting scenario. Stand alone 5K monitors ain't cheap, so the expense of a second iMac not as crazy as it sounds.
I would think it would at least be possible to have an iPad Sidecar type connection between iMacs (especially if they are basically overgrown iPads), but that notion of clustering could make that second (or third!) iMac very cost effective when compared to multi-monitor set ups.
I still think it is a beautiful machine, the best looking computer on the market. It should get a higher score than 4/5 except for the non upgradable internal storage. That said, because you have to attach an external TB3 drive and ruin those lovely, lovely aesthetics, or pay two to three times commercial rates for Apple to add more internal storage at the time of purchase really, really shits me.
But attaching a keyboard, trackpad, and multiple monitors doesn’t detract from the aesthetics? How about all the other junk in your desk?
Most external storage can easily be hidden behind the display, and there are many options that are almost as fast as the built-in storage.
If only the iMac came with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Oh, wait...
Again! The effing external drive wrecks the aesthetics which is one of the reasons people buy imacs. Of course you can do that. I have done it myself with my older iMac with a thunderbolt external drive. So what!
I hate that iMac buyers are forced to do that to increase capacity as opposed to a more elegant internal solution. Loathsome.
I get your point about feeling forced to hang external drives to solve the expansion issue. I would prefer to keep storage expansion internal too. However, I don't know about you, but I don't hate the OWC NVMe enclosure due out next month. Maybe not ideal, but certainly not loathsome, IMO:
Got the i7 one a day after it appeared in the Apple store. I’ve been waiting for years for that disgusting 720p webcam to disappear, and also since they decided to go with their cpu in the near future I thought this is a good time to grab one. The new AMD graphics was another reason. The machine is fast. grab one before Apple downgrades them with their CPU.
Is that a correct speed test, or just an illustrative picture taken from elsewhere? If so, both the 13" and 16" MacBook Pro handily outpace it, which is strange for an otherwise more powerful desktop. Even Thunderbolt interface external drives are faster. Further, is there a difference in SSD speeds for the various sizes (256GB to 8TB) available?
No idea what that screenshot is meant to represent. As the figures were so low I thought it was an externally connected TB SSD which was mentioned in the text above but perhaps it is the 256GB model or something else entirely?
My 2020 iMac with 512GB internal storage tests around 2600MB/s for both read and write, although that was soon after did a migration so some indexing may have been going on in the background to slow it down a little. For comparison my 2019 MBP 16 with 512GB storage achieves 2300 MB/s write and 2800 MB/s read.
And is it possible for one iMac to extend its display to the other iMac and also be able to use the computing bits inside in at least a cluster arrangement? Like a Handbrake job where I can distribute the transcoding to both machines? Also, if they can keep the power budget of the iMac less than 100 W, it can be lowered with USB-PD, so an iMac can be USB-PD bus powered from the other host iMac?
Two iMacs acting as extended displays to one another is an interesting scenario. Stand alone 5K monitors ain't cheap, so the expense of a second iMac not as crazy as it sounds.
I would think it would at least be possible to have an iPad Sidecar type connection between iMacs (especially if they are basically overgrown iPads), but that notion of clustering could make that second (or third!) iMac very cost effective when compared to multi-monitor set ups.
This type of scenario is really unique to Apple's iMac. It's been about 5, 6 years now, and there are basically only 2 5K monitor options. The LG UF 27" which I have. One TB3 cable using multistream protocol whatever. Works great with my MBP15 save the aforementioned heat problem. Grrr. The other is Dell's UP2715K monitor, where you can use 1 DP1.3 cable or 2 DP1.2 cables.
Now, Apple has a 32" 6K monitor in their supply chain. If Apple makes an iMac with a 32" 6K display, second monitor options could be down to just the $5000 Pro Display XDR! If the displays can be shared and the computing components easily networked or automagically "fused", it would present an interesting option for some folks.
I also wish Apple would offer a 30" to 36" 21:9 iMac option too.
Another potential benefit of the iMac Pro is a VESA kit however the iMac still is only BTO.
Yes, Apple hides the vesa mount option on the regular iMacs. It is available on the new iMac 27” for a $40 up charge. Search “Apple iMac-vesa” and you’ll get the Apple order page for it. All modes show ~$40 increase in the base price.
The max is only 8TB. You still need external drives for more storage and for backing up at any rate. Just hide it behind the imac. I have a four bay OWC thunderbolt drive setup, plus backup drives. You are not going to fit that many drives or TB within the iMac.
My 2011 iMac has a 2TB SSD and 16TB hdd internal. It’s sad that 9 years later and at 400% increase in storage price, the maximum internal capacity is now 8TB. Yes it’s faster and soldered boot disks are more secure. secondary drive expansion elimination is just planned obsolescence. Apple should have at least left room for future sales opportunities when 16,32,48, 256TB SSD’s come out. Unless Apple has a secret ARM expansion module that goes in the HDD space in the chassis, in which case I’d buy that instead.
The article mentions 2666 vs 2933 is unexplained. I’ll take a stab at this. 2933 modules I’ve researched are almost identical in performance to 2666. Take Kingston hyperX 2666 CL16-18-18 vs 2933 CL17-19-19. They are almost identical chips. In fact Kingston sells the 2933 module with a 2666 xmp profile. The interface clock speed is faster, so the chips take more cycles to grab the data. End result is higher cost no benefit. You have to jump to the 3xxx, 4xxx XMP chips to see noticeable results.
Comments
I really like AI's fairly minimal advertising, and it's especially non intrusive ads. They can do this with a minimal crew. If they need to make enough money for editors and such, you will more than likely end up with websites like iMore, Verge, Anandtech, so on and so forth. A veritable vomit of advertising and trackers right in front of your eyes. It's amazing to hear these managing editors, the tastemakers of good design, critique a product's design while their websites are abominations of design with all the advertising and tracking they spew.
The content displacement tricks where they time an inline ad to displace the website's content just before you click or tap so you hit the ad instead of link. Not a coincidence. The scroll jacking where if your finger doesn't scroll the web page anymore if your finger starts the scroll from the ad? You then have to find a sliver of non ad content to actually scroll. Some websites audio jack where it takes over the audio going to your headphones. Never mind the continuous tracking of what you do and the selling of your habits and contact info, which results in advertising to you in all communications channels, from your telephone, paper mail, to your IP based channels.
Yeah, I would rather suffer through a few typos than have AI be turned into iMore or 9to5Mac. Either that, or a paid subscription.
I'm guessing no because Apple killed that feature in the 27" iMac long ago for obvious reasons.
eh, this is just what happens you let bots write articles.
But I'll take a 32" iMac with an iPad Pro form factor: 0.25 inches thin. USBC/TB only. A 30 W SoC or thereabouts. Likely not possible though. That's a a really large object that have to make flat and thin, and pretty hard to make where every machine off the assembly line has perfectly straight edges. So, maybe 0.4 mm.
Having an iMac that is thinner and smaller than a typical external display of the same size presents some interesting multiple monitor setups. If I want 2 displays on my desk, does it mean I can get 2 iMacs? And is it possible for one iMac to extend its display to the other iMac and also be able to use the computing bits inside in at least a cluster arrangement? Like a Handbrake job where I can distribute the transcoding to both machines? Also, if they can keep the power budget of the iMac less than 100 W, it can be lowered with USB-PD, so an iMac can be USB-PD bus powered from the other host iMac?
Again! The effing external drive wrecks the aesthetics which is one of the reasons people buy imacs. Of course you can do that. I have done it myself with my older iMac with a thunderbolt external drive. So what!
outpace it, which is strange for an otherwise more powerful desktop. Even Thunderbolt interface external drives are faster.
Further, is there a difference in SSD speeds for the various sizes (256GB to 8TB) available?
I would think it would at least be possible to have an iPad Sidecar type connection between iMacs (especially if they are basically overgrown iPads), but that notion of clustering could make that second (or third!) iMac very cost effective when compared to multi-monitor set ups.
I get your point about feeling forced to hang external drives to solve the expansion issue. I would prefer to keep storage expansion internal too. However, I don't know about you, but I don't hate the OWC NVMe enclosure due out next month. Maybe not ideal, but certainly not loathsome, IMO:
https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/envoy-express/thunderbolt-3
My 2020 iMac with 512GB internal storage tests around 2600MB/s for both read and write, although that was soon after did a migration so some indexing may have been going on in the background to slow it down a little. For comparison my 2019 MBP 16 with 512GB storage achieves 2300 MB/s write and 2800 MB/s read.
Now, Apple has a 32" 6K monitor in their supply chain. If Apple makes an iMac with a 32" 6K display, second monitor options could be down to just the $5000 Pro Display XDR! If the displays can be shared and the computing components easily networked or automagically "fused", it would present an interesting option for some folks.
I also wish Apple would offer a 30" to 36" 21:9 iMac option too.