Smaller Mac Pro, 2021 iMac redesign with color options shown off by prolific leaker

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 122
    danoxdanox Posts: 3,043member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    No chin, at last!

    But I've had it with all-in-ones. I'll never buy a desktop Mac with the screen glued onto it again. 
    As a guy who built PCs for decades, I love my iMac AIOs. My last one lasted 8 years, by the time it was done even the screen was out of date. My new one is 10 lbs lighter and is VESA arm mounted, giving me an ultra clean desk free of any clutter or cables. 

    Never cared about the chin. Such complaints seem to be academic ones held by people not actually using the product. You’re in that category too, aren’t you?
    You may not have had problems due to AOI design issues - and that's what they were - but I and many, many others did. 

    Try looking into 2009 27" i7 models which were literally 'designed' to slow cook themselves. Or put another way, they were nowhere near efficient enough with the thermals. 

    'hidden' Air inlets prone to clogging with dust. Impossibilty get dust out of the machines. Inaccessible entry point requiring glass and display removal. Poor thermals in general. System fans not running fast enough and the killer: throwing Radeon graphics cards into that soup and seeing them fail as a result.

    Under warranty Apple would gladly throw another identical card into that soup but it would almost certainly meet the same fate. 

    Back in the day I did some research on the issue and found it to be VERY widespread. 

    I still have that machine but it will only boot into safe mode. 

    The screen is perfect but unusable because its tied to the machine. RAM is perfect. Disk is perfect etc.

    The root problem is the design. Then fans not running nearly fast enough (probably not to 'annoy' users) and the combination of the i7 and the Radeon. 

    Now, I would love for someone to dig into this particular scenario and force Apple to hand over data on exactly how many  systems failed in this setting according to its records (in or out of warranty). 

    The chin is very dated. That's why they'll surely get rid of it. A move that is long overdue. 




    I have a 2011 iMac in use for 8 1/2 years, graphic card when down for the second time, now waiting to update to a M series iMac or Mac Pro.
  • Reply 102 of 122
    edac2edac2 Posts: 29member
    If these renderings are accurate, the "new" iMac is still basically the the same design as the old iMac, but with a bigger screen. The Surface Studio 2 is far more creative in its design, and it has a touch screen. All it needs is an M1 motherboard retrofit!
  • Reply 103 of 122
    PezaPeza Posts: 198member
    edac2 said:
    If these renderings are accurate, the "new" iMac is still basically the the same design as the old iMac, but with a bigger screen. The Surface Studio 2 is far more creative in its design, and it has a touch screen. All it needs is an M1 motherboard retrofit!
    The Surface Studio 2 starts from around three times the price of an iMac. So that could be the reason for its unique design with clever hinge.

    personally I’m looking forward to what the new iMacs are like, it’s been several years in the making... also hopeful this new Mini Mac is a thing.
    edited March 2021
  • Reply 104 of 122
    PezaPeza Posts: 198member
    Sorry, I should have read what I typed before posting, I meant to say I hope the new Mac Mini Pro machine that’s being rumoured comes to market. Be nice if it was half the price of the current Intel Mac Pro too.
    I plan to get a lot of new tech now. I need some type of PC so will probably get a Surface Pro as I don’t want anything big on the desk. Need a new iPad Pro and a new Mac of some description. A new iPhone would be nice too. Hmm currently my bank balance doesn’t agree though.
  • Reply 105 of 122
    thttht Posts: 5,530member
    edac2 said:
    If these renderings are accurate, the "new" iMac is still basically the the same design as the old iMac, but with a bigger screen. The Surface Studio 2 is far more creative in its design, and it has a touch screen. All it needs is an M1 motherboard retrofit!
    The Surface Studio 2 has a touch display and a hinge to make it lay at a drafting table angle, but I wouldn't buy it. It's really only for people who can make use of the touch display, and those who want a show piece. Otherwise, it is quite poor value for someone who wants a large display AIO. Yeah, and M1 will crush the Surface Studio 2 in CPU, but it does have a better GPU. Just strange specs from Microsoft. They haven't updated for 8-core CPUs.

    As far Apple's iMac, I could get two! A 24" model for the 15yo, somewhere around $1500, and maybe the 27" to 32" model for the family room at $2500. I want thin, quiet and cool-running for both. At least 8 TB storage on the big one.
  • Reply 106 of 122
    thttht Posts: 5,530member

    Peza said:
    Sorry, I should have read what I typed before posting, I meant to say I hope the new Mac Mini Pro machine that’s being rumoured comes to market. Be nice if it was half the price of the current Intel Mac Pro too.
    I plan to get a lot of new tech now. I need some type of PC so will probably get a Surface Pro as I don’t want anything big on the desk. Need a new iPad Pro and a new Mac of some description. A new iPhone would be nice too. Hmm currently my bank balance doesn’t agree though.
    This Mac Half Pro is probably going to be end of 2021 at the earliest. It's going to be a long wait. Equally important is a display the matches the industrial design of the iMac.

    Would be interesting if there was auto-clustering, something that seamlessly fuses 2, 3 iMacs together, so that you can have 2 iMacs, and you'd be presented with one virtual home account. Processes would be run and pushed to the computer with the least load. Ethernet over Thunderbolt networking protocol at 40 Gbit/sec. I don't need such power, but it would be quite interesting for those who need high performance and lots of display area.

    If the new iMac is say 12 mm thin, 2x of an iPad, and they have a pricing scenario where their 5K iMac is just a little more than a 5K display, makes for an interesting situation.
  • Reply 107 of 122
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,612member
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
  • Reply 108 of 122
    PezaPeza Posts: 198member
    tht said:

    Peza said:
    Sorry, I should have read what I typed before posting, I meant to say I hope the new Mac Mini Pro machine that’s being rumoured comes to market. Be nice if it was half the price of the current Intel Mac Pro too.
    I plan to get a lot of new tech now. I need some type of PC so will probably get a Surface Pro as I don’t want anything big on the desk. Need a new iPad Pro and a new Mac of some description. A new iPhone would be nice too. Hmm currently my bank balance doesn’t agree though.
    This Mac Half Pro is probably going to be end of 2021 at the earliest. It's going to be a long wait. Equally important is a display the matches the industrial design of the iMac.

    Would be interesting if there was auto-clustering, something that seamlessly fuses 2, 3 iMacs together, so that you can have 2 iMacs, and you'd be presented with one virtual home account. Processes would be run and pushed to the computer with the least load. Ethernet over Thunderbolt networking protocol at 40 Gbit/sec. I don't need such power, but it would be quite interesting for those who need high performance and lots of display area.

    If the new iMac is say 12 mm thin, 2x of an iPad, and they have a pricing scenario where their 5K iMac is just a little more than a 5K display, makes for an interesting situation.
    A new display would be nice, I would never purchase an Apple display as they are too expensive for my use, however I am yet to see the new Pro display. Due to Covid I haven't seen the new Mac Pro either yet.
    Interesting thought on the linking two iMacs up, doubt it'll be a feature they use but it's an interesting thought. Combine the power of the two machines and spread the desktop across the screens.
    I hope that if they are now going to use their own silicon, they will at least provide new computer hardware designs more often then every 10 years or so, like they do with the iPad and iPhone.
  • Reply 109 of 122
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
  • Reply 110 of 122
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,612member
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
  • Reply 111 of 122
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    Bit of a niche use case.  Also, if you're running the Mac mini off USB power then that'll limit your ability to power other devices from the USB/Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Mini, which though not a killer feature would probably mean a lot of grumbling if you took it away.
  • Reply 112 of 122
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,612member
    crowley said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    Bit of a niche use case.  Also, if you're running the Mac mini off USB power then that'll limit your ability to power other devices from the USB/Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Mini, which though not a killer feature would probably mean a lot of grumbling if you took it away.
    Valid point, but there might be some people who just stack Minis in a rack and don't have other devices attached. This could cut the cables by 50% if the only other cable is networking.
  • Reply 113 of 122
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    crowley said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    Bit of a niche use case.  Also, if you're running the Mac mini off USB power then that'll limit your ability to power other devices from the USB/Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Mini, which though not a killer feature would probably mean a lot of grumbling if you took it away.
    Valid point, but there might be some people who just stack Minis in a rack and don't have other devices attached. This could cut the cables by 50% if the only other cable is networking.
    How would it cut any cables?  You'd just need a USB cable instead of an AC power cable.  They're a bit thinner generally, but it's not a great difference.  Even if you daisy chained them (which would only work for one, maybe two units because of the 40W power draw under load) there would still be cables between the machines.
    darkvader
  • Reply 114 of 122
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,612member
    crowley said:
    crowley said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    Bit of a niche use case.  Also, if you're running the Mac mini off USB power then that'll limit your ability to power other devices from the USB/Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Mini, which though not a killer feature would probably mean a lot of grumbling if you took it away.
    Valid point, but there might be some people who just stack Minis in a rack and don't have other devices attached. This could cut the cables by 50% if the only other cable is networking.
    How would it cut any cables?  You'd just need a USB cable instead of an AC power cable.  They're a bit thinner generally, but it's not a great difference.  Even if you daisy chained them (which would only work for one, maybe two units because of the 40W power draw under load) there would still be cables between the machines.
    I was thinking it would cut cables by 50% because all you would need is a USB or Thunderbolt cable that would provide both the power and the networking, instead of a separate cable for networking and power.
  • Reply 115 of 122
    thttht Posts: 5,530member
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    The Mac mini has a 110V 60 Hz AC to DC power supply in it. If it is just straight USB-PD, you can shrink to a slab of something like 0.25 x 2 x 6 inches. You'd need a TB/USB-PD backplane that can independently provide 30 to 40 Watts to each slab, and the same for data. An Ethernet over TB protocol and switch would be needed. This gets you down to 1 wire per device.

    However, a larger SoC and box would do the equivalent job for less fuss?
    darkvader
  • Reply 116 of 122
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,612member
    tht said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    The Mac mini has a 110V 60 Hz AC to DC power supply in it. If it is just straight USB-PD, you can shrink to a slab of something like 0.25 x 2 x 6 inches. You'd need a TB/USB-PD backplane that can independently provide 30 to 40 Watts to each slab, and the same for data. An Ethernet over TB protocol and switch would be needed. This gets you down to 1 wire per device.

    However, a larger SoC and box would do the equivalent job for less fuss?
    You described in better detail what I was trying to propose. I realized a switch of some sort would be needed but I didn't want to complicate my description.
  • Reply 117 of 122
    edac2 said:
    If these renderings are accurate, the "new" iMac is still basically the the same design as the old iMac, but with a bigger screen. The Surface Studio 2 is far more creative in its design, and it has a touch screen. All it needs is an M1 motherboard retrofit!
    As the former owner of a G4 lampshade iMac –– probably the single best iMac I’ve ever owned and which was still going strong right up until its original HDD gave up the clapper sometime in 2015 – I personally would welcome a reprise on that design. As tempting as the Surface Studio 2 might have been (it is an interesting design, I’ll grant it that), however, it still isn’t a Mac and, in my view, tries to do too many different things (with the result being that it doesn’t really excel at any of them). I mean, if an iPad Pro connected via Sidecar doesn’t do it for you, then a Wacom Cintiq Pro is a far better touch-enabled alternative for visual creatives than would be having an AiO try to do it all: software and hardware should be complimentary, but I can see the Surface Studio 2’s software getting in the way of its potential as a piece of hardware –– and vice versa.
    edited March 2021 darkvader
  • Reply 118 of 122
    thttht Posts: 5,530member
    tht said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    The Mac mini has a 110V 60 Hz AC to DC power supply in it. If it is just straight USB-PD, you can shrink to a slab of something like 0.25 x 2 x 6 inches. You'd need a TB/USB-PD backplane that can independently provide 30 to 40 Watts to each slab, and the same for data. An Ethernet over TB protocol and switch would be needed. This gets you down to 1 wire per device.

    However, a larger SoC and box would do the equivalent job for less fuss?
    You described in better detail what I was trying to propose. I realized a switch of some sort would be needed but I didn't want to complicate my description.
    It's nothing original. What is these days? Blade servers have been around for a long time. The blade is basically a single server computer that slides into the host rack. It has a contact rail (like a PCIe card) on the rear edge to provide power and comms. But I don't think enough people need to do this with a desktop solution. Eventually, they'll just run out of power (as in Watts) and or cooling anyways.

    Apple can probably make an MPX board or PCI board with a couple of M1 or M1X SoCs and put 4 or 5 of them in the Mac Pro. It's basically the same thing, but without any wires flopping around. But who wants this sort of thing other than cryptocurrency miners and maybe a single or two person video shop, that's not willing to buy it from a cloud company?
    darkvader
  • Reply 119 of 122
    darkvaderdarkvader Posts: 1,146member
    tht said:
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.
    Good answer, thanks pal. I was thinking that getting rid of a cable like AC power would be helpful for people who stack these devices, which is the idea that I was replying to.
    The Mac mini has a 110V 60 Hz AC to DC power supply in it. If it is just straight USB-PD, you can shrink to a slab of something like 0.25 x 2 x 6 inches. You'd need a TB/USB-PD backplane that can independently provide 30 to 40 Watts to each slab, and the same for data. An Ethernet over TB protocol and switch would be needed. This gets you down to 1 wire per device.

    However, a larger SoC and box would do the equivalent job for less fuss?
    You described in better detail what I was trying to propose. I realized a switch of some sort would be needed but I didn't want to complicate my description.

    And the better question at this point is why?  Apple has ZERO credibility in the server market at this point, they've screwed over customers who want Apple servers so many times now that I'm not sure anybody would buy a server from Apple ever again.

    macOS 10.13, the last version that actually had a server package from Apple that did anything useful, is now not getting security updates any more.  The last real server Apple sold was discontinued in 2011.  The last "server" Apple sold was discontinued in 2014.

    I've a client that has been running Apple servers so long that their current EOL 2012 Mac mini Server is still named Workgroup Server.  And the next migration I do will be to something other than Apple hardware.  I won't have a choice.
  • Reply 120 of 122
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,678member
    crowley said:
    I wonder, since the M1 Mac Mini is so low power, just 5W for the CPU I read, could it (had it been built differently) run on USB or Thunderbolt providing the power instead of a 110V cable?
    5W at idle, it'll still pull 40W under load.  But yeah, USB could provide that, it already does for MacBooks after all.  A traditional AC power port is probably cheaper and more robust though.

    My M1 is currently using 150 mW (0.15W) at idle. Even as I type this message.

    The 40W you mention might be for the entire mini, not the M1. It might reach 30W, but that would require, all 8 CPU cores, all 8 GPU cores, all 16 ANE cores working at full load, plus all DRAM filled as well.

    Under normal load, the M1 SoC is rated at 10W.
    edited March 2021
Sign In or Register to comment.