Apple debuts colorful 24-inch iMac with M1, upgraded camera and audio

1568101115

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 283
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 5,956member


    mike1 said:
    Put another way, the base Mac Mini is $699.  Pair it with a nice $300 LG 4k display (24") and an Apple keyboard and Mouse and you're only at about $1150.  Same M1 chip, same 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD.  But more ports, Gigabit Ethernet, and even the ability to swap out the screen as a bonus if you wanted to later.  Add a webcam for $100 and you're still $50 under this crippled iMac's price point.

    You clearly aren't the customer for this, so please spend your money elsewhere.
    But I am the customer for it.  I've owned three iMacs since 2002.  I'm not asking for something unreasonable, or even something that is in line with what Apple has offered in the past.  The entry level consumer iMac at $1299 has never involved these kinds of petty compromises.  It makes no sense in light of the specs for the Mac Mini for instance.

    There's no need to get pissy about valid criticism.  These are artificial feature removals that are a step backward from what the entry level, non-education iMac has offered in the past.
    Did you consider the fact that it’s an entirely new industrial design and larger screen and doesn’t use a 4200rpm hard drive or any number of other features that would make it more difficult to reach the same price point of the previous low end model with all the features of the higher specced models? It’s not uncommon for newer improved models to come out at higher prices to recoup development and component expenses and later drop as those things improve. It’s not a new thing. 
    I did consider it.  The 2020 iMac 21.5 had 8GB of RAM, 256 SSD (not a spinning hard drive) and only a slightly smaller screen for $1099.  The new design is nice but not $200 nicer when you remove that many ports and can't even be bothered to include an ethernet jack on a desktop computer.  
    Most people have zero use for an Ethernet jack.
    When I set up my iMac in 2017 it was quicker to initially set it up with wireless to my router, and I've never bothered to use my Ethernet jack even though it's probably faster. Wireless is perfectly good even if I want to watch a movie on Apple TV+. I can't be bothered to connect my Ethernet cable to the jack behind my desk.
    Wifi is only as good as the version you have and the antenna configuration residing in the devices.

    Then you have to factor in walls/floors and other signal barriers and cross your fingers that interference isn't a problem. Then you have bandwidth issues to contend with.

    Due to accumulation more than anything else, I have three networks running at home and over fifty devices hopping on and off the network.

    It's a bit of a mess, truth be told but it works mostly reliably, and largely due to the fact that ethernet cables and an 8 port gigabit switch get my incoming fibre service into the routers and from there, into the air via WiFi.

    My mesh system also makes use of PLC for the backhaul.

    I also have old equipment that has ethernet but no WiFi.

    Some people will get by with a purely wireless setup but there are solid reasons to actually use ethernet over WiFi when both are available. Especially when Wi-Fi starts playing up and things become more akin to voodoo.

    If your ethernet ports are in good shape and your cables are good, ethernet can be rock solid.

    And writing this I'm remembering networking over firewire back in the day. Wow! I'm much older than I thought. 
    elijahgmdriftmeyerbaconstangdewmefirelock
  • Reply 142 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    elijahg said:
    We know the M1 is an evolution of the Ax iPad chips, it performs very similarly and some of the iPads are very cheap. The M1 is also used in all of Apple's ASi Macs (and now iPad Pro too), so economies of scale will be good. AI has an article about how Apple may be "saving" $2.5bn by using the M1. In other words, making more profit on each iMac thanks to the M1, shafting customers again. 

    I dunno where these cheap iPad Pro's are - iPad Pro's that have the equivalent CPU as this iMac are within $100 or so of this iMac.  If anything, by comparison if you think Apple is scalping they are scalping the crap out of iPad Pro users in comparison to this iMac. 

    As for the "saving $2.5bn" article I saw that and it's speculative crap.  Nothing new in the Mac universe - nature abhors a vacuum and Apple produces plenty of vacuum for others to fill with their own wild speculation. 

    Here's the bottom line - if you like the machine, buy it.  If you don't then don't buy it.  Magically thinking Apple is going to change their M.O. after 40 years shows the defect is with your thinking, not theirs. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 143 of 283
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,498member


    mike1 said:
    Put another way, the base Mac Mini is $699.  Pair it with a nice $300 LG 4k display (24") and an Apple keyboard and Mouse and you're only at about $1150.  Same M1 chip, same 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD.  But more ports, Gigabit Ethernet, and even the ability to swap out the screen as a bonus if you wanted to later.  Add a webcam for $100 and you're still $50 under this crippled iMac's price point.

    You clearly aren't the customer for this, so please spend your money elsewhere.
    But I am the customer for it.  I've owned three iMacs since 2002.  I'm not asking for something unreasonable, or even something that is in line with what Apple has offered in the past.  The entry level consumer iMac at $1299 has never involved these kinds of petty compromises.  It makes no sense in light of the specs for the Mac Mini for instance.

    There's no need to get pissy about valid criticism.  These are artificial feature removals that are a step backward from what the entry level, non-education iMac has offered in the past.
    Did you consider the fact that it’s an entirely new industrial design and larger screen and doesn’t use a 4200rpm hard drive or any number of other features that would make it more difficult to reach the same price point of the previous low end model with all the features of the higher specced models? It’s not uncommon for newer improved models to come out at higher prices to recoup development and component expenses and later drop as those things improve. It’s not a new thing. 
    I did consider it.  The 2020 iMac 21.5 had 8GB of RAM, 256 SSD (not a spinning hard drive) and only a slightly smaller screen for $1099.  The new design is nice but not $200 nicer when you remove that many ports and can't even be bothered to include an ethernet jack on a desktop computer.  
    Most people have zero use for an Ethernet jack.
    Do these doorknobs not realize the Ethernet jack is in the power brick, using 1 cable to snap in rather than 2? It has ethernet. 


    "Configurable with ethernet" is not "has ethernet" is it? So the iMacs all have 16GB RAM and 1TB SSDs because they're configurable with those? Geez talk about licking Apple's ass.

    Edit: Ah-ha, I see you have edited your comment when you realised how dumb it was. Who's the doorknob now?
    edited April 20 saarek
  • Reply 144 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    Who uses Ethernet ?  
    People who value performance, speed and reliability.  Other than that, no biggie. 
    firelockwatto_cobra
  • Reply 145 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    titantiger said:
    And I pointed out in the very next post that the M1 Mac Mini with the same exact specs on RAM and SSD storage can be paired with a nice 24" 4k LG monitor, Apple keyboard and mouse and still come out $150 less. 
    For a much shittier experience.  

    Fine - you don't value it.  Apple thinks there are more people that will.  And I also think they are probably right.   Also you've already demonstrated over and over that even if they fixed your "issues" you wouldn't be buying it for other reasons so have fun being a contrarian for constrains sake.  It is one of the bigger Internet pastimes (and heck BBS's before the Internet too). 
    williamlondonDetnatorwatto_cobra
  • Reply 146 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    titantiger said:
    Let me see if I can explain this to you simply:  It's not drastically different in ways that are meaningful to the end user.  
    Who are you, Tron?  Now among other things you are the spokesman for all end users too?  lol!  Gotta love people posting anonymously on electronic message boards.  
    williamlondonDetnatorwatto_cobra
  • Reply 147 of 283
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,498member
    docno42 said:
    elijahg said:
    We know the M1 is an evolution of the Ax iPad chips, it performs very similarly and some of the iPads are very cheap. The M1 is also used in all of Apple's ASi Macs (and now iPad Pro too), so economies of scale will be good. AI has an article about how Apple may be "saving" $2.5bn by using the M1. In other words, making more profit on each iMac thanks to the M1, shafting customers again. 

    I dunno where these cheap iPad Pro's are - iPad Pro's that have the equivalent CPU as this iMac are within $100 or so of this iMac.  If anything, by comparison if you think Apple is scalping they are scalping the crap out of iPad Pro users in comparison to this iMac. 

    As for the "saving $2.5bn" article I saw that and it's speculative crap.  Nothing new in the Mac universe - nature abhors a vacuum and Apple produces plenty of vacuum for others to fill with their own wild speculation. 

    Here's the bottom line - if you like the machine, buy it.  If you don't then don't buy it.  Magically thinking Apple is going to change their M.O. after 40 years shows the defect is with your thinking, not theirs. 
    I said "we know the M1 is an evolution of the Ax iPad chips" and "some of the iPads are very cheap". Never mentioned the Pro being cheap. We also know the M1 is a beefed up Ax CPU. It was not designed from scratch, so it's not that expensive, most of the R&D has been paid for by the iPhone. 

    The issue is Apple has changed their M.O. of the last 40 years - or more specifically Cook has. Macs were great value in the days of Jobs - now, not so much. And in some cases: RAM/storage, not at all. Apple used to make computers for their customers, now Apple makes computers for their shareholders.
    edited April 20
  • Reply 148 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    titantiger said:
    I'm not hysterical over it.  I'm just pointing out some glaring issues with how they went about this.
    They are only glaring if this is the only Apple Silicon iMac they ever release.  That's quite a leap. 

    Also that $1099 iMac you keep harping on - care to find one in stock at any Apple resellers?  I haven't seen it around for some time now.  If they had kept it around there's a good chance it would have gone up in price - like a lot of other non-Apple electronics have in the last year - might have something to do with a global event I might have heard a rumor or two about...
    williamlondonDetnatorwatto_cobra
  • Reply 149 of 283
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    mknelson said:
    Well, that's going to be an inventory 💩 show.

    But the initial specs do look impressive!
    I think the supply with far outpace the demand. You wait nearly one year after announcing the M1 for consumables and you get shown the same entry level for the iMac. Sad.
    elijahg
  • Reply 150 of 283
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    frantisek said:
    It is interesting to see that m1 supports 4 USB-C ports. So on laptop side it was simple cost/ reason.
    I assume those are burned on the keyboard and trackpad.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 151 of 283
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    avon b7 said:


    mike1 said:
    Put another way, the base Mac Mini is $699.  Pair it with a nice $300 LG 4k display (24") and an Apple keyboard and Mouse and you're only at about $1150.  Same M1 chip, same 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD.  But more ports, Gigabit Ethernet, and even the ability to swap out the screen as a bonus if you wanted to later.  Add a webcam for $100 and you're still $50 under this crippled iMac's price point.

    You clearly aren't the customer for this, so please spend your money elsewhere.
    But I am the customer for it.  I've owned three iMacs since 2002.  I'm not asking for something unreasonable, or even something that is in line with what Apple has offered in the past.  The entry level consumer iMac at $1299 has never involved these kinds of petty compromises.  It makes no sense in light of the specs for the Mac Mini for instance.

    There's no need to get pissy about valid criticism.  These are artificial feature removals that are a step backward from what the entry level, non-education iMac has offered in the past.
    Did you consider the fact that it’s an entirely new industrial design and larger screen and doesn’t use a 4200rpm hard drive or any number of other features that would make it more difficult to reach the same price point of the previous low end model with all the features of the higher specced models? It’s not uncommon for newer improved models to come out at higher prices to recoup development and component expenses and later drop as those things improve. It’s not a new thing. 
    I did consider it.  The 2020 iMac 21.5 had 8GB of RAM, 256 SSD (not a spinning hard drive) and only a slightly smaller screen for $1099.  The new design is nice but not $200 nicer when you remove that many ports and can't even be bothered to include an ethernet jack on a desktop computer.  
    Most people have zero use for an Ethernet jack.
    When I set up my iMac in 2017 it was quicker to initially set it up with wireless to my router, and I've never bothered to use my Ethernet jack even though it's probably faster. Wireless is perfectly good even if I want to watch a movie on Apple TV+. I can't be bothered to connect my Ethernet cable to the jack behind my desk.
    Wifi is only as good as the version you have and the antenna configuration residing in the devices.

    Then you have to factor in walls/floors and other signal barriers and cross your fingers that interference isn't a problem. Then you have bandwidth issues to contend with.

    Due to accumulation more than anything else, I have three networks running at home and over fifty devices hopping on and off the network.

    It's a bit of a mess, truth be told but it works mostly reliably, and largely due to the fact that ethernet cables and an 8 port gigabit switch get my incoming fibre service into the routers and from there, into the air via WiFi.

    My mesh system also makes use of PLC for the backhaul.

    I also have old equipment that has ethernet but no WiFi.

    Some people will get by with a purely wireless setup but there are solid reasons to actually use ethernet over WiFi when both are available. Especially when Wi-Fi starts playing up and things become more akin to voodoo.

    If your ethernet ports are in good shape and your cables are good, ethernet can be rock solid.

    And writing this I'm remembering networking over firewire back in the day. Wow! I'm much older than I thought. 
    Ethernet is always better than wifi and like you said with the level of switch management you must have and QoS Wifi is a joke.
    elijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 152 of 283
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    So glad I bought the i7 Mac Mini 2018 and added 64GB RAM on it. Extend it with and eGPU and I'm just fine for several more years so they [my old colleagues at Apple] that real workflows need more than these first steps. I'll wait until the third major SoC generation before bothering.
    elijahg
  • Reply 153 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    elijahg said:
    I said "we know the M1 is an evolution of the Ax iPad chips" and "some of the iPads are very cheap". Never mentioned the Pro being cheap. We also know the M1 is a beefed up Ax CPU. It was not designed from scratch, so it's not that expensive, most of the R&D has been paid for by the iPhone. 
    So now you are an expert in costs between engineering different SOCs?  If there isn't that much of a difference between the chips then why not just standardize everything on the same chip?

    Gee, maybe there are significant cost differences to justify having different versions of the chips?

    Just maybe?

    Good god, I'm used to baseless speculation around all things Apple but this thread is one of the more ridiculous I have seen in a long time.

    elijahg said:
    The issue is Apple has changed their M.O. of the last 40 years - or more specifically Cook has. Macs were great value in the days of Jobs - now, not so much. And in some cases: RAM/storage, not at all. Apple used to make computers for their customers, now Apple makes computers for their shareholders.
    You are out of your mind delusional or an ignorant wippersnapper.  You want to talk about "the good 'ol days" - let's talk real Mac's.  My Mac Plus.  Got it at a discount for $2100 off a teacher that bought it and tried to convince the school to buy it.  $2,100 in 1987 is almost $5,000 in todays dollars adjusted by inflation and depending on which estimating tool you use.  Out of curiosity I looked it up because I figured someone was going to toss down the "good old days" card sooner or later.  God bless my crazy parents for buying it for me (and the advantages of being an only kid).  I went straight from 8 bit computers to a 32 bit machine with a GUI and mouse (OK, not a pure 32 bit machine but still way better than the PCs of the day).  

    That was for a computer with a 9" MONOCHROME screen, screen resolution you couldn't fit a calculator widget from today on and 1 megabyte of RAM.  I went in with 10 other people for a bulk RAM order to get a discount and we were over the moon at scoring 1 megabyte (MB, not GB) of RAM for $90 a stick.  I got four to max my machine out at 4 MB.  Twice the amount of the $200 difference people are raising so much fuss over.  Actually it's worse than that adjusted for inflation, but screw it - at face value it's already ridiculous.  Let's not even discuss the $700 external 40MB SCSI hard drive either.  I still don't like to think about it.  

    So yeah, I have plenty of reason to see the comments in here and deem them beyond hysterically pathetic as well as funny too.  You people are getting computing power (and COLOR!) we could have never dreamed of at a fraction of the price.  So enough of the ridiculous pining for the "good 'ol days" BS because they most assuredly never were nearly as good as people choose to remember them.  

    Apple wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar concern if they only made computers for their shareholders; another ridiculously absurd assertion - that sounds good in comment threads but makes zero sense otherwise.  Next you'll tell me that central planning will really work *this time* and all the previous failures throughout history were just because those people were morons but we are much smarter now.  Heh - Adam's penned it as satire but perhaps we are descendants of phone sanitizers after all  :p
    Fidonet12713485randominternetpersonwilliamlondonDetnatorwatto_cobra
  • Reply 154 of 283
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    docno42 said:
    Put another way, the base Mac Mini is $699.  Pair it with a nice $300 LG 4k display (24") and an Apple keyboard and Mouse and you're only at about $1150.  Same M1 chip, same 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD.  But more ports, Gigabit Ethernet, and even the ability to swap out the screen as a bonus if you wanted to later.  Add a webcam for $100 and you're still $50 under this crippled iMac's price point.
    Yet for the premium that "crippled" iMac delivers a much more compact and practically cable free computing experience. 
    It’s one HDMI cable different. And if I mount the mini to the back of the display it becomes invisible.

    This is one of the few times the mini is clearly the better machine for the money than the iMac.  

    By the next iteration or so the base iMac will be back down to $1099 with ports and you could go either way value wise.

    I guess they are recouping NRE costs for moving to the new architecture...and for the desktops the iMac is the volume machine to make it on.  But I’ve always preferred the mini so...yay. 

    Now please give us back eGPU support...
    elijahg
  • Reply 155 of 283
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,660member
    nht said:
    It’s one HDMI cable different. And if I mount the mini to the back of the display it becomes invisible.
    One cable?  Are you the reincarnation of Tesla and figured out wireless power transmission now too?  

    Also it's only "invisible" if your computer backs up against a wall without anything on the other side of it.  Otherwise it's a rats nest of cables again.  

    Lots of use cases where computers are not backed up against walls.

    If only Apple provided choice, they could solve this hopeless conundrum  :p
    edited April 20 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 156 of 283
    The iMacs look like Teletubbies. 


    elijahgbaconstang
  • Reply 157 of 283
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,049member
    sflocal said:
    I fail to understand the hate people have towards the iMac's "chin".  It really comes across as petty and that chin I think is what differentiates the iMac instead of making it look like some large, generic monitor.  Get over it people. 
    Whiners will be whiners.  But I wonder what people would have said if, instead, Apple had put an iPhone type notch at the bottom of the iMac screen instead of the chin?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 158 of 283
    jfdesigns said:
    The iMacs look like Teletubbies. 


    Oh!
    I thought that was a soccer team.
    bennettvistawatto_cobra
  • Reply 159 of 283
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 410member
    elijahg said:
    Who uses Ethernet ?  
    People who live in a city and can't get anything more than 20mbps over wireless due to interference.
    People who already have Ethernet wiring in the house, and want faster connection than wireless to stationary computers.
    docno42watto_cobra
  • Reply 160 of 283
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,686member
    crowley said:
    mattinoz said:
    crowley said:
    lkrupp said:
    mario said:
    Headphone jack is located on the side on the desktop computer???? Who wants speaker cable dangling from the side all the time going to external powered speakers, instead of neatly tucked behind the screen and out of sight?
    Only neanderthal luddites use headphone jacks.
    And yet Apple included the jack.  Seems they know something you don't, smart guy.
    They could have added lightening on the other side or back for options. 
    What options?  That's a terrible idea.
    The option of using a single set of accessories between iMac, Laptop and phone.
    Ok, Ok,...USB-c is meant to be that set and wireless if only multidevice wireless head phone worked well. (iPods while promising have proven still lacking).

    Kind of wondering about the Power brick with ethernet as well. Would be great if there was a PoE or USB-c PD cable option instead so I could run an iMac direct from Solar and Battery DC line. Doesn't look like it's over a 100w any way.

Sign In or Register to comment.