It's drops to flash storage on their Fusion Drives which get me. They've dropped it down to 24GB from 128GB, and still charge $200 extra for one more TB or alternatively a whopping $900 to get a 1TB SSD . A 1TB SSD will cost me no more than $350 these days for a good one!
I cannot fathom why they charge so much.
I got my work iMac (14,2 model purchased this past summer) with a conventional 1TB HDD, and then bought the OWC ThunderBay 4 Mini. I populated it with two SSDs, and an HDD, and everything seems to run as fast as my home iMac which has a 3TB Fusion drive. The work iMac, which doesn't even have ThunderBolt 2 ports, actually boots just about as quickly as my rMBP (11,3). For me, this made a hell of a lot more sense than paying $900 for a 1TB internal SSD. The price for the ThunderBay 4 Mini and a 1TB SSD would be about $675 or so. And that leaves room for 3 other 2.5" drives.
Seriously, get out and meet people in the real world sometime. People other than the tech enthusiasts who dominate the discussions on forums like this. Teachers, accountants, doctors/nurses, lawyers, etc. People who treat a computer like a car or an appliance: you buy it to serve some purpose, you don't know and don't really care how it works, if something goes wrong you take it in to be serviced, and when it can no longer serve your needs you buy a new one.
I'm sure if you talked to a car enthusiast, they'd tell you how you can get a cheap car and replace a few parts to make it into a race car, but are you willing to spend the effort to do that? Now replace car with computer and you get the idea.
So you think 5400 rpm drive is just fine for "real world" non-techies? That's like says most people aren't camera enthusiasts and just post shit on FB and Instagram so what do they need a good camera in their phone for.
Even 7 or 8 years ago, there were a lot of low end consumers using iMacs.
Today, if someone tells you their parents want a computer just to check email and surf the web, you direct them to the iPad.
That's what I mean, a lot of those "average users" don't exist anymore. Students have gone entirely to laptops and iPads.
So who's Apple really building the 21" iMac for? Any home users editing video will eventually feel the slower drive. Do small businesses really not care that they can't add RAM in-house, and will have to lose the workstation for days to an Apple Store with company data on it?
It's hard for me to envision a huge Mac demographic that doesn't eventually get riled by using soldered RAM and 5400 rpm drives.
I agree completely. The 21" iMac is an ideal computer for small businesses. But whether it's a photographer, flower shop, or small tool and die shop, they'll likely need to upgrade in a year or two. Why not allow users to upgrade as their business grows? Instead you force their hand at the outset to buy 16gb or be stuck with 8gb for life. As others have mentioned, your average user may not even be aware of this limitation.
You're simply forcing owners to buy a new Mac every two years when it should easily last you five.
Something I'm sure is what Apple wants you to do.
I'm saddened by Apple's thirst for profits over user needs (and I'm a shareholder).
It seems they subscribe to Gordon Gecko's mantra that, 'greed is good'.
It's hard for me to envision a huge Mac demographic that doesn't eventually get riled by using soldered RAM and 5400 rpm drives.
The only people who get riled by such things are the same people who would never buy it in the first place. No one else cares about these things. They buy a computer, they use it. When it isn't good enough anymore, they buy a new one.
If you have an issue with it, buy a different model. Apple is obviously targeting this computer at the same demographic they designed the new MacBook for.
I have to agree that even though I (and most (all) of us here) would never buy the the iMac with 5400 RPM drive, some will. However, *I* think it's clearly typical Apple strategy; the people who'll be looking to buy a cheap iMac don't know much about computers. They'll ask someone for advice, someone who will either steer them away from Apple/iMac, or steer them to the upgraded option. If they're looking at an iMac, I'll assume it'll be the latter option, but just saying for arguments sake.
Apple will sell more of the upgraded options, with better margins and then next year (maybe), that'll become the entry level model, while they then introduce something that'll make the entry level model not so appealing, again, forcing hands a bit, to upgrade. What's $100 when you're already spending $1100 on a computer you expect to last you 3/4 years, easily (to one person)? However, multiply $100 (80/90 % of which is purely cash in Apples pocket) by the number of potential buyers likely to upgrade and it's a sizable amount of close-to-pure-profit, no?
It's drops to flash storage on their Fusion Drives which get me. They've dropped it down to 24GB from 128GB, and still charge $200 extra for one more TB or alternatively a whopping $900 to get a 1TB SSD . A 1TB SSD will cost me no more than $350 these days for a good one!
I cannot fathom why they charge so much.
For this statement to hold any weight at all, you'd have to prove that going from 128 to 24 in a Fusion Drive actually negatively impacts the user experience.
I don't expect you to put that much thought into this though.
nice upgrade... not for the video card.... really pissed off....
I use 3d software that needs gpu power from nvidia card at office and at home.... so..
....I'd never think about making switch to shit pc.
thanks apple
sounds like you dont need a consumer desktop then. workstation maybe? check out the Mac Pro.
So you think 5400 rpm drive is just fine for "real world" non-techies? That's like says most people aren't camera enthusiasts and just post shit on FB and Instagram so what do they need a good camera in their phone for.
yup, 5400rpm works just fine for normal people. my dad has no idea what rpms are.
Great argument except your advice to pay the extra $200 for the upgrade runs counter to everything you just laid out. You clearly, and correctly made the argument that many people just don't need that upgrade.
I think people tend to forget that the needs of the average user have not changed (much) over the last 5 years, yet the desktop Mac you can buy for $1,100 has. The iMac was fast enough/good enough for today's average user 5 years ago.
Only we, the geeks, have lost sight of that. Well, some of us anyway.
I wonder if OWC will offer SSDs for the new iMac 27"? They don't currently offer one for the previous 5k retina model.
After reading this article on their blog for the previous 27" and seeing this "... our own flash upgrade will be coming soon for these as well." I called them. They said that they're still working on it and will hopefully be out within a year. For me I can't afford the extra cash for the 1tb "flash storage", so I'll have to settle for the 3tb Fusion. If OWC comes through I'll upgrade it later myself. As for RAM, I've never excepted Apples raping and always gone bare bones, then ordered and installed OWC's. I'll do this until they solder it as it only makes $$ sense.
Soldered RAM on the 21", 1tb Fusion drive w/ only 24gb of SSD - used to be 256gb, no DDR4 RAM, and still shipping 5400 rpm disk drives and zero love for the Mac Mini that hasn't been updated in 2 years and still shipping crappy old Cinema Displays? Wow. Can someone please bring back Steve Jobs?
I don't get the rationale behind soldered RAM on a full desktop computer. Sure I get it on a portable, with all the space constraints and such, but on a 20+'' iMac?
That's just poor judgment. If by some unhappy chance someone get a faulty RAM, that quits on you just after AppleCare expires, that on itself will require full logic board replacement.
I am against soldered in ram, but ram chip failures are lower then ram socket failures (due to vibration). Soldered ram increases not decreases reliability.
So you think 5400 rpm drive is just fine for "real world" non-techies? That's like says most people aren't camera enthusiasts and just post shit on FB and Instagram so what do they need a good camera in their phone for.
Actually, it is just fine. Our home machine - used by all members of the family for everything from my wife's work, to the kids games & apps, to managing music and photos (with light photo editing) - is a 2009 21.5" iMac with the (then) entry level configuration. It worked like a charm until a few months ago, when it started to slow down due to (believed) HDD issue (while the diagnostic showed OK, the drive was 6 years old, so time for a new one).
Just put in a new drive (7200 RPM), added 4GB of RAM, upgraded to El Capitan, and it is like a new machine. Hoping to get another 4 years out of it - for a total of 10 years if we can (that is amazing to me, compared with how Windows PC's have held up for us before the iMac). Then I will upgrade to an 8K iMac...:)
As noted a few times on this thread - only the people who have no intention of buying the product spend countless hours complaining about it.
Look, we've debated the soldered RAM thing for years now, and while it's a problem for me I understand non-techies don't care.
And Apple's profiting off that, and it's fine.
But it's really more the 5400 drive thing that bothers me.
In 2015, how much could Apple really be profiting from using outdated tech instead of the standard version?
Cook is supposed to be a procurement whiz, and he can't get 7200rpm drives in quantity for the iMac?
Apple is supposed to be a premium experience. They raise the price of their machines by hundreds of dollars so they can build in a high def screen into it. They carve the machines out of a block of aluminium instead of molding plastic. They pioneer high-end connectivity like Thunderbolt to enhance the user experience.
And then they use a hard drive that's outdated by everyone's standards.
Maybe their research says that if they use 7200 drives more customers won't take the Fusion upgrade. Or maybe they're just penny pinching.
Either way, it's an odd choice to make. I think it devalues the Mac experience and gives PC users ammunition needlessly.
Actually, it is just fine. Our home machine - used by all members of the family for everything from my wife's work, to the kids games & apps, to managing music and photos (with light photo editing) - is a 2009 21.5" iMac with the (then) entry level configuration. It worked like a charm until a few months ago, when it started to slow down due to (believed) HDD issue (while the diagnostic showed OK, the drive was 6 years old, so time for a new one).
Just put in a new drive (7200 RPM), added 4GB of RAM, upgraded to El Capitan, and it is like a new machine. Hoping to get another 4 years out of it - for a total of 10 years if we can (that is amazing to me, compared with how Windows PC's have held up for us before the iMac). Then I will upgrade to an 8K iMac...:)
As noted a few times on this thread - only the people who have no intention of buying the product spend countless hours complaining about it.
You do realize that the point here is that you can't perform those upgrades you mention on the new iMac, right?
Can someone answer some questions for me? Apple's RAM spec indicates the Apple supplied RAM is 1867MHz DDR3. OWC's RAM is 1600MHz. So the frequency is a bit lower.
1. With the 27" iMac's 4 slots, can you use both 1867MHz and 1600MHz RAM at the same time (paired properly)? In other words, can I leave the supplied RAM in and simply add, say two 8GB DIMMs from OWC?
2. What kind and how much of an impact will the lower frequency have on the system?
yup, 5400rpm works just fine for normal people. my dad has no idea what rpms are.
I was just about to respond to the original poster, but this captures it.
People who understand and care about specs will upgrade to a Fusion drive. The rest won't even notice. Unless you're working with large videos or a ton of files, the difference is negligible. Especially given that many people are just storing their photos in iCloud (photo libraries are the biggest source of files for most people).
Comments
It's drops to flash storage on their Fusion Drives which get me. They've dropped it down to 24GB from 128GB, and still charge $200 extra for one more TB or alternatively a whopping $900 to get a 1TB SSD . A 1TB SSD will cost me no more than $350 these days for a good one!
I cannot fathom why they charge so much.
I got my work iMac (14,2 model purchased this past summer) with a conventional 1TB HDD, and then bought the OWC ThunderBay 4 Mini. I populated it with two SSDs, and an HDD, and everything seems to run as fast as my home iMac which has a 3TB Fusion drive. The work iMac, which doesn't even have ThunderBolt 2 ports, actually boots just about as quickly as my rMBP (11,3). For me, this made a hell of a lot more sense than paying $900 for a 1TB internal SSD. The price for the ThunderBay 4 Mini and a 1TB SSD would be about $675 or so. And that leaves room for 3 other 2.5" drives.
So you think 5400 rpm drive is just fine for "real world" non-techies? That's like says most people aren't camera enthusiasts and just post shit on FB and Instagram so what do they need a good camera in their phone for.
Even 7 or 8 years ago, there were a lot of low end consumers using iMacs.
Today, if someone tells you their parents want a computer just to check email and surf the web, you direct them to the iPad.
That's what I mean, a lot of those "average users" don't exist anymore. Students have gone entirely to laptops and iPads.
So who's Apple really building the 21" iMac for? Any home users editing video will eventually feel the slower drive. Do small businesses really not care that they can't add RAM in-house, and will have to lose the workstation for days to an Apple Store with company data on it?
It's hard for me to envision a huge Mac demographic that doesn't eventually get riled by using soldered RAM and 5400 rpm drives.
I agree completely. The 21" iMac is an ideal computer for small businesses. But whether it's a photographer, flower shop, or small tool and die shop, they'll likely need to upgrade in a year or two. Why not allow users to upgrade as their business grows? Instead you force their hand at the outset to buy 16gb or be stuck with 8gb for life. As others have mentioned, your average user may not even be aware of this limitation.
You're simply forcing owners to buy a new Mac every two years when it should easily last you five.
Something I'm sure is what Apple wants you to do.
I'm saddened by Apple's thirst for profits over user needs (and I'm a shareholder).
It seems they subscribe to Gordon Gecko's mantra that, 'greed is good'.
The old 21.5" iMac had non-upgradeable RAM, and so does the new one.
Move along people, there's nothing to see here.
(And yes, I know that the old model had socketed RAM that, with major disassembly, could theoretically have been replaced.)
It's hard for me to envision a huge Mac demographic that doesn't eventually get riled by using soldered RAM and 5400 rpm drives.
The only people who get riled by such things are the same people who would never buy it in the first place. No one else cares about these things. They buy a computer, they use it. When it isn't good enough anymore, they buy a new one.
If you have an issue with it, buy a different model. Apple is obviously targeting this computer at the same demographic they designed the new MacBook for.
I have to agree that even though I (and most (all) of us here) would never buy the the iMac with 5400 RPM drive, some will. However, *I* think it's clearly typical Apple strategy; the people who'll be looking to buy a cheap iMac don't know much about computers. They'll ask someone for advice, someone who will either steer them away from Apple/iMac, or steer them to the upgraded option. If they're looking at an iMac, I'll assume it'll be the latter option, but just saying for arguments sake.
Apple will sell more of the upgraded options, with better margins and then next year (maybe), that'll become the entry level model, while they then introduce something that'll make the entry level model not so appealing, again, forcing hands a bit, to upgrade. What's $100 when you're already spending $1100 on a computer you expect to last you 3/4 years, easily (to one person)? However, multiply $100 (80/90 % of which is purely cash in Apples pocket) by the number of potential buyers likely to upgrade and it's a sizable amount of close-to-pure-profit, no?
Apple is a business, first...
agreed on thin iMacs -- i put mine on a VESA arm mount, and the thinner it is the lighter it is, the easier to move it is.
It's drops to flash storage on their Fusion Drives which get me. They've dropped it down to 24GB from 128GB, and still charge $200 extra for one more TB or alternatively a whopping $900 to get a 1TB SSD . A 1TB SSD will cost me no more than $350 these days for a good one!
I cannot fathom why they charge so much.
For this statement to hold any weight at all, you'd have to prove that going from 128 to 24 in a Fusion Drive actually negatively impacts the user experience.
I don't expect you to put that much thought into this though.
sounds like you dont need a consumer desktop then. workstation maybe? check out the Mac Pro.
yup, 5400rpm works just fine for normal people. my dad has no idea what rpms are.
Great argument except your advice to pay the extra $200 for the upgrade runs counter to everything you just laid out. You clearly, and correctly made the argument that many people just don't need that upgrade.
I think people tend to forget that the needs of the average user have not changed (much) over the last 5 years, yet the desktop Mac you can buy for $1,100 has. The iMac was fast enough/good enough for today's average user 5 years ago.
Only we, the geeks, have lost sight of that. Well, some of us anyway.
I wonder if OWC will offer SSDs for the new iMac 27"? They don't currently offer one for the previous 5k retina model.
After reading this article on their blog for the previous 27" and seeing this "... our own flash upgrade will be coming soon for these as well." I called them. They said that they're still working on it and will hopefully be out within a year. For me I can't afford the extra cash for the 1tb "flash storage", so I'll have to settle for the 3tb Fusion. If OWC comes through I'll upgrade it later myself. As for RAM, I've never excepted Apples raping and always gone bare bones, then ordered and installed OWC's. I'll do this until they solder it as it only makes $$ sense.
Soldered RAM on the 21", 1tb Fusion drive w/ only 24gb of SSD - used to be 256gb, no DDR4 RAM, and still shipping 5400 rpm disk drives and zero love for the Mac Mini that hasn't been updated in 2 years and still shipping crappy old Cinema Displays? Wow. Can someone please bring back Steve Jobs?
Soldered RAM on the 21",
Is the sole purpose of buying a Mac to upgrade the fucking RAM after you get it?
1tb Fusion drive w/ only 24gb of SSD - used to be 256gb,
It used to be 128, but since you can't demonstrate how this negatively impacts the user, this is bullshit.
no DDR4 RAM
I wonder how many people that buy 21.5" iMacs know what DDR4 RAM is...
and still shipping 5400 rpm disk drives
See above.
zero love for the Mac Mini that hasn't been updated in 2 years
Wrong.
still shipping crappy old Cinema Displays?
They'd rather you buy an iMac. A New 4k or 5k display would cost almost as much as one.
I don't get the rationale behind soldered RAM on a full desktop computer. Sure I get it on a portable, with all the space constraints and such, but on a 20+'' iMac?
That's just poor judgment. If by some unhappy chance someone get a faulty RAM, that quits on you just after AppleCare expires, that on itself will require full logic board replacement.
I am against soldered in ram, but ram chip failures are lower then ram socket failures (due to vibration). Soldered ram increases not decreases reliability.
So you think 5400 rpm drive is just fine for "real world" non-techies? That's like says most people aren't camera enthusiasts and just post shit on FB and Instagram so what do they need a good camera in their phone for.
Actually, it is just fine. Our home machine - used by all members of the family for everything from my wife's work, to the kids games & apps, to managing music and photos (with light photo editing) - is a 2009 21.5" iMac with the (then) entry level configuration. It worked like a charm until a few months ago, when it started to slow down due to (believed) HDD issue (while the diagnostic showed OK, the drive was 6 years old, so time for a new one).
Just put in a new drive (7200 RPM), added 4GB of RAM, upgraded to El Capitan, and it is like a new machine. Hoping to get another 4 years out of it - for a total of 10 years if we can (that is amazing to me, compared with how Windows PC's have held up for us before the iMac). Then I will upgrade to an 8K iMac...:)
As noted a few times on this thread - only the people who have no intention of buying the product spend countless hours complaining about it.
Look, we've debated the soldered RAM thing for years now, and while it's a problem for me I understand non-techies don't care.
And Apple's profiting off that, and it's fine.
But it's really more the 5400 drive thing that bothers me.
In 2015, how much could Apple really be profiting from using outdated tech instead of the standard version?
Cook is supposed to be a procurement whiz, and he can't get 7200rpm drives in quantity for the iMac?
Apple is supposed to be a premium experience. They raise the price of their machines by hundreds of dollars so they can build in a high def screen into it. They carve the machines out of a block of aluminium instead of molding plastic. They pioneer high-end connectivity like Thunderbolt to enhance the user experience.
And then they use a hard drive that's outdated by everyone's standards.
Maybe their research says that if they use 7200 drives more customers won't take the Fusion upgrade. Or maybe they're just penny pinching.
Either way, it's an odd choice to make. I think it devalues the Mac experience and gives PC users ammunition needlessly.
Actually, it is just fine. Our home machine - used by all members of the family for everything from my wife's work, to the kids games & apps, to managing music and photos (with light photo editing) - is a 2009 21.5" iMac with the (then) entry level configuration. It worked like a charm until a few months ago, when it started to slow down due to (believed) HDD issue (while the diagnostic showed OK, the drive was 6 years old, so time for a new one).
Just put in a new drive (7200 RPM), added 4GB of RAM, upgraded to El Capitan, and it is like a new machine. Hoping to get another 4 years out of it - for a total of 10 years if we can (that is amazing to me, compared with how Windows PC's have held up for us before the iMac). Then I will upgrade to an 8K iMac...:)
As noted a few times on this thread - only the people who have no intention of buying the product spend countless hours complaining about it.
You do realize that the point here is that you can't perform those upgrades you mention on the new iMac, right?
Can someone answer some questions for me? Apple's RAM spec indicates the Apple supplied RAM is 1867MHz DDR3. OWC's RAM is 1600MHz. So the frequency is a bit lower.
1. With the 27" iMac's 4 slots, can you use both 1867MHz and 1600MHz RAM at the same time (paired properly)? In other words, can I leave the supplied RAM in and simply add, say two 8GB DIMMs from OWC?
2. What kind and how much of an impact will the lower frequency have on the system?
Thanks in advance!
yup, 5400rpm works just fine for normal people. my dad has no idea what rpms are.
I was just about to respond to the original poster, but this captures it.
People who understand and care about specs will upgrade to a Fusion drive. The rest won't even notice. Unless you're working with large videos or a ton of files, the difference is negligible. Especially given that many people are just storing their photos in iCloud (photo libraries are the biggest source of files for most people).