I had planned on buying one of these iMacs, but I have to say I'm massively underwhelmed. £1649 for the model with 512GB SSD and a paltry 8GB of Ram and last years entry level chip.
Real nasty taste in the mouth with the £200 jump from the base model which they deliberately neutered to try and force people into buying the middle model.
I'm with you. That $1700 model should have 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD in it. And the entry level one is a joke. That's the kind of stripped down SKU you'd expect them to sell as an "education version."
Have you ever looked at the lowest end 21.5” iMac before? That’s precisely what it is, along with stores and grandmas and other lightweight users who only need the bare basics and literally do not care about the missing features. It exists to reach the $1299 price point and serve those use cases. If it makes you mad, then you’re not the target audience for that model.
I simply don’t understand the complaints that the cheapest model isn’t the best. It never has been.
That's not my complaint.
The current 21.5" Intel iMac has had 8GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, Gigabit Ethernet and comes with 4 USB-A ports and two Thunderbolt ports, plus an SD card reader for $1099. The new entry level is $200 more, has only two USB/Thunderbolt ports, no ethernet, no SD slot and still 8GB of RAM and 256 SSD. That's my complaint - not that the entry level isn't the top of the line model, but that the entry level went up in price but down several pretty important areas. And there isn't even a $1099 model option at all.
So buy that one instead, problem solved. Lol
It’s a completely different machine. There are costs that come with developing these things which will be recouped over time. New components that will get cheaper with higher yields over time. Inflation is a thing, have you compensated for that in your price comparisons of yesteryear’s models? This is not a new phenomenon and your comparison is meaningless.
It's not "yesteryear." I'm not comparing a 2015 iMac to today's model. It's literally last year's iMac and Mac Mini that I've offered for comparison, which are totally in line with what should be expected here. The internals of this iMac are not so drastically different from the other M1 models that it justifies a $200 price increase while removing basic functionality.
I figured if I traded from my current 27" model to the new M1 there'd be some tradeoffs - better processor but non-upgradeable RAM (and less of it), a slightly smaller screen, etc. But what I didn't expect was to have to pay $200 extra over the already $200 more base model, just to have 2 fewer ports instead of 4 fewer, and to keep Gigabit Ethernet. That doesn't even get into the small SSD size. I don't see how these issues are unreasonable to point out.
You clearly don’t understand how this not an apples to apples specs comparison. It *is* drastically different in almost every measurable way!
Lastly you’re downsizing from a more expensive 27” model instead of waiting for the replacement for that model to arrive, and you’re complaining about $200? Good grief.
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. It's the same M1 and same integrated 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD they can get in the Mac Mini. It's roughly the same footprint as the 21.5" iMac with a slightly larger screen. It's nice but not life changing nor a big boost in productivity or convenience in their day to day use of a Mac. The average iMac buyer couldn't give a shit about the new cooling system
I just don't think it's unreasonable to expect that you get to keep some basic functionality when you're already ponying up $200 more than a base model would have before.
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.
Count me as a neanderthal luddite, then. I have AirPods that are nice when they work but not infrequently they have problems connecting or the connection is poor. For my last conference call I had to turn off the bluetooth completely on both my phone and computer and repair therm. Never have to do that with headphones.
titantiger said: Far from nonsensical. The issue is, the $1299 price point didn't used to be the crippled K-12 version. A version like that was in the $1000 range. When you got to 1300 bucks it didn't have goofy trade offs like only two USB ports and no ethernet jack. Hell, even the base Mac mini has a damn ethernet jack, 2 USB ports in addition to the 2 Thunderbolt ones, and even an HDMI. So it's perfectly reasonable to question the specs for the price on this new iMac.
I don't know what country you live in but in the western world things have been getting more expensive over time for the past 40 years. And it's accelerated in our COVID blessed world thanks to the now blindingly obvious gross, continued overreaction to the China virus. The base mini lacks a screen, speakers, bundled keyboard/mouse, etc. so it's hardly an equal comparison.
Speaking of costs raising over time - I was unwrapping some stuff wrapped in newspapers from the mid 70's and cars costing $30K plus today were around $1500 then. Thank decades of successful central planning for this "feature".
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. Add in webcam and speakers and you're still at or under $1299 and you have the versatility of more ports (including HDMI) and the ability to upgrade the screen to 5k or a larger size later. I don't think inflation on the Mac line jumped 20% from the release of the M1 Mac Mini til now.
The mini is in same old enclosure as the Intel model. The display is 4.5K, not 4K. It’s got a new logic board, cooling system, and audio designs. You can’t pretend like these aren’t factors.
Which while it may justify a price increase, does not justify an increase while removing 4 ports, the SD slot, and ethernet.
Because you’re making up component costs in your head to calculate the value of the product. As has been discussed many times over, the sum of component costs has nothing to do with development and manufacturing costs. You have no idea how they calculated these choices, and are making yourself angry over an imaginary metric that you concocted on your own. That seems unproductive.
The bottom line for the end user is value for the money paid. I think if you told a person - hey, we couldn't stay at the $1099 iMac price point from last year but it's a new design with the better processor and a bigger screen, then while I'm not thrilled that the entry point is 20% higher, I can handle that. But when you do that but also give me a paltry 2 USB ports, and remove the ethernet jack and other ports then I'm starting to feel nickeled and dimed and it's actually affecting the functionality of the computer.
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.
Based on what the entry level iMac has? That's reading a bit much into things, isn't it?
I mean if they never produced the Mac Pro or an M1 Mac Mini that also has USB A ports then I would share your pessimism, but I think the new Mac Pro and the re-emergence of USB A on the Mac Mini - heck, the release of the MacBook Air without the blasted touch bar too - indicates that today's Apple is at least a little willing to tilt more to the practical side of things.
Also every pro audio guy/gal I know has DACs over Thunderbolt or USB for their signal path. Or a Mac Pro full of cards. No one is using blutooth, and they certainly aren't using a 3.5mm jack (side OR back) for "Pro Audio".
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.
I actually glad there's some kind of chin there, especially with the new color options, it allows some of that color to come to the front of the unit as well. Good job Apple.
I do with the specs for the iMac were more beefy. I used an M1-based MacBook and while I was absolutely floored by the performance, I expected Apple would give the desktop Macs with ASi chips made for desktop-class machines. I just hope that whatever Apple has in store for the larger 27"+ iMac, it better include more RAM, and much higher spec ASi chips.
A chin serves no purpose. It should be removed.
It's where the computer actually resides.
They manage to have no chin on the iPad Pro, and the iMac is basically an iPad Pro. There’s nothing really in the chin except speakers on the intel iMacs, and from the pictures it looks similar on this one.
They show you what’s inside of it. The logic board is in the chin only. There are two fans. Six larger speakers. I/O perpendicular to the back plane. Did you even watch the presentation?
Then make it thicker? The iPad Pro manages it at 6mm. They have a huge aluminium heatsink they can use too. I usually do but skimmed through this one, can't stand listening to Cook's drawl at the best of times, but the scripted enthusiasm is grating.
I literally just explained the reasons it’s not like the iPad Pro and you responded that they could’ve made it like the iPad Pro.
You don’t like it. Fine. But at least do the tiniest bit of research on the product before erroneously complaining about it.
Well no, you pointed out what's different; that's not explaining why they can apparently fit 4 speakers, the logic board and battery behind the back-lit rather than side-lit display in the iPad Pro but can't fit just the logic board behind the display in the twice-as-thick iMac.
Purely questioning why something possible in the thinner iPad apparently isn't possible in the thicker iMac is not something that can be "erroneous". Which you haven't actually answered, you've just said "but the iMac isn't like the iPad because it has the logic board in the chin". We established that a while ago, but you are still beating on about it. But you still haven't explained why you think the logic board can't be behind the display, even though my solution was to have it thicker. It's a desktop computer, not a laptop.
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.
Well, I can’t say it’s what I was expecting... it is kinda growing in me, but man from the front those colours are just odd.. shame it’s an M1 too and not something more powerful. Still an interesting design, nice Touch ID integration too. Probably better value then the new M1 iPad Pro. Wonder what the 32” iMac will be like? However it’s incredibly overpriced, and I can see a 16GB 1TB model being 2 grand. And I bet anything you cannot upgrade any of those components yourself.
titantiger said: Far from nonsensical. The issue is, the $1299 price point didn't used to be the crippled K-12 version. A version like that was in the $1000 range. When you got to 1300 bucks it didn't have goofy trade offs like only two USB ports and no ethernet jack. Hell, even the base Mac mini has a damn ethernet jack, 2 USB ports in addition to the 2 Thunderbolt ones, and even an HDMI. So it's perfectly reasonable to question the specs for the price on this new iMac.
I don't know what country you live in but in the western world things have been getting more expensive over time for the past 40 years. And it's accelerated in our COVID blessed world thanks to the now blindingly obvious gross, continued overreaction to the China virus. The base mini lacks a screen, speakers, bundled keyboard/mouse, etc. so it's hardly an equal comparison.
Speaking of costs raising over time - I was unwrapping some stuff wrapped in newspapers from the mid 70's and cars costing $30K plus today were around $1500 then. Thank decades of successful central planning for this "feature".
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. Add in webcam and speakers and you're still at or under $1299 and you have the versatility of more ports (including HDMI) and the ability to upgrade the screen to 5k or a larger size later. I don't think inflation on the Mac line jumped 20% from the release of the M1 Mac Mini til now.
The mini is in same old enclosure as the Intel model. The display is 4.5K, not 4K. It’s got a new logic board, cooling system, and audio designs. You can’t pretend like these aren’t factors.
Which while it may justify a price increase, does not justify an increase while removing 4 ports, the SD slot, and ethernet.
Because you’re making up component costs in your head to calculate the value of the product. As has been discussed many times over, the sum of component costs has nothing to do with development and manufacturing costs. You have no idea how they calculated these choices, and are making yourself angry over an imaginary metric that you concocted on your own. That seems unproductive.
The bottom line for the end user is value for the money paid. I think if you told a person - hey, we couldn't stay at the $1099 iMac price point from last year but it's a new design with the better processor and a bigger screen, then while I'm not thrilled that the entry point is 20% higher, I can handle that. But when you do that but also give me a paltry 2 USB ports, and remove the ethernet jack and other ports then I'm starting to feel nickeled and dimed and it's actually affecting the functionality of the computer.
titantiger said: But I am the customer for it. I've owned three iMacs since 2002.
If a year from now this is the only Apple Silicon Mac they have produced then you win.
Until then, your hysteria is overrated. This is *an* iMac. Obviously not the one for you. Or for me either. I was hoping to see at 27" replacement, but this obviously isn't it so we both get to wait some more. How will we ever survive the suspense.
It is a serious upgrade for the former 21" though - and the return of colors is a nice touch I hope they carry over to other new Apple Silicon Macs. Although I agree with others - a black or space gray in there wouldn't kill them.
4.5K resolution hints that the 27" replacement might be 6K. Now that would really be worth waiting for, especially if they bump the size up by an inch too. My over 40 eyes will always appreciate more physical screen real estate!
I see lots complaining about the base storage, you need to remember this IS Apple, the company who sells a ‘Pro’ level desktop machine with. Intel Xeon CPU for 5500 pounds or dollars with 256GB storage......... that’s less then Microsoft’s Xbox Series S 512GB faster storage and the entire machine is 250 pounds or dollars.
I simply don’t understand the complaints that the cheapest model isn’t the best. It never has been.
Makes about as much sense as people complaining the entry level M1 MacBook Air and Mini weren't also taking out the highest end PC's, therefore what's all the fuss about?
Never mind that Apples new ENTRY LEVEL machines were easily besting well over 3/4's of the existing PCs out there.
People who only ever see the glass as half empty are so tedious.
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.
titantiger said: That's my complaint - not that the entry level isn't the top of the line model, but that the entry level went up in price but down several pretty important areas. And there isn't even a $1099 model option at all.
Are they really important areas that were dropped? I notice you left out the dramatic upgrade in the screen - both in size, resolution and image quality. How many machines at this level would have anything plugged into the ports you are bemoaning as missing? Hell I have friends with computers less than a dozen feet from their cable modems and they still insist on using Wifi because it's more convenient
Also what makes you think if they hadn't released this iMac that the old $1099 would remain at $1099? I dunno if you noticed but during this pandemic prices of electronics have been rising - not just for Apple but on the PC side of things too. And that's if you can find components to buy
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.
The old iMac's design hadn't changed since 2012, so they were very much in credit for design spend on that one, which could be used to justify lower pricing on this. Also continuing to use a 4200rpm drive in what is positioned as a premium computer was an embarrassment. Having an awful 4200RPM drive in the previous model doesn't justify higher pricing for the measly 256GB SSD in this. The cost of drive + mounting hardware + controller + connectors was certainly more than the cost of the single NAND chip needed to bump the storage from 64GB in the fusion drive SSD to 256GB. The old Minis never had a HDD, and yet the price on those dropped $100 when they switched to the M1 and bumped the storage from 128GB SSD to 256GB. Care to explain that? Also if you hadn't noticed, Apple never drops prices on their products unless they're replacing it with a newer one, or a serious flop and they have too many in the channel, i.e. the HomePod.
titantiger said: But I am the customer for it. I've owned three iMacs since 2002.
If a year from now this is the only Apple Silicon Mac they have produced then you win.
Until then, your hysteria is overrated. This is *an* iMac. Obviously not the one for you. Or for me either. I was hoping to see at 27" replacement, but this obviously isn't it so we both get to wait some more. How will we ever survive the suspense.
It is a serious upgrade for the former 21" though - and the return of colors is a nice touch I hope they carry over to other new Apple Silicon Macs. Although I agree with others - a black or space gray in there wouldn't kill them.
4.5K resolution hints that the 27" replacement might be 6K. Now that would really be worth waiting fore, especially if they bump the size up by an inch too. My over 40 eyes will always appreciate more physical screen real estate!
I'm not hysterical over it. I'm just pointing out some glaring issues with how they went about this.
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.
The base model doesn't have the same power brick.
It’s a configurable option. If you need it, you add it.
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.
*in your opinion. But since we're passing off opinion as fact with no sourcing at all, I'll claim that most people would find the base 8GB RAM lacking. That's more likely true than your "fact".
Comments
I mean if they never produced the Mac Pro or an M1 Mac Mini that also has USB A ports then I would share your pessimism, but I think the new Mac Pro and the re-emergence of USB A on the Mac Mini - heck, the release of the MacBook Air without the blasted touch bar too - indicates that today's Apple is at least a little willing to tilt more to the practical side of things.
Also every pro audio guy/gal I know has DACs over Thunderbolt or USB for their signal path. Or a Mac Pro full of cards. No one is using blutooth, and they certainly aren't using a 3.5mm jack (side OR back) for "Pro Audio".
Purely questioning why something possible in the thinner iPad apparently isn't possible in the thicker iMac is not something that can be "erroneous". Which you haven't actually answered, you've just said "but the iMac isn't like the iPad because it has the logic board in the chin". We established that a while ago, but you are still beating on about it. But you still haven't explained why you think the logic board can't be behind the display, even though my solution was to have it thicker. It's a desktop computer, not a laptop.
However it’s incredibly overpriced, and I can see a 16GB 1TB model being 2 grand. And I bet anything you cannot upgrade any of those components yourself.
The port is in the power brick.
Until then, your hysteria is overrated. This is *an* iMac. Obviously not the one for you. Or for me either. I was hoping to see at 27" replacement, but this obviously isn't it so we both get to wait some more. How will we ever survive the suspense.
It is a serious upgrade for the former 21" though - and the return of colors is a nice touch I hope they carry over to other new Apple Silicon Macs. Although I agree with others - a black or space gray in there wouldn't kill them.
4.5K resolution hints that the 27" replacement might be 6K. Now that would really be worth waiting for, especially if they bump the size up by an inch too. My over 40 eyes will always appreciate more physical screen real estate!
Never mind that Apples new ENTRY LEVEL machines were easily besting well over 3/4's of the existing PCs out there.
People who only ever see the glass as half empty are so tedious.
Also what makes you think if they hadn't released this iMac that the old $1099 would remain at $1099? I dunno if you noticed but during this pandemic prices of electronics have been rising - not just for Apple but on the PC side of things too. And that's if you can find components to buy