Apple released the iMac 24 years ago and it's better than ever

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 28
    chasmchasm Posts: 2,574member
    The original iMac also changed my world ... it was through my work educating users of both Macs and PC about how remarkable the iMac was that I eventually landed a job with Apple Marketing for a year. I actually didn't own one until I went to the Macworld where they introduced the all-white one, and I found one for super-cheap so I grabbed it. I think I still had it until the year the iPhone came out, though I had moved on to Apple's notebooks by that point for day-to-day use.

    The latest iMacs finally fulfill Steve's vision, both for the iMac and what he would have liked (had the technology existed) for the original Mac: almost all screen, silent normal operation, thin as possible. Everyone rags on Ive for his obsession with thin, but I think Steve was attached to that idea well before Jony even started working for Apple -- it just wasn't anywhere near as possible as it is today. I am very very sure he would be delighted if he were alive to see the current iMac.

    As for the 27-inch, I'm very much doubting there will be an affordable consumer version with that size screen (or larger) ever offered. Once again, we absolutely DO NOT represent the mainstream of Apple buyers, and that needs to be remembered. I have my doubts about even an iMac Pro -- given that the Mac Studio exists. The Max version of the Studio is less than half the price of the old iMac Pro, and the Ultra version of the Studio is still $1K LESS than the iMac Pro, and a new iMac Pro would naturally be priced similarly to the Studio+Studio Display.

    For people who still use desktops at all, the present iMac is damn near the perfect productivity computer. Sure kicks the crap out of any Windows PC AIO ...
    tenthousandthings9secondkox2
  • Reply 22 of 28
    https://www.imore.com/2020-imac-review


    The big iMac is the quintessential Mac. The all in one that put the category on the map. It’s the ultimate representation of desktop computing as an integrated system. 

    The 2020 iMac is one of the best apple computers ever, one of the best performing, and a fantastic deal. 

    A Mac Studio is nice for the Mac mini buyers who need more than the mini and for the Mac Pro buyers who have no Mac Pro to buy. But it is nowhere near a replacement for the iMac. 

    The only caveat is that Apple needs to leave the crazy Mac studio pricing with the Mac studio. And there is zero reason not to expect fair pricing when apple was shelling out to Intel and Nvidia with the 2020 iMac - and increased the webcam to 1080p. The only thing stopping decent pricing is corporate greed. 

    As the iMac Pro stood in for the Mac Pro while the modern Mac Pro was being designed, the iMac is anything but an entry level family device. It’s s workhorse and a professional dream machine. Sure if you want a stock m1 small iMac, that may work well for your kitchen. But the larger iMac is s professional tool that rips through jobs on an elite level. An apple silicon version would be the ultimate Mac. 
    edited August 16 elijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 23 of 28
    https://www.imore.com/2020-imac-review


    The big iMac is the quintessential Mac. The all in one that put the category on the map. It’s the ultimate representation of desktop computing as an integrated system. 

    The 2020 iMac is one of the best apple computers ever, one of the best performing, and a fantastic deal. 

    A Mac Studio is nice for the Mac mini buyers who need more than the mini and for the Mac Pro buyers who have no Mac Pro to buy. But it is nowhere near a replacement for the iMac. 

    The only caveat is that Apple needs to leave the crazy Mac studio pricing with the Mac studio. And there is zero reason not to expect fair pricing when apple was shelling out to Intel and Nvidia with the 2020 iMac - and increased the webcam to 1080p. The only thing stopping decent pricing is corporate greed. 

    As the iMac Pro stood in for the Mac Pro while the modern Mac Pro was being designed, the iMac is anything but an entry level family device. It’s s workhorse and a professional dream machine. Sure if you want a stock m1 small iMac, that may work well for your kitchen. But the larger iMac is s professional tool that rips through jobs on an elite level. An apple silicon version would be the ultimate Mac. 
    [AMD, not “Nvidia,” of course.] What you say is largely true, but you are looking back, not ahead. Plus, your sense of it being a bargain relative to the Mac Studio + Studio Display (and your claim of “gouging”) ignores a few things. Yes, the 5K iMac was a bargain if you were happy with the base configurations, but for anyone else the BTO pricing was similar to the Mac Studio. I think I paid about $4500, all told (including 32 GB of high-quality third-party RAM), an i7 with best graphics and 2 TB storage.

    Looking ahead, there are things Apple can do with the Mac Studio that they could never do with the iMac. Starting with displays. They could produce a line of different displays aimed at different uses.

    Another thing that is easier to do with the Mac Studio is subscriptions. That’s coming soon, possibly very soon, for the iPhone (and probably also the Watch), but Macs won’t be far behind. Swapping out the Mac Studio module every year or so is a far simpler proposition than an entire iMac. It’s a better model, more reality-based, it acknowledges that display technology evolves at a different rate than SoC technology.
    edited August 17
  • Reply 24 of 28
    darkvader said:
    Dead_Pool said:
    Many have no idea how close Apple was to going under when the iMac was released. There was virtually no chance it would survive in the face of the onslaught by industry-standard Windows, which had finally been able to copy the Mac’s ease of use after more than a decade of trying. Today, Apple is arguably the most powerful company to ever exist. Truly unbelievable, and all thanks to one man: Steve Jobs. 
    All of that is complete bunk.

    Apple was in no danger of going under.  Apple was consistently profitable, had a huge chunk of cash in the bank, and was making far better computers than everybody else.

    Where Apple was struggling was with the development of the next generation operating system.  The NeXT purchase made sense for picking up a good UNIX-based OS, but sadly came with Steve Jobs, the man who was very justifiably fired from Apple in the early '80s.  Had Amelio been slightly more competent the first thing he'd have done after buying NeXT would have been to fire Jobs again, or at least contain him to the marketing department, with no influence on computer design.

    Oh, and Microsoft didn't approach Macintosh ease of use for another decade and a half.  The ONLY release they've ever had that came close was Windows 7, what they had in the '90s was absolute garbage.  I know there were people at the time saying things like "Windows 95 = Macintosh 87" but the reality was very different, Win95 was still ultimately a shell on top of DOS.
    Thanks for trolling with all your false information.  We get it, you hate Steve Jobs.  Apple was 3 months away from bankruptcy after filing a loss of $750M for the prior quarter.  They were not profitable, they were bleeding.  Ship with a big hole in it.  Apple had 32 SKUs of garbage products.  There is even a keynote that shows all 32 SKUs of Macs that made no sense.  Their Macs in the 90s were riddled with quality problems.  Bad PowerBooks and cheap PowerPC Macs running on a 680x0 32bit board for most models. And then the Performas added to the mess.  The iMac and Steve Jobs saved Apple.
  • Reply 25 of 28
    I would not say the iMac is better than ever.  The 24" is a poor design.  No SD slot, headphone jack on the side, Ethernet in a power brick?  Limited to 16GB of RAM, limited to 2TB of storage, no dedicated graphics, and the M1 has slower multi-core scores than Intel.  Without improved graphics, the prior models with dedicated GPUs smoked the M1.  Once Apple makes an iMac with the M Pro and M Max CPUs, like the new MacBook Pros, then they will be worthy once again...and bringing back the 27" model.
  • Reply 26 of 28
    danoxdanox Posts: 1,329member
    darkvader said:
    Dead_Pool said:
    Many have no idea how close Apple was to going under when the iMac was released. There was virtually no chance it would survive in the face of the onslaught by industry-standard Windows, which had finally been able to copy the Mac’s ease of use after more than a decade of trying. Today, Apple is arguably the most powerful company to ever exist. Truly unbelievable, and all thanks to one man: Steve Jobs. 
    All of that is complete bunk.

    Apple was in no danger of going under.  Apple was consistently profitable, had a huge chunk of cash in the bank, and was making far better computers than everybody else.

    Where Apple was struggling was with the development of the next generation operating system.  The NeXT purchase made sense for picking up a good UNIX-based OS, but sadly came with Steve Jobs, the man who was very justifiably fired from Apple in the early '80s.  Had Amelio been slightly more competent the first thing he'd have done after buying NeXT would have been to fire Jobs again, or at least contain him to the marketing department, with no influence on computer design.

    Oh, and Microsoft didn't approach Macintosh ease of use for another decade and a half.  The ONLY release they've ever had that came close was Windows 7, what they had in the '90s was absolute garbage.  I know there were people at the time saying things like "Windows 95 = Macintosh 87" but the reality was very different, Win95 was still ultimately a shell on top of DOS.
    Apple had the equivalent of 3.5 billion dollars and no debt when Steve Jobs took over, those CEO’s after Steve Jobs the first time around may not have been the best but they did one right, they were profitable and didn’t create debt something that most people/companies can’t do live within a budget, great idea’s by Job’s (Next) and no debt saved Apple, if you were still using Apple computers (1997-2000) nothing coming from Microsoft played any part, for me personally at the time new Mac’s and OS X made it a easy decision to use Apple computers, it also made it a easy decision to buy shares later on.
  • Reply 27 of 28
    danoxdanox Posts: 1,329member
    darkvader said:
    Dead_Pool said:
    Many have no idea how close Apple was to going under when the iMac was released. There was virtually no chance it would survive in the face of the onslaught by industry-standard Windows, which had finally been able to copy the Mac’s ease of use after more than a decade of trying. Today, Apple is arguably the most powerful company to ever exist. Truly unbelievable, and all thanks to one man: Steve Jobs. 
    All of that is complete bunk.

    Apple was in no danger of going under.  Apple was consistently profitable, had a huge chunk of cash in the bank, and was making far better computers than everybody else.

    Where Apple was struggling was with the development of the next generation operating system.  The NeXT purchase made sense for picking up a good UNIX-based OS, but sadly came with Steve Jobs, the man who was very justifiably fired from Apple in the early '80s.  Had Amelio been slightly more competent the first thing he'd have done after buying NeXT would have been to fire Jobs again, or at least contain him to the marketing department, with no influence on computer design.

    Oh, and Microsoft didn't approach Macintosh ease of use for another decade and a half.  The ONLY release they've ever had that came close was Windows 7, what they had in the '90s was absolute garbage.  I know there were people at the time saying things like "Windows 95 = Macintosh 87" but the reality was very different, Win95 was still ultimately a shell on top of DOS.

    Even today still, except for the Apple Watch almost everything Apple does that makes the big bucks (the core elements) was green lighted by Steve Jobs. No Steve Jobs no Apple by 2001.
  • Reply 28 of 28
    pbpb Posts: 4,244member
    DAalseth said:
    My favourite was the lamp. I had a 17” one and loved it. Right now I have a 21.5” Intel iMac. It’s fine for a mid teens computer. But I’d like to update it to an M2.
    Right, the "lamp" had the most original design ever:



    Unfortunately I did not have the opportunity to use one. Now I am on a 27-inch iMac overloaded with RAM. It is three years old now and it still feels like new. Loads of memory and the Core i5 certainly help here but its time will pass. I hope bigger than 24-inch iMac will return in the future; I would not like to go down in screen size when the time will come, after having used the iMac in full 5K resolution.



Sign In or Register to comment.