PauloSeraa

Newsflash: the iMac form factor is not attractive anymore, and that makes perfect sense. The iMac rose to popularity during an era where the alternative for a desktop computer was hideous, and despite the iMac's success, the competition remain hideous for a long, long time. Over 25 years it created some life-long iMac users. But here is the truth about iMac today: it's not portable, it's not upgradable and it's not reusable. The display on the iMac will outlast the PC inside it by several years. Heck, the 2014 5K iMac has a better display on it than most people are using on their desk today, and yet that machine is already obsolete. And because they are impossible to sell or trade in due to bulk and weight, these things become useless paperweights after a relatively short amount of time. Compare this to a Mac Mini or Mac Studio + a Studio display experience. The Studio display creates the same elegant look on the desk, and the small desktops take a up a minimal amount of space and can even be hidden inside/under a desk. The main selling point of the iMac becomes less attractive as a result. And now, you can upgrade the mini/studio several times while keeping the same display, which will surely outlast the computer in terms of usability over time.

The proof is in the sales. Apple hasn't even seen it worth their time to upgrade it to an M2 to keep it current, with M3 already on the horizon. Undoubtedly Apple is warring with itself right now over discontinuing its once-critical iMac, or spending money to update a Mac that doesn't sell.

It amazes me the lengths these guys will go to build a fantasy around something in hopes that people believe they are committed to it. In truth Apple will drop Vision Pro entirely if it doesn't sell well enough. Presale data isn't good, and Tim's continued experiment to see how much he can convince people to pay for something is starting to unravel. Apple simply does not do low volume products. They either cancel them entirely, or they let them die on the vine for ages while the 8 customers who bought into the idea are left hanging in the wind. Given the general feeling toward VR headsets on the market, the presale numbers most likely reflect a huge chunk of the people even interested in buying a Vision Pro, leaving day to day sales from here out to be scarce. If Apple can't even sell half a million units in the first year, their interest in the category will quickly diminish. Everyone assumes that version 2 is a given, but that's a bad assumption. Apple does not throw good money after bad, and they've already spent exorbitant amounts of money on the development of something that has amounted to an iPad for your face that costs $3,500, and requires wearing an objectionable piece hardware that is heavy, uncomfortable for any length time, nausea-inducing for most people, tethered to the wall, and completely world-isolating. What other Apple product even comes close to having that many negative tradeoffs? There is almost nothing good that you can say about this product that isn't outweighed but its downsides.

Apple has said that AR is the future, and I agree. So they go and build a VR headset, something no one anywhere thinks is the future, and try to do AR with it.

AR is all about the view finder. We already have the ability in software to do amazing things with AR, but they're nothing more than a tech demo until we get the view finder right. And a VR headset is not it. No more closer than holding an iPhone up to your face and looking through the lens of the camera. Apple knows this, and knows that glasses are the wearable of the future, and that everyday glasses that can be powered by iPhone to project AR into your world are a game changer. They also know that the technology to do this well is still several years away, and Tim Cook knows he won't be CEO by the time that comes around. He wanted spatial computing to be part of his legacy so badly that he pushed a product onto market years before it was ready, bolstered by his successes with overcharging customers in the last several years. Things like raising the price of products every time a new feature is added is a Tim Cook invention that customers have rewarded him for, and it has led to some poor decisions...Vision Pro's release being the pinnacle.

jellybelly said:

1.)  I don’t think anyone has predicted that 24” iMacs might be upgraded not only with M2 but also with M2 Pro and M2 Max SOC as “scary fast” options.  I’d expect the M2 Max will be faster than the base M3.

For the iMac 24”, that could be a “scary” fast option of interest for many—including folks with a Studio Display they already have or would get so they’d have a two monitor system with power in the tank. 

There could be an introduction of a 27” or 30” or 32” iMac with the M2 Pro or M2 Max.   That would make sense. It would fill a long time stretch of no upgrades on that product. The M2 Pro & M2 Max are already in production and this would avoid the supply crunch on the M3 SOC. 

2.)  Another thought is—why would Apple schedule a reveal and compete for audience just when game 3 of the World Series starts?

Maybe the reveal will followed by (or be in) a series of ads during the World Series game, with a bigger ad just before the game start of 5:03pm PDT, and a repeat or second ad during 7th inning stretch.  And short 20 second or less ads during the game hi-lighting gaming on iPhone and the new iMacs as reinforcement teasers. It would be a rather larger audience and during a sporting event, in which they might also reveal expanded MLB showings beyond the Friday night deal. 

If Apple planned M2 spec bumps for the 24" iMac, which are already way overdue, that would hardly be event worthy. If they're going to update this stale product at all, they might as well do it with an M3 so it can remain relevant while it languishes for a few more years. And at this stage, there is zero evidence of an imminent launch of any other iMac model. And if MacBook Pros are indeed on the table, then M3 Pro and M3 Max are the next chips in line. And if Apple is showing off M3 Pro and M3 Max, it stands to reason that they would show the base M3 first. Logically, what makes sense is a M3 iMac followed by an M3 Pro and M3 Max MBP.

The timing is thought to coincide with Japanese business hours, because there is some sort of gaming announcement that involves a Japanese game company.

Mike Wuerthele said:

rob53 said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

canukstorm said:

"Our review unit had a 512GB SSD" => How much RAM did your review consist of?

8GB. We use what we can get our hands on this early in the process.

Apple seeded beefy review units to YouTubers. We are not amongst that crowd.

This is something AI needs to work on. 😉

There’s too many YouTubers without real technical abilities. AI has access to people who’ve been in the business for years, providing real technical information. Time for AI to stand up and push for test equipment that people should actually buy. 

As for Apple’s worthless base model, I’ve never bought that version for home use or for (huge) corporate use since 1989.  

For whatever the reason, the "big three" meaning 9to5, MacRumors, and AppleInsider, don't get seeded with review units early, despite having our own YT channels, and for some of us, over 30 years of experience talking about and using this gear. We all try, and are greeted with silence.

Maybe it has something to do with spending all day, every day setting unrealistic expectations for Apple.

Amazingly, it's the first product Apple has ever introduced that no one actually wants to use. Oh, some people want the experience it unlocks, for sure. But no one actually wants to use the product...they will use it in spite of it. No one actually wants a gigantic, heavy, nausea-inducing, world-isolating headset. Not for anything. And certainly not for what amounts to an iPad strapped to their head. So every single user will be someone who is putting up with that awful hardware in order to get access to an interesting software experience. What kind of potential does that actually have?

I feel like Apple is doing an awful lot of pretending here. And those championing the product are too. Riding the coattails of other confident successes where Apple was right to be confident. There are seeing if they can actually fake the confidence, and create a market as a result. I just don't see it, because you will never fake people into spending $3500+, and you won't fake them into wearing it for any length of time.

No one ever looked at the iPhone and said, "Ugh I have to hold this thing in order to use it?" 
No one ever looked at the Apple Watch and said "Ugh I have to wear this thing in order to use it?"
No one ever looked at the HomePod and said "Ugh I have to plug this thing in and put it out of the way somewhere in order to use it?"
No one ever looked at the AppleTV and said "Ugh I have to plug this thing into my TV and watch it?"

These are not objectionable products. The VisionPro is objectionable hardware from the start. People in the microscopic VR community seem to take for granted that shitty uncomfortable hardware is to be expected if you want such an experience. That shouldn't be acceptable to Apple, because it certainly isn't acceptable to average consumers.

Marvin said:

AppleInsider said:

"The mini has changed the direction of screen assembly," wrote the leaker (in translation) as spotted by MacRumors, "and the jelly screen phenomenon has been improved."

That change of screen assembly direction does fit with iFixit's supposition that the position of components is exacerbating the issue.

This video says they changed the refresh direction with the mini 6 and the jelly effect is just noticeable because iPads are more often held in portrait when reading:



It doesn't happen in landscape (3:11). By switching it around, it will now happen in landscape like on older iPad minis. Here is an iPad mini 4 with jelly scrolling in landscape:



The proper fixes will be using ProMotion 120Hz with faster refresh or eventually using OLED.

Correct. The proper fix is to stop cheaping out on the hardware and add ProMotion to the mid-tier iPads after its 6 year run as an exclusive feature of iPad Pro.

Apple of the 2000s and 2010s I would say no chance would they chase this worthless fad all the way to a production product. But the current Apple under this leadership? The Apple that thinks Vision Pro is shippable product. Anything is possible. 

I prefer the comparisons to the M1 MBP because there are far more of those users eyeing up this product (myself included) than anyone who just bought an M2 a few months ago.

InspiredCode said:

They basically don't want to contribute to Apple R&D and profits. After profit, Apple essentially uses the device revenue to fund hardware R&D and the App Store revenue to fund R&D for the operating system and built-in apps. I doubt Apple will return to paying for operating systems, so the cost needs to be factored in somewhere. 

I can see where makers of free apps, freemium apps, and one-time-purchase apps might think the alternative stores are not fair for them. The marketplace rules certainly seem more geared to apps with subscription revenue. However, they are not complaining about that, they just don't want to pay Apple anything and that will never happen. 

I don't think Apple's store is a bad deal for most types of apps. My criticism over the years has always been that some store restrictions go too far in the name of protecting the platform, there is no way to follow GPL licensing for apps on the store (ability to remove DRM etc.), and certain types of digital content just fundamentally doesn't work with App Store pricing. If alternative markets have any effect, I would prefer it to address these areas. Better, that Apple will just resolve these issues on their App Store.

My only issue with any of it has been Apple's selective enforcement of their rules based on who they are dealing with. An app like Amazon could never exist under the literal terms of the App Store TOS, but it does, and Apple's reasoning has been: "...because its Amazon..."

I came for Titanium and stayed for Titanium. The thing feels so incredible in the hand, better than any of the last several generations of iPhone, that I haven't even put a case on it yet.