Apple iMac gets a design refresh, faster M1 hardware and colors galore

[punctualturn]

Funny how nobody has commented on the clearly money grab that is the stupid proprietary power brick.

I mean, it uses a magsafe type connector for a desktop.

And of course, they have a base model that doesnt include the ridiculous ethernet port.

They could had use a standard USB C connector for power.

Then again, this thing doesnt need to be this thin that it cannot hold a proper ethernet port or internal power supply.

 

[QuaZulu]

The criticism of a SOC that includes RAM and logic on one (much faster) chip is the 2021 version of the "an iMac doesn't have a floppy drive, parallel ports, or PS2 ports" complaints of 1997.

The iMac M1 systems are both significantly cheaper than competing PCs with similar specs and have speeds that no comparable Intel or AMD powered system can match. I think the average person will be fine with that compromise, just as they were fine with Apple's decision to ditch other Wintel legacies like the floppy drive in years past.

You can see this trend in the mobile space as well -- Samsung and others who used to hail "removable batteries" and other legacy concepts like SD cards have since come around to removing those from their phones to remain competitive. Within the next couple of years, SOC systems from Intel and AMD are inevitable, they won't have upgradeable RAM either, and nobody will care.



While that might be true for Windows PCs due to the bloated nature of that OS, it's not accurate for Macs. I have a 1 TB drive on my Intel MacBook, and about half is devoted to a Windows partition. That OS gobbles up storage like no tomorrow; whereas OS X is quite a bit less hungry.

Just checked my MacBook Pro's storage. The OS uses not quite 19 GB. A clean install of Big Sur would leave about 220 GB of free space, which is plenty for the sort of user who purchases an entry-level $1,299 Mac.

Mac users also tend to heavily leverage the cloud due to the integration of advanced cloud storage options into the OS; that tends to keep the usage and storage space down.

I'd like to meet the person who can easily fill up 100+ GB with "personal files." That's likely to primarily be someone editing large amounts of video, and that sort of user is probably going to have a NAT for additional storage.

Say, perhaps, there's a grain of truth here (although one could even go to any boutique PC seller to build a system that completely blows the doors off any of these "new" Apple systems - this at a @ 30% mark-up!), I'd like to see the real world evidence. IMO Apple sells much less tech at a much higher price (you're being ripped off 2x!). It was their modus 25+ years ago when I left them for good. What they provide is a "shiny sandbox." If one is dazzled by colors ("oooh, colors") and is happy in their sandbox, the real world is gonna seem a scary place.

But, again, say I'm wrong. I'd like so see that in the testing here. I think there's a very good reason that places like Techspot test Intel vs. AMD or Nvidia vs. AMD. I think that's because Apple would be blown off the list (particularly the price/performance one!). And I suspect that it would be tough to get an "Apples to apples" comparison since software would have to be designed to operate in each environment. And trying to operate real world testing on an Apple is like trying to run a democracy in today's Russia. But, ask the Russians. They'll tell you its the best government in the world!

 

[CommonSenseTech]

Again, this is an illustration of diversity and how it manifests in personal computing.

Some of us view real-world performance, stability, security, reliability and yes, aesthetics as the core pillars of how well a computer performs. An elegant, thin, light, beautifully integrated, stable and secure machine is a lovely thing for folks in that camp.

Others rate speeds-and-feeds and bragging rights in "benchmarks" as performance, and are willing to endure endless registry errors, frequent malware problems (either infections or endless futzing with a pile of malware-prevention tech), stability issues, chunky/clunky/ugly hardware, poor software UX (regedit in 2021?!?) and heat issues as prices they're willing to pay to get those bragging rights. And while I don't begrudge those users their choices, I find the inverse need to rip on well-engineered, usable hardware to be a bit bizarre.

 

[CommonSenseTech]

Then again, this thing doesnt need to be this thing that it cannot hold a proper ethernet port or internal power supply.

It also lacks a parallel port, 3.5" HD floppy drive, and chunky ginormous ATX power supply! The horror!

 

[Crinkles]

Say, perhaps, there's a grain of truth here (although one could even go to any boutique PC seller to build a system that completely blows the doors off any of these "new" Apple systems - this at a @ 30% mark-up!), I'd like to see the real world evidence. IMO Apple sells much less tech at a much higher price (you're being ripped off 2x!). It was their modus 25+ years ago when I left them for good. What they provide is a "shiny sandbox." If one is dazzled by colors ("oooh, colors") and is happy in their sandbox, the real world is gonna seem a scary place.

But, again, say I'm wrong. I'd like so see that in the testing here. I think there's a very good reason that places like Techspot test Intel vs. AMD or Nvidia vs. AMD. I think that's because Apple would be blown off the list (particularly the price/performance one!). And I suspect that it would be tough to get an "Apples to apples" comparison since software would have to be designed to operate in each environment. And trying to operate real world testing on an Apple is like trying to run a democracy in today's Russia. But, ask the Russians. They'll tell you its the best government in the world!

This is from a Geekbench run some of the laptop sites use.

Intel I-7 8700k @stock. Asus Z390 mainboard PC.
Geekbench 5 Score
1290 Single-Core Score
7058 Multi-Core Score

Apples M1 is slightly faster, there are good reasons why it is faster.

Apple "M1"
Geekbench 5 Score
1740 Single-Core Score
7667 Multi-Core Score

There are users touching the fringes of modern technology, as in other areas of life, who demand that everyone think and be exactly like they are. For the rest of us a machine that does the job at hand is good.

And GREAT is reserved for gods.

Perhaps the funniest bit is that Apple will sell millions of them to happy customers who won’t care at all that they don’t have a floppy drive, parallel port, PS2 port, cartridge port, etc.

And Apple is the first major computer maker to ship a SOC in a personal computer. AMD and Intel’s SOCs are for industrial applications like cars and microwaves.

The first SOC was in a $2,100 Hamilton Pulsar digital watch, first shown by Johnny Carson in 1970. Stuff computers, accurate timekeeping is orders of magnitude more important to humankind.

 

[CommonSenseTech]

If you want to be pedantic, the Pulsar was an early mobile device.

 

[Crinkles]

If you want to be pedantic, the Pulsar was an early mobile device.

You just did.

Whoever said that watch went anywhere?