Apple Announced the 24-Inch iMac Three Years Ago Today

[satchmo]

Imagine THIS iMac "wedge" concept with a bit of that kind of thinking... through a consumer instead of a shareholders lens.

...

But what do I know? I'm just an Apple consumer. Why care about me when there's shareholders to delight?

The question then becomes, will things ever change with Tim Cook at the helm? I highly doubt it.

And when he does pass the torch, will the new CEO be any different?

I'm not feeling the vibe with any of the current senior executives that they're willing to change course. One can only hope they have a different vision for Apple. And perhaps are holding their cards close to their chest and for now, simply following Tim's direction.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

While Jobs certainly cared about revenue & profit too as evidenced in many instances such as "you're holding it wrong" the key difference is that Jobs SEEMED to put customer delight above shareholder delight... or more properly stated: Jobs SEEMED to think shareholder delight would be a byproduct of customer delight. Whether that was actual or Jobs was just better at facilitating that illusion is not clear.

Cook SEEMS overly focused- perhaps even intoxicated- on the steady beat of "another record quarter..." announcements. That seems paramount above all else and just about anything & everything will be done in support of it. As such, we've witnessed a steady evolution of moves designed to harvest more revenue per unit sold. He's thoroughly succeeded at that. Apple is generally around "richest company in the world" and Apple fans will passionately argue that an iMac 27" monitor alone is perfectly justified at whole iMac 27" former pricing, etc, etc.

If you are a shareholder (FIRST), you've ridden a highly-enriching wave of share gains for more than a decade with these kinds of moves. If you're a customer (FIRST), you've basically rolled with some punches you may not love and just paid up, further feeding THAT fire at your own expense.

Is one way better than the other? It depends on how you measure. Through a consumer lens, you are paying more than ever to margin, which means money spent is not actually paying for the thing you're buying but fattening the wealth of the corp and shareholders. Through a shareholder lens, you've piled up gains on top of gains as long-term goodwill keeps motivating people to "pay anything" over going some other way.

Where does this lead? IDK. TBD. Goodwill burn is not forever. At some point, relative pricing far above market rates seems like it must catch up to Apple. How long can customers look around at 8TB of m.2 for under $700 and opt to "just pay" $2200 for that upgrade. Or 32GB of RAM for $100 but opt to "just pay" $400+ for it?

Else, hello 5 TRILLION, then 6 TRILLION, then 10 TRILLION, etc.

 

[tenthousandthings]

That would be a great feature to have

Apple used to allow this with their target display mode:

Use your iMac as a display with target display mode - Apple Support

Target display mode is a feature available with certain older Mac models.

support.apple.com

I would love to see Apple bring back that feature - It would be much easier/cheaper for me to just purchase a new M series Mac mini every few years for $599 so that I can just plug it into my M1 iMac (if Apple comes out with a software update to allow target display mode) a bonus would be to allow all the existing iMac features to work while doing this i.e. microphone camera, etc.

If they do that, and I hope they will, it would only be for the M1 iMac and later. I also think it will be an advance over Target Display Mode, if you think about how Sidecar works now and Airplay, it’s a different world from when TDM was conceived.

 

[123]

It replaced both the 21.5-inch and the 27-inch Intel iMacs, and represented a recommitment to the long-standing desktop product line.

Actually, it was the end of it. 24-inch in 2021, after people had 27-inch iMacs for 7 years, what a colossal failure.

 

[devinher]

Today marks the three-year anniversary of Apple's announcement of the 24-inch iMac, a transformative redesign featuring the first integration of Apple silicon in the product line.

Apple unveiled the new 24-inch iMac on April 20, 2021, almost nine years after the previous iMac redesign debuted. It replaced both the 21.5-inch and the 27-inch Intel iMacs, and represented a recommitment to the long-standing desktop product line.

The highly anticipated redesign offers a much thinner and more compact body compared to its predecessors, available in an array of vibrant colors reminiscent of the original iMacs released in the late 1990s. The 24-inch 4.5K Retina display boasts 11.3 million pixels and support for 1 billion colors.

The new model was not only notable for its updated design but also as the inaugural iMac to incorporate Apple silicon, one of the last Macs to make the transition away from Intel. Apple claimed that the M1 chip delivered up to 85% faster CPU performance and up to two-times faster GPU performance compared to the previous 21.5-inch iMac models. The new iMac also offered a 1080p FaceTime HD camera, studio-quality microphones, and a six-speaker sound system, as well as a color-matched Magic Keyboard with Touch ID.

Apple refreshed the 24-inch iMac with the M3 chip, Wi-Fi 6E, and Bluetooth 5.3 in November 2023. Rumors suggest that a larger-screened iMac that could be positioned as an iMac Pro will launch in 2025. In June 2023, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said that the high-end iMac was a year or two away from launching as work on the device was still in the early stages.

Article Link: Apple Announced the 24-Inch iMac Three Years Ago Today

The most sterile, boring design Apple has ever put out. It looks like a generic "computer" a film production team might throw together to avoid any branding.

Speaking of which, the only Apple logo visible is on the back. How many people set up their computer so that anything but the front is visible?

The previous generation was sexy as hell. This design is a massive disappointment.

 

[Biro]

While Jobs certainly cared about revenue & profit too as evidenced in many instances such as "you're holding it wrong" the key difference is that Jobs SEEMED to put customer delight about shareholder delight... or more properly stated, Jobs SEEMED to think shareholder delight would be a byproduct of customer delight. Whether that was actual or Jobs was just better at facilitating that illusion is not clear.

Cook SEEMS overly focused- perhaps even intoxicated- on the steady beat of "another record quarter..." announcements. That seem paramount above all else and just about anything & everything will be done in support of it. As such, we've witnessed a steady evolution of moves designed to harvest more revenue per unit sold. He's thoroughly succeeded at that. Apple is generally around "richest company in the world" and Apple fans will passionately argue that an iMac 27" monitor alone is perfectly justified at whole iMac 27" former pricing, etc, etc.

If you are a shareholder (FIRST), you've ridden an highly-enriching wave for more than a decade with these kinds of moves. If you're a customer (FIRST), you've basically rolled with some punches you may not love and just paid up, further feeding THAT fire at your own expense.

Is one way better than the other? It depends on how you measure. Through a consumer lens, you are paying more than ever to margin, which means money spent is not actually paying for the thing you're buying but fattening the wealth of the corp and shareholders. Through a shareholder lens, you've piled up gains on top of gains as long-term goodwill keeps motivating people to "pay anything" over going some other way.

Where does this lead? IDK. TBD. Goodwill burn is not forever. At some point, relative pricing far above market rates seems like it must catch up to Apple. How long can customers look around at 8TB of m.2 for under $700 and opt to "just pay" $2200 for that upgrade. Or 32GB of RAM for $100 but opt to "just pay" $400+ for it?

Else, hello 5 TRILLION, then 6 TRILLION, then 10 TRILLION, etc.

While many of the Apple faithful would never switch ecosystems, what’s missing from the market right now is a viable alternative. Apple enrages me at times but the Windows experience (particularly Windows 11) rules that out for me and many others. Likewise Android. Alternatives have been offered in the past but can’t seem to gain traction. Ironically, Windows Phone was a very nice OS, although who knows what it would have evolved into. For a full computer OS, people keep talking about Linux but no system ever seems to be fully developed.

 

[beatrixwillius]

My iMac with 32 GB and 1 TB ComboDrive is now 5.5 years old. Recently, I checked the specs of iMacs. Nowadays there isn't even a single iMac with 32 GB. And the screens are smaller, too.

 

[citysnaps]

No need to upgrade every year. They work fine for the consumer audience it's intended for.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

While many of the Apple faithful would never switch ecosystems, what’s missing from the market right now is a viable alternative. Apple enrages me at times but the Windows experience (particularly Windows 11) rules that out for me and many others. Likewise Android. Alternatives have been offered in the past but can’t seem to gain traction. Ironically, Windows Phone was a very nice OS, although who knows what it would have evolved into. For a full computer OS, people keep talking about Linux but no system ever seems to be fully developed.

Ironically, embracing silicon as a long-term working Mac guy meant I needed to re-embrace PC too in the form of "old fashioned bootcamp" (as ARM Windows is not full Windows, so not a suitable alternative to me). So I purchased a PC. I did it begrudgingly because I had let some of our Apple mentalities seep in. However, using Windows 11 for Windows stuff has evolved my view.

Furthermore, buying a good PC reminded me of the relative VALUE of PC vs. Mac. For example, I was able to purchase the ENTIRE gaming PC with 10TB of fast SSD and 32GB RAM for LESS than what Apple seeks for only an 8TB SSD upgrade (not including RAM, the Mac, etc). And now THAT computer offers the easy flexibility to evolve should my needs change without having to throw out the whole thing because maybe I need more RAM someday or even more storage inside.

So- for me anyway- PC is a viable alternative. You get POWER vs. PPW, but power means speed of computing instead of maximizing energy efficiency. I find myself tossing intensive tasks that can run on either system to the PC for that speed (albeit by using a little bit more power... though unlike what some of us often sling in support of PPW, not enough to notice in the monthly electric bill).

Now I face needing a new laptop. 5 years ago, that could only be a MBpro or MBair. But modern Apple has me fully considering choosing a PC laptop instead. Why? For reasons like value, flexibility, expandability, power/speed, etc. So 5+ years ago, I was mostly a Mac desktop + Apple monitor + Mac laptop guy (running PC-musts stuff in bootcamp) = 100% Apple. Now, I may be about to become a Mac desktop + PC desktop + NOT-Apple monitor (to work with both of those) + PC laptop guy. Is that 75% PC: 25% Mac? Yes, it is. I wonder if I'm the only one around here.

From 5-20+ years ago, I could only think Apple. Modern Apple choices are evolving that perspective. I still think Mac & macOS are fantastic, etc... but not so much so that I'll just pay any amount for it. One must see these things for what they are: tools. If one hammer is priced 5X more than another hammer, I'm not so quick to "just pay up" for the former. I need to see 5X value through my consumer lens... not through a shareholder lens. As things have progressed last few years, it's getting harder for me to do that. A lot of accumulated goodwill helped rationalize the Apple premium for years. Now that it seems to only be ever-fattening margin, my 2 decades accumulation of goodwill seems about spent. I need some goodwill re-fueled. How? By delivering more VALUE for my money. Can Apple do that? Or PC for the win? TBD.

 

[glorp]

Love how these look, and having a smaller monitor is very appealing to me. Scratch that - small is essential.

If I could use the monitor as an external, they'd likely have made two sales; the lowest spec iMac and a beefy laptop.

As it is, the iMac is just too meagre and restrictive, so instead they sold me a Mac Mini, which I use with a second hand Apple Cinema Display from 2009.

Is it really that unusual for people to live or work in small spaces, and/or who cannot or will not pony up for a big expensive monitor?

I feel that if they sold a low-frills 24" Retina monitor, for hooking up to a phone, tablet, laptop or desktop, they'd fly off the shelves.

 

[mrr]

27” iMac please!

 

[Zest28]

27” iMac please!

It's already here. Apple Studio Display + Mac Mini or Mac Studio. And it also replaced the iMac Pro too.

It makes no sense for Apple to sell the same computer twice, it's duplicate and a waste of resources.

 

[SpanishAppleNerd]

I can’t help but think/hope the reason there’s are no M2/M3 Pro chips is that they’re holding it back for the 27 or 3O inch iMac coming later this year.

I agree. I don't know why they discontinued the iMac Pro, for me it makes more sense than the Mac Pro

 

[Biro]

Ironically, embracing silicon as a long-term working Mac guy meant I needed to re-embrace PC too in the form of "old fashioned bootcamp" (as ARM Windows is not full Windows, so not a suitable alternative to me). So I purchased a PC. I did it begrudgingly because I had let some of our Apple mentalities seep in. However, using Windows 11 for Windows stuff has evolved my view.

Furthermore, buying a good PC reminded me of the relative VALUE of PC vs. Mac. For example, I was able to purchase the ENTIRE gaming PC with 10TB of fast SSD and 32GB RAM for LESS than what Apple seeks only for an 8TB SSD upgrade (not including RAM, the Mac, etc). And now THAT computer offers the easy flexility to evolve should my needs change without having to throw out the whole thing because maybe I need more RAM someday or even more storage inside.

So- for me anyway- PC is a viable alternative. You get POWER vs. PPW, but power means speed of computing instead of maximizing energy efficiency. I find myself tossing intensive tasks that can run on either system to the PC for that speed (albeit by using a little bit more power, though unlikely what some of us often sling in support of PPW, not enough to notice in the monthly electric bill).

Now I face needing a new laptop. 5 years ago, that could only be a MBpro or MBair. But modern Apple has me fully considering choosing a PC laptop instead. Why? For reasons like value, flexibility, expandability, power/speed, etc. So 5+ years ago, I was mostly a Mac desktop + Apple monitor + Mac laptop guy (running PC-musts stuff in bootcamp). Now, I may be about to become a Mac desktop + PC desktop + NOT-Apple monitor (to work with both of those) + PC laptop guy. Is that 3/4ths PC: 1/4th Mac? Yes, it is. I wonder if I'm the only one around here.

From 5-20+ years ago, I could only think Apple. Modern Apple choices are evolving that perspective. I still think Mac & macOS are fantastic, etc... but not so much so that I'll just pay any amount for it. One must see these things for what they are: tools. If one hammer is priced 5X more than another hammer, I'm not so quick to "just pay up" for the former. I need to see 5X value through my consumer lens... not through a shareholder lens. As things have progressed last few years, it's getting harder for me to do that. A lot of accumulated goodwill helped rationalize the Apple premium for years. Now that it seems to only be ever-fattening margin, my 2 decades accumulation of goodwill seems about spent. I need some goodwill re-fueled. How? By delivering more VALUE for my money. Can Apple do that? Or PC for the win? TBD.

And, too, there is what appears to be an impending migration by Windows to ARM-based chips. That may change the equation again - especially if RAM can no longer be upgraded. But we still still need to see how that shakes out.

 

[Agent007]

If they made a 27" 5k version for $1,499 or $1,599 I'd be all over it. IDK why they do 24" - a 27" panel would increase overall width by less than 4cm. Less than 2cm wider on each side. Hardly anyone would notice the size increase until they sat down to use it.

 

[ignatius345]

Outdated, maybe. Worthless, I don't think so. There is a use case for the iMac, doesn't matter how small. I do agree with the complaints about the size tho

I do paid graphic design work on my M1 iMac all day long and it works incredibly well. I think the M3 is "outdated" for people who just buy computers based on numbers.

I'd buy a 27" version in a heartbeat, but this is still about 3x the screen real estate of a 13" laptop and I've definitely got enough room to get work done.

My use is perfectly met with the 24" iMac. Have had the M1 since it was introduced and love it.

Same. I just don't have a compelling reason to upgrade to the M3 because this thing runs dead silent and I very rarely find myself waiting for anything to happen. The screen is bright and sharp as hell, and even with 16 GB of RAM it's still very snappy. The only thing I've been able to get it to slow down on is gigantic architectural vector PDF plans.

 

[docbop]

Today marks the three-year anniversary of Apple's announcement of the 24-inch iMac, a transformative redesign featuring the first integration of Apple silicon in the product line.

Apple unveiled the new 24-inch iMac on April 20, 2021, almost nine years after the previous iMac redesign debuted. It replaced both the 21.5-inch and the 27-inch Intel iMacs, and represented a recommitment to the long-standing desktop product line.

The highly anticipated redesign offers a much thinner and more compact body compared to its predecessors, available in an array of vibrant colors reminiscent of the original iMacs released in the late 1990s. The 24-inch 4.5K Retina display boasts 11.3 million pixels and support for 1 billion colors.

The new model was not only notable for its updated design but also as the inaugural iMac to incorporate Apple silicon, one of the last Macs to make the transition away from Intel. Apple claimed that the M1 chip delivered up to 85% faster CPU performance and up to two-times faster GPU performance compared to the previous 21.5-inch iMac models. The new iMac also offered a 1080p FaceTime HD camera, studio-quality microphones, and a six-speaker sound system, as well as a color-matched Magic Keyboard with Touch ID.

Apple refreshed the 24-inch iMac with the M3 chip, Wi-Fi 6E, and Bluetooth 5.3 in November 2023. Rumors suggest that a larger-screened iMac that could be positioned as an iMac Pro will launch in 2025. In June 2023, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said that the high-end iMac was a year or two away from launching as work on the device was still in the early stages.

Article Link: Apple Announced the 24-Inch iMac Three Years Ago Today

I was really disappointed they didn't do another 27" iMac. I've had two 27" iMacs and two of my most favorite Mac's I've had, I'm still using the one. I hope they come out with another 27" or bigger iMac with M-series chip.

 

[BeatCrazy]

I love the M1 iMac. I have two of them! Both 8CPU/8GPU with the Ethernet + 4 ports.

First one I got for $900 new, and I use it as a dedicated Plex server. I wanted/needed a TouchID keyboard for my Mac Studio, so I repurposed the one from the iMac. Net cost, $800. For $5-600, I could get a Mac mini, so I'm paying a $200-$300 premium for a really nice 24" monitor. But unlike a headless mini, I never have to fool with challenges remoting-in to the machine for updates etc. The iMac monitor works (of course!) 100% of the time.

Got another, a used 16/512 model for my kid to use. It was $800 and is rock solid for browsing, editing GoPro videos, and playing Roblox. I've built my kids PCs before. Something always goes wrong with Windows/drivers/etc. macOS is rock-solid for kids or people that aren't adept at troubleshooting.

TL;DR - if you can get either M1 or M3 at a good discount, I think they offer tremendous value.

 

[seek3r]

Speaking of which, the only Apple logo visible is on the back. How many people set up their computer so that anything but the front is visible?

I often see the current imacs at reception desks and the like at hotels, doctor’s offices, large contractor offices, real estate brokers, vet clinics, etc. the back is what’s to the public. I dont know if that’s a market Apple is deliberately targeting but it definitely is one place where the logo on the back works to Apple’s advantage

 

[aidler]

And what an incredibly ugly thing it is.

 

[Fuzzball84]

And then they let it languish for 2.5 years.

It was a well designed product... a computer for the consumer.. and the refresh to M3 was probably more about business decisions regarding costs etc... the average consumer will do the same things with M3 as compared to M1.

There is nothing wrong with a product that doesnt require a refresh, if it does its job, it does its job. If you need more power... well you need a different device (like a more powerful Mac mini.. Studio etc).

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

And, too, there is what appears to be an impending migration by Windows to ARM-based chips. That may change the equation again - especially if RAM can no longer be upgraded. But we still still need to see how that shakes out.

Of course, PC going from Intel to ARM doesn't mean they have to lock down RAM & SSD too... just as Apple didn't have to do that. That's simply a choice... a very, VERY profitable choice by Apple to make itself the only possible source of both AND to engineer it so you have to best guess your needs for life of device up front.

Yes, let's see how PCs adopting ARM and Snapdragon opt to go... and how that much larger market responds if PC makers decide to copy Apple on RAM & SSD pricing insanity and lockdown.

 

[Realityck]

Most worthless computer in Apples History.

Not if you value quietness. The two fans hardly make any noise. But this M3 update was weird as it did nothing to alleviate the iMac being able to drive more then one 6K display from its TB port. The Thunderbolt/USB 4 port can't be ID'ed as TB4 because of that. Also because its only a M3 its stuck with only 24 GB RAM max, where everyone was clamoring for 32 GB RAM back when the M1 model w/16 GB RAM was first being tested with final cut pro running while editing multiple streams for more then 30 mins.

 

[tenthousandthings]

iMac Plus. SoC will parallel the Mini. I still think Retina 30” is the sweet spot, the 32” rumor makes no sense to me — it’s too big and the price of the 6K display they’d need for that seems prohibitive.

There’s a tendency to forget that, in the home, there are plenty of small workspaces that are limited in size. The 24” iMac is great for those, but a 30” could also fit a lot of them.

 

[AlexESP]

Beautiful design but imagine a slightly thicker wedge shape (or overall) with an easy-to-remove back and maybe 2-4 m.2 slots inside, so one could start with any amount of storage they like and upgrade to however much more they want/need over time... not at Apple exploitive SSD pricing 3-5X ABOVE market but using off-the-shelf m.2 sticks like the vast larger world of PCs can do.

Keep the M-series storage option too for anyone wanting to make a case of "fastest" or some special ability of Apple SSD vs. commodity SSD. Then users who believe could get the overall system installed on 256GB to 8TB Apple SSD (and pay way, wayyyyyyyyyy up for any upgrades that way) AND have up to enormous, additional storage "hidden" inside what might be imagined as a big MBair (wedge design) on a stick. Bonus to this: almost certainly no "unexpected ejections" for SSDs that are directly connected to the board... unlike the joy of that with some- but not all- external SSDs and HDDs we attach externally to any Mac since about Big Sur.

Yes, that wouldn't be a "shareholders rejoice!" bit of engineering but I have to think customers would go nuts for it. Long ago, a Jobsian Apple made an early iMac design with a plastic/acrylic white case, easily removed as one whole piece to not show any panels or visible screws, making accessing (& upgrading) the HDD easy enough for anyone to do it. Here's that oldie (fattened up more than this concept by it also building in an optical disc player and heat management to keep them ancient PowerPC chips cool enough)...

View attachment 2370198​

Imagine THIS iMac "wedge" concept with a bit of that kind of thinking... through a consumer instead of a shareholders lens.

And while this hypothetical, customers-first Apple engineering creation is being hatched, put a standardized input or two on it so that when the Mac guts obsolete it as a Mac, it could easily be repurposed as a monitor for the remainder of the screen life... again, like a Jobsian iMac as late as about 2010-11. Then, consumers would not be buying an overall "throw baby out with the bathwater" device when any one part conks or Apple decides to conk it by vintaging. Yes, that would be ANOTHER disappointment at the all-important "shareholders rejoice!" while jacking up the value proposition of the product for consumers. But maybe a more customer-focused Mac would sell in higher volume, making a little less profit per unit sold but more total profit on volume... so that shareholders could rejoice too.

But what do I know? I'm just an Apple consumer. Why care about me when there's shareholders to delight?

Well, I put on my “consumer lenses” and I see that the vast majority of people (specially this iMac’s target customer) wouldn’t want to access its guts, while most of them do like a thinner design.

Apple is clearly one of the most customer-focused companies in terms of revenue.
Stakeholders’s interests are aligned with customer’s; if people don’t like their products, they won’t sell and stakeholders won’t be happy.

I think the main problem here is that there is a difference between what Macrumors thinks is customer’s interests and actual customer’s interests.