iMac redesign? [Merged]

[Brian Y]

Then too bad. macOS is heavily optimized for Intel CPU and I really dont think that Apple wishes to change everything. Also, Intel still owns TB3 so if they deny or reject TB3 technology, then Apple is doomed.

Do you even aware that all iMac with 5k monitor shares identical hardware since 2015? I think it is time to change everything by using 1000 nit monitor for true HDR.

Mac OS isn't heavily optimised for Intel CPUs. It only has native support, but that doesn't mean it's optimised for it.

It would be silly to think that Apple doesn't have OS X running on AMD kit in house, just in case. Just like how they run it on intel back in the power pc days.

The biggest thing stopping us getting an AMD flavoured Mac would be, in my opinion, thermal management. AMD chips run way hotter than their intel counterparts.

 

[Pro7913]

Mac OS isn't heavily optimised for Intel CPUs. It only has native support, but that doesn't mean it's optimised for it.

It would be silly to think that Apple doesn't have OS X running on AMD kit in house, just in case. Just like how they run it on intel back in the power pc days.

The biggest thing stopping us getting an AMD flavoured Mac would be, in my opinion, thermal management. AMD chips run way hotter than their intel counterparts.

Intel is much hotter than AMD... Did you even check Youtube videos? Intel 9th gen can easily reach 90 degrees while AMD 3rd gen can maintain the temperature around 70. It's already a joke since Intel is still using 14nm while AMD has 7nm.

Then how come Apple is still not able to use AMD CPU? This explains a lot of things.

 

[casperes1996]

In terms of specification, for the premium price we pay for iMacs then 256GB drives should really be the base level storage as standard.

No. 1TB Fusion with at least 256 of that being SSD. 256 is just too little space. Fusion Drives are great if you give them enough SSD to HDD ratio
[automerge]1572968708[/automerge]

Mac OS isn't heavily optimised for Intel CPUs. It only has native support, but that doesn't mean it's optimised for it.

It would be silly to think that Apple doesn't have OS X running on AMD kit in house, just in case. Just like how they run it on intel back in the power pc days.

The biggest thing stopping us getting an AMD flavoured Mac would be, in my opinion, thermal management. AMD chips run way hotter than their intel counterparts.

Intel is much hotter than AMD... Did you even check Youtube videos? Intel 9th gen can easily reach 90 degrees while AMD 3rd gen can maintain the temperature around 70. It's already a joke since Intel is still using 14nm while AMD has 7nm.

Then how come Apple is still not able to use AMD CPU? This explains a lot of things.

Yes and no to both of you on different accounts.

Machine code for an Intel chip can run on an AMD chip without tweaking at all and the same the other way around. They both have the same instruction set (proprietary extensions aside)
Apple does optimise macOS for they Intel chips, meaning that whilst the same code would run on AMD they do optimise it for Intel. - But it's also safe to assume they have internal builds with more AMD focused optimisations, though likely not yet as heavily due to prioritising the actively used systems.
But it is already possible to make an AMD hackintosh since the IA is the same, and it runs pretty alright even without chip specific optimisations and just generic Intel targeted binaries.

But modern AMD chips are indeed cooler than Intel chips under the right circumstances.

But it's not just as simple as plunging in a new CPU
Reasons Apple hasn't just switched to AMD already can be manyfold.
They make their own motherboards, and you'd need to redo the logic boards entirely.
The SMC chip may only be compatible with Intel, same with the T2 chip.
Thunderbolt is natively supported on the Intel platform
Certain hardware blocks on Intel chips are used a lot by Apple software like QuickSync

 

[EightyTwenty]

Fusion drives are stupid. Just buy cheap external storage if you need it. There is zero reason to have a spinning platter as the main drive in a modern desktop computer.

 

[JimmyG]

1000 would be bliss. 1400... I doubt it. The XDR is capable of 1000 nits continously, it's bloody expensive and requires a huge cooling system. Not exactly what you are looking for, when you have to thermal manage an AIO.

Well, my thoughts were based on Apple's ability to provide 800/1200 nits on the new iPhone Pro screens which clearly do not require internal fans for thermal management...

...and not the 32" Pro Display XDR beast shipping with the new Mac Pro!

 

[askunk]

I am not one of those who thinks the next iMac will sport a 1000 nits screen. I think Apple will move to 650, which will ensure a better HDR than the almost fake one we have today and allow for a richer colour range.
[automerge]1573237699[/automerge]

my thoughts were based on Apple's ability to provide 800/1200 nits on the new iPhone Pro screens

You are comparing a thermal load on a 90-120 square cm surface with a higher resolution 0.3 square m screen...
[automerge]1573237919[/automerge]
I'm pretty sure the iPhone will easily go in protection mode if you watched a movie under the Sun. My iPhone 6 couldn't stand a simple game for more than a few minutes, let alone a 1000 nits screen.

Anyway, as I said, if they find a way to bring a 1.000 nits, regardless of how, still keeping the iMac on the same price range... they are more than welcome.
[automerge]1573238037[/automerge]
Besides, an iMac would have to stay on for hours. Mine is on about 16 hrs a day continuosly. An iPhone has a bit of a different use case.

 

[Icaras]

Dear god, the iMac bezels looks even more unsightly next to the new 16" MBP. ?

 

[bpeeps]

Dear god, the iMac bezels looks even more unsightly next to the new 16" MBP. ?
View attachment 876938

The iMac bezels don't bother me. But putting them side by side does make them very apparent!

 

[sublunar]

The increased amount of NAND SSD storage in the 16" MacBook Pro SKUs potentially lends a clue to a future iMac redesign. I'm more confident that a 2020 27" iMac could move a lot closer to the iMac Pro philosophy with T2 chip, all SSD storage (eg starting with 256Gb), better cooling system, AMD 5500M/5700M graphics, and (unfortunately) sealed in RAM.

 

[newyorksole]

The increased amount of NAND SSD storage in the 16" MacBook Pro SKUs potentially lends a clue to a future iMac redesign. I'm more confident that a 2020 27" iMac could move a lot closer to the iMac Pro philosophy with T2 chip, all SSD storage (eg starting with 256Gb), better cooling system, AMD 5500M/5700M graphics, and (unfortunately) sealed in RAM.

Bring it on. I’m sooo ready for a new iMac. Praying for Face ID too, but I doubt it.

 

[nutmac]

Dear god, the iMac bezels looks even more unsightly next to the new 16" MBP. ?

All Apple need to do is shrink the bezels, bump the screen size a bit (or reduce the overall size), remove the spinning HDD option, and add T2.

 

[satchmo]

The increased amount of NAND SSD storage in the 16" MacBook Pro SKUs potentially lends a clue to a future iMac redesign. I'm more confident that a 2020 27" iMac could move a lot closer to the iMac Pro philosophy with T2 chip, all SSD storage (eg starting with 256Gb), better cooling system, AMD 5500M/5700M graphics, and (unfortunately) sealed in RAM.

I hope it's a new shift to equip all their Macs with SSDs. Unfortunately, I think it'll be limited to only 'Pro' models, perhaps BTO and the top of the line regular iMacs.

 

[sublunar]

I hope it's a new shift to equip all their Macs with SSDs. Unfortunately, I think it'll be limited to only 'Pro' models, perhaps BTO and the top of the line regular iMacs.

What is to stop Apple from launching a lower SKU imac pro? They have CPU’s for it and graphics.

Apple must be closer to the point where SSD is cheap enough to put in all their machines.

 

[nutmac]

I hope it's a new shift to equip all their Macs with SSDs. Unfortunately, I think it'll be limited to only 'Pro' models, perhaps BTO and the top of the line regular iMacs.

Apple can take the MacBook Air route and offer 128GB on the entry level model. Since iMac is desk bound, attaching an external hard disk full time for additional storage space is a viable option.

 

[colodane]

I understand the urge on Apple's part to have at least one low cost "entry" iMac for advertising purposes that might contain a traditional non-SSD hard drive. But I completely do NOT understand why they are so hesitant to stock SSD machines in Apple stores. This has been going on for YEARS now.

You would think it would be a big advantage for Apple to showcase the speed of the SSD in their stores and satisfy the customers who want something NOW instead of special ordering. But I guess they are smarter at marketing than I am.

Not a problem for me personally, as I have no problem with the very excellent BTO process that gets me the machine I want in only a week or two.

 

[newyorksole]

I understand the urge on Apple's part to have at least one low cost "entry" iMac for advertising purposes that might contain a traditional non-SSD hard drive. But I completely do NOT understand why they are so hesitant to stock SSD machines in Apple stores. This has been going on for YEARS now.

You would think it would be a big advantage for Apple to showcase the speed of the SSD in their stores and satisfy the customers who want something NOW instead of special ordering. But I guess they are smarter at marketing than I am.

Not a problem for me personally, as I have no problem with the very excellent BTO process that gets me the machine I want in only a week or two.

Mannn... I ordered a 27” iMac 2019 with 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD.

Ordered on Thursday October 31st.

Was told it would be ready for pickup Tuesday November 12. Got an email saying it was delayed to Monday November 18. And now finally it’ll be ready Wednesday November 20.

I was not expecting it to take 3 weeks. I am soooo ready for this thing. Praying it doesn’t get delayed again.

 

[Moonjumper]

I understand the urge on Apple's part to have at least one low cost "entry" iMac for advertising purposes that might contain a traditional non-SSD hard drive. But I completely do NOT understand why they are so hesitant to stock SSD machines in Apple stores. This has been going on for YEARS now.

You would think it would be a big advantage for Apple to showcase the speed of the SSD in their stores and satisfy the customers who want something NOW instead of special ordering. But I guess they are smarter at marketing than I am.

Not a problem for me personally, as I have no problem with the very excellent BTO process that gets me the machine I want in only a week or two.

I agree, although as I use mine for business, a week or two is a problem if mine breaks. No BTO with an SSD is a problem that shouldn't exist.

 

[sublunar]

Apple can take the MacBook Air route and offer 128GB on the entry level model. Since iMac is desk bound, attaching an external hard disk full time for additional storage space is a viable option.

One of the pluses of a Fusion drive is that it appears to be one device though. I'd like to see them ditch spinning disks and go full SSD but always get the feeling that 256Gb should be the lowest storage SKU.

 

[Moonjumper]

I wonder if there is a case for an all-SSD Fusion drive? A small capacity NVMe (fast, but expensive) paired with a larger SATA (slower, but cheaper).

 

[askunk]

One of the pluses of a Fusion drive is that it appears to be one device though.

Well... you see just the HDD. The SSD's capacity is used as a dynamic buffer, therefore it doesn't add up to the HDD. It's not ZFS

 

[Moonjumper]

Well... you see just the HDD. The SSD's capacity is used as a dynamic buffer, therefore it doesn't add up to the HDD. It's not ZFS

Not on my iMac. It shows the capacity as 2.12 TB.

 

[sublunar]

Well... you see just the HDD. The SSD's capacity is used as a dynamic buffer, therefore it doesn't add up to the HDD. It's not ZFS

I'm thinking of the basic computer users who might not be fully on board with saving stuff to an 'external' drive. If Apple are keeping it simple then the sooner they switch to all-SSD the better.

 

[TorontoJen]

I get that it needs a refresh, but honestly the bezels don't really bother me. I still think it's a sharp looking machine. I'm surprised they haven't updated the look a LITTLE, though. I'm thinking next year they will redesign.

 

[Appledoesnotlisten]

I want to buy a low specs 27" iMac in December and get an external SSD.
It's going to be my 1st ever iMac and I might not like it at all.

Do you think that it's better to get a USED one or just buy a new one and see how it immediately depreciates when I new iMac comes out (supposedly, soon)?

 

[Paratriplel]

Let's hope a redesign is coming up though the bezels aren't what's bothering me but the thermal issues and that it doesn't come with SSD in base models are.

I guess that the lowest speced model could of course could come with their fusion drive if that holds prices down but at least an 256 GB in the other base models and I'm really hoping for a larger size (32" or even 34") with improved cooling and if it's 1-10 mm (or even up to 20 mm) thicker it wouldn't bother me at all and probably not anyone else either because what different does it really make.
Not expecting that we'll be able to upgrade the disk ourselves without opening the screen up but it would be amazing if they let us do that.
Hopefully they'll still let us upgrade the ram ourselves because I might not need 64 or even 32 GB in my new iMac when I buy it but to have to either open it up through the screen or buy a new iMac because the applications I use gets a bit more demanding is just crazy if everything else is fine.