Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple updates its iMac line

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 480 posts

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#331

Post by mythz »

I’ve always had a fondness for the iMac which I’ve been using as my main Desktop since the last PowerPC version, IMO they’ve always been a mark of the best all-in-one of the day, lots of people like to focus on the internals but it ignores the noise and clutter free desktop and top build quality I’ve enjoyed for over a decade.

I’ve upgraded 4 times since and am currently enjoying the iMac 5k, this floating screen is beautiful on the inside and out, the 5k is gorgeous and its form factor is near perfect, still just a single power cord disappearing out from behind it and wireless for everything else.

I’ve got the high-end version with Max CPU and SSD so I’ll skip this version but will in all likelihood get the next unless someone ships a better all-in-one, which never happens.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#334

Post by rsynnott »

tosh wrote: post #63

I find it curious that Apple is starting to communicate major product updates decoupled from an event. Just good old press releases. Maybe they already have too many announcements to fit into the narrative of the handful of events per year.

They've been doing this for about a decade. New Mac products (iMac Pro) and form factors (new MBA) get a mention at events, but spec bumps almost never do.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#335

Post by derefr »

mbell wrote: post #321
derefr wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone could figure out a legal way to offer recommended-hardware Hackintosh builds as a service†, that'd be pretty ideal for what you're talking about, in the sense of "you could buy one for your mom", and it would "just work" (and hopefully continue to "just work" through updates, if they do it right.) † I guess, if you were to operate a "Hackintosh OEM", you could sell the hardware build itself without actuall…

> If someone could figure out a legal way to offer recommended-hardware Hackintosh builds as a service†, that'd be pretty ideal for what you're talking about, in the sense of "you could buy one for your mom", and it would "just work" (and hopefully continue to "just work" through updates, if they do it right.) Is this not what tonymacx86.com provides via the buying guide / golden builds forum?

You still have to buy the parts and put them together yourself; and then you have it follow the scene to figure out what to do for each macOS update (e.g. whether you should wait before installing it, whether you need to tweak some setting in Clover, etc.)

I’m willing to do that for one workstation that will live on my desk; I’m not willing to do it for a computer that’s going to be used by a relative who lives thousands of miles away, who I only see for a few days a year (and don’t want to waste those days building a computer.) Let alone several such computers, one per relative.

Whereas in the hypothetical I’m talking about, you order the computer pre-built from a website shipped to your relative, and burn macOS to a USB; and then, when you visit them, unpack the box, install the OS on the computer, and then forget about it.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#336

Post by tom_ »

smnrchrds wrote: post #167
js2 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something sounds wrong. I have an older 21.5 with the first generation 1 TB fusion and it is not at all slow.

First generation 1TB fusion drives had 128GB of SSD storage. 2017 and 2019 1TB fusion drives have 32GB of SSD storage [1], which is basically just enough for the OS and a couple of apps if you are lucky. People are not exaggerating when they say Apple hardware are regressing, not progressing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_Drive

The size need only be proportional to the amount of hot data. And realistically, it need only be proportional to the amount of hot data that's randomly accessed in small chunks, because that's where the bulk of the improvements will come from.

I wonder why the performance ain't so great. I bet 32GBytes is in principle more than sufficient.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#337

Post by bigj0n »

greglindahl wrote: post #328
aczerepinski wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$3.5k entry would be very disappointing since the Mac Mini doesn’t have a graphics card so it struggles with even 3-5 year old video games or hobbyist video editing. I really hope they make a high end mini or low end pro in the $1.5-2k range that can meet the needs of a lot of monitor owning folks who used to be Apple Computer’s core demographic.

If your budget is $1.5k+ you could put an external GPU on a Mac Mini and call it a day.

That would suck because you're paying the consequences (money and thermal) of that mac form factor but you're still gonna have a big ugly mess on your desk.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#338

Post by PascLeRasc »

jeffhuys wrote: post #52
fiblye wrote: post #13

Bought my iMac 7 years ago with 8GB as the default memory option and a 1TB fusion drive. And here we are, nearly a decade later. Still 8 GB in the newest models. Still 1 TB fusion drives. GPUs haven't even seemed to take a jump over last year's models.

It's the lowest option, you can upgrade to 32GB or 64GB on the 27-inch version. You can upgrade the drive to an 2TB SSD, or a 3TB fusion drive. If you only buy an iMac for the basic things like browsing, emailing and watching youtube, 8GB is more than enough, especially on macOS. I don't get the hate for having a lower-budget option.

The day they take out the entry-level option people on here will be complaining about how they just want a decent desktop for their parents to browse on, or for them to upgrade themselves. I have 8gb and keep big music projects in Ableton open, a ton of Chrome tabs and several Electron apps open all the time, and I haven't had any issues yet.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#339

Post by intrasight »

todd8 wrote: post #201

It's just frustrating, I switched the household over to Apple devices when OSX came out, and now there really aren't any systems from Apple that look interesting to me. I've been programming since before the (Unix) dawn of time, and Apple devices have been good development machines for me since OSX was released 18 years ago. I'm comfortable on Linux, but the Apple iOS devices and computers are all over my home and in…

Aren't the only people buying Macs those who have no choice because of the monopoly they have for iOS development? I mean really - crappy hardware (form over function), expensive, dated UI.

Re: Apple updates its iMac line

#340

Post by artursapek »

todd8 wrote: post #261
naravara wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the Mac Pro is the computer of all our dreams, I doubt it will meet the poster’s needs. Seems like they want a fairly bare-bones, minimalist and simple computer. I doubt a Mac Pro is going to come in at under $3.5k at the entry level.

It's not that I think the Mac's are too expensive, I paid more that $3.5k for my current gen Mac Book Pro laptop. I wish it had a good keyboard and I wish it was as easy to handle as one of my ThinkPads. My current development machine is a Mac Pro, the little cylinder from 2013, and I had a couple of the aluminum box ones and my first was in a plastic case. I just couldn't see upgrading to a current Mac Pro ($5k to $…

> I paid more that $3.5k for my current gen Mac Book Pro laptop. I wish it had a good keyboard

As time goes on I find Mac loyalists more and more absurd

Post reply on HN