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

27-inch iMac gets a major update

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 611 posts

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#411

Post by abrowne »

bluedino wrote: post #358
localhost wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s like buying a 5k display and getting a subsidized computer. There’s ~1 5k monitor on the market today (LG)? I wonder how expandable this is? Buy the bottom end machine with the CPU you want and upgrade SSD and RAM? I would imagine SSD is upgradeable but RAM soldered onto the mobo?

27" iMacs have typically featured 4 memory slots in an easily accessible panel on the back: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201191#install1

And https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/ (click 27-inch) says

> four SO-DIMM slots, user accessible

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#413

Post by caycep »

n3k5 wrote: post #134

“SSDs across the line with quadruple the storage” 1/4 TB of storage in the $1800 model, 1/2 TB in the $2300 one. Ugh. (So before the lower-end one had 64GB? [Edit: Nope, 1 TB Fusion Drive, thanks smnrchrds!] That would be FULL just from installing the one game the press release mentions.) What kind of magic fairy dust SSDs are they using that you can't have a sensible amount of storage space at those prices? Looking…

I realize that games these days are full of high detail world-building, but I shudder to think that 250-500 gb for an install is considered commonplace these days...

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#414

Post by charlus »

efficax wrote: post #48
dijit wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will almost certainly be a low end macbook. In fact, there's a non-pro 'macbook'[0] that already exists which would be perfect, it was discontinued a year ago, but used ultra-low power CPUs. In fact when they were talking about them (prior to release) they thought they would have ARM CPU's back then. They are fanless and have a 5W thermal envelope, which fits in with the current A12X too. The major criticisms of t…

the 12" macbook is my favorite laptop of all time. Mine is the 2016 version and it's starting to feel dated and I'm hoping that they rerelease this on the new silicon first. I'll be smashing the buy button the day it's out.

I agree, still running a 12" 2015, it's an incredible machine that just doesn't feel as though it has been replaced. Makes the Pro and Air feel like heavy weights.

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#415

Post by caycep »

samtheprogram wrote: post #294
avianlyric wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What kind of magic fairy dust SSDs are they using that you can't have a sensible amount of storage space at those prices? The kind where Apple can make a 300% or more margin, knowing that people will still pay. Don't think Apple have ever sold SSD upgrades at anything remotely resembling competitive $/TB prices. Clearly they don't need too because people still buy their machines.

The iMac competes via its 5K display and having macOS in general. Remember that Apple’s comparable offerings for this tier display were priced at $1299, in the same price range as many 5K displays. The $1800 price point isn’t hard to grasp once you consider the display. EDIT: I previously compared to / referenced possibly sub-$1000 5K monitors, but it seems the ones I was looking at in that range were actually 4K.

and it's interesting, hard to find a 5k "retina"; was looking at this, but other than the hard to find (these days) LG model, everything from the usual suspects (dell, etc) gives you some gigantic screen at a lesser DPI...

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#416

Post by caycep »

taywrobel wrote: post #384
BurningFrog wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people still buy their machines Sure, but more would buy at lower prices. That said I don't doubt that Apple has researched this a zillion ways, and this price point is there for solid reasons.

Apple intentionally prices a lot of customers out of their market. Their monetary strategy relies on it, oddly enough. If they sold to more people, they’d run into many more issues being seen as a monopoly. Tim Cook spelled it out pretty clearly to Congress when he testified last week; Apple does not have majority market share in any market they’re in. Not in smartphones, tablets, laptops, desktops, or wearables. And…

"Veblen goods"?

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#417

Post by Joeri »

byset wrote: post #314
avianlyric wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What kind of magic fairy dust SSDs are they using that you can't have a sensible amount of storage space at those prices? The kind where Apple can make a 300% or more margin, knowing that people will still pay. Don't think Apple have ever sold SSD upgrades at anything remotely resembling competitive $/TB prices. Clearly they don't need too because people still buy their machines.

As I see it it's basically price discrimination. Apple wants a certain profit margin for the model as a whole. Yet for customers who will never pay prices that will give Apple that full margin, they offer a model at a low price point with a compressed margin, but with a painful aspect that will encourage customers who can pay to go with a higher priced unit — here, the painful thing is the small SSD size. So the idea…

If people want to "cheap out" they can always get it with the base storage and hang a big thunderbolt drive off the back. It basically performs the same as if it was built-in, at a much lower price. One can get the entry level 27 inch imac and add storage and RAM to get a high end config on the cheap (graphics excepted).

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#418

Post by caycep »

smnrchrds wrote: post #292
snapetom wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iMac and Mac Pro has user upgradeable RAM. https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

You are right. But you used to be able to do that to any Mac. And I fully expect the ARM Macs to get rid of this feature. Though I would be happily surprised if they don't.

I feel like they are taking a page out of consoles, at least if the iPad's influence is to be felt on future Macs. Relatively rigidly defined hardware specs and the apps are designed to take that into account.

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#419

Post by ogre_codes »

freehunter wrote: post #186
rbanffy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's trivially easy to build software for both ISAs from within Xcode, unless, of course, you are playing with Intel or ARM intrinsics or other pathologically non-portable thing, in which case it's anything but trivial. It's not much harder than supporting Linux on x86 and ARM.

And yet with the Raspberry Pi being so popular and being on the market for so long, there are still a lot of packages that don’t support ARM. It’s trivially easy to compile your iOS app for 64-bit as well, but like I mentioned... that transition left a lot of dead apps in its wake.

> It’s trivially easy to compile your iOS app for 64-bit as well, but like I mentioned... that transition left a lot of dead apps in its wake.

Most of those "dead" apps were not under active development and had no income flow. Making a "trivial" change to an inactive project means rebuilding software which you have shelved for some time.

If you are actively developing software, adding Intel support to a build is pretty much just clicking the option to build a Universal binary. Adding a flag to an existing build a lot easier than dusting off an old app and making a bunch of tweaks and a new build with near zero chance of return on that time invested.

Re: 27-inch iMac gets a major update

#420

Post by obmelvin »

rsynnott wrote: post #316
obmelvin wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may work fine, but its slightly absurd to need a better webcam for a recently made 2k USD laptop

Few if any laptops have decent cameras. This is partially because until recently most users didn't actually care that much, but also for practical reasons; modern laptops have very slim lids, so you can't really fit decent optics (a phone is a good bit deeper).

Thanks for pointing out the size - didn't quite think about just how much thinner lids are than phones. That is certainly a very real limiter
Post reply on HN