I’m amused by the huge numbers of (angeblich pro) Mac users who are whining about (a) the colours and (b) the “chin” of the new M1 iMac.

First, it’s a computer. It doesn’t have a “chin”. It looks fine to me, especially if it means that the (apparently sensational) sound system is optimised. And I repeat, it doesn’t look remotely like a “chin” (some wag even compared it to Jay Leno. I mean, please!). An iMac doesn’t have a “face”.

Second, I LOVE the colours. I want a nice, cheerful yellow one on my desk right now! As someone who spends 99% of my working life in front of a computer, it would make me so happy! Or maybe green…

Third, it weighs less than 10 lbs/4.8 kg. This suggests you could carry it round the house if you wanted to (personally, I like to work in multiple locations). That’s presumably the reason for the MagSafe power cable (although they’re not calling it that). Which begs the question: will Apple (or some other enterprising supplier) produce battery kits for iMacs? Now that would be pretty cool!

Sorry. This has absolutely nothing to do with outlining, it’s entirely about working environment. And aesthetics. And common sense. All things we also occasionally discuss in the forum ;-)

Cheers!
Bill

It's ugly, it's unfunctional, it's unergonomic, it's overpriced and it technically was a huge disappointment.

Ok, i'm not a Barbie club member so we can just agree to disagree about the look of this thing.

But its unfunctional and unergonomic as previous iMacs (i own two of them with 2 extra Thunderbold monitors) with all the USB/TB connectors still on the back side of the monitor, it has no VESA mount and monitor height is not heigh adjustable. The later is a big problem when you work on a desk in winter but in high summer move it to a different heigh table/chair combination in the garden lounge. I do it with my current iMac and it sucks. For a device that is almost completely marketed as a great display with a computer inside the stand problem is serious.

It's sadly overpriced and the base model of this base model only exist to allow apple show lower prices in ads. But without USB ports or Ethernet and 8GB it is IMHO a shame model. The M1 macMini is good with a good price, but this was only to reduce the critics about the transition to AS. Just as they smoothed it by streching the bad news (no 32bit compatibility, stronger backward compatibility breaking security) over 3 years ahead of the transition, so people don't associate it with Apple Silicon. Again a very smart marketing move of Apple.

And technically, it's just an iPad with a big screen. And thats what is still making me think about the Apple future. They have not yet shown that they are able to scale the current AS design which they are working on for 15 years now to a desktop system. If they can't increase the IO throughput they will have no future. The all integrated approach (the only technical detail that makes the M1 fast and power efficient) is a sign of failure not evolution for professional devices. But Apple had no success in the professional market since 2010 with the last cheesegrader. The M1 design is still 10 times slower (50 times slower 3D with RTX3090) than a PC workstation.

Notice: I do own about $10000 worth in fully maxed out iMacs (2), macMinis (1), iPad (2) and iPhones (1) and i will buy a M1 macMini one day, but i'm not blinded enough to not see the bad things in this products.

Lothar Scholz wrote:

It's ugly, it's unfunctional, it's unergonomic, it's overpriced and it
technically was a huge disappointment.

All valid concerns, although I get a lot of functionality out of my Apple gizmos. The iMac would be better if the monitor stand were detachable and adjustable.

I lived in Linux for a decade or more, then got lured to the dark side (Windows) by not being able to sync Linux with a Blackberry (there are ways, they just didn't work for me). Then, I discovered Scrivener, which was at that time Mac-only, and got a Macbook Air as a writing machine.

Then, I discovered Devonthink. With that as my "binder" I moved to Nisus Writer, which I like a lot better than Word. By "a lot better" I mean hamburgers in a boisterous sports bar with good friends is a lot better than raw vermin, shivering in a cave. But I also recognize there are people whose voice is found in Word, and I respect that. One person's rat is another's gourmet dining. :-)

At some point I got an iMac.

Recently I've started migrating my word processing to Mellel.

Curio and MindNode are great for planning. I prefer Apple Numbers to Excel, not because it's an Apple product, but being able to do layouts with multiple tables, images, etc, on a single canvas is pretty neat. I also recognize I could create the same reports with a combination of Excel and something else. Excel plus Powerpoint, maybe, or my recent favorite, Affinity Publisher.

In other words, I got hooked on Apple-centric applications. If I had this desktop experience under Linux, that's where I'd be.

Use what works. For me, performance is heavily weighted toward what I can do, not what the machine can do. That's why I like Linux. I can provision heavy iron for datacenters, one of my day job roles, and I can interface motor controls to a Raspberry Pi in a box the size of a paperback book. Linux is my katana.

Macs can be workhorses, too, but in a quite different way.

See, I love this. You take a splendidly technical stance and criticise everything about the iMac that hasn’t met your technical expectations. And I get that.

But I don’t have such high technical expectations. What I want is a really, really pleasant working environment. One that makes me smile every time I sit down in it. One that includes an attractive, brightly coloured, meaninglessly but gorgeously thin computer that oozes style and makes me feel happy (no, I don’t think it’s ugly – but as you say, I’m a Barbie Club member).

On the other hand, what really makes me smile is that in reality, you too enjoy that aspect of the Apple ecosphere. You wouldn’t have all those Apple machines if, at some level, you didn’t appreciate the sheer congruence of the Apple working environment. You’re making grumpy noises because, let’s face it, all highly technical users are *expected* to make grumpy noises about the many ways Apple lets them down time and time again (although that may change if they launch a really cool Mac Cube – but no, what am I talking about, that wouldn’t be good enough either).

Yet at the same time, you’re all busy sneaking down to your living rooms, stroking your Mac Minis and whispering: “My Precious…”

It’s okay, I won’t tell anyone… ;-)

Lothar Scholz wrote:

It's ugly, it's unfunctional, it's unergonomic, it's overpriced and it
technically was a huge disappointment.

Ok, i'm not a Barbie club member so we can just agree to disagree about
the look of this thing.

But its unfunctional and unergonomic as previous iMacs (i own two of
them with 2 extra Thunderbold monitors) with all the USB/TB connectors
still on the back side of the monitor, it has no VESA mount and monitor
height is not heigh adjustable. The later is a big problem when you work
on a desk in winter but in high summer move it to a different heigh
table/chair combination in the garden lounge. I do it with my current
iMac and it sucks. For a device that is almost completely marketed as a
great display with a computer inside the stand problem is serious.

It's sadly overpriced and the base model of this base model only exist
to allow apple show lower prices in ads. But without USB ports or
Ethernet and 8GB it is IMHO a shame model. The M1 macMini is good with a
good price, but this was only to reduce the critics about the transition
to AS. Just as they smoothed it by streching the bad news (no 32bit
compatibility, stronger backward compatibility breaking security) over 3
years ahead of the transition, so people don't associate it with Apple
Silicon. Again a very smart marketing move of Apple.

And technically, it's just an iPad with a big screen. And thats what is
still making me think about the Apple future. They have not yet shown
that they are able to scale the current AS design which they are working
on for 15 years now to a desktop system. If they can't increase the IO
throughput they will have no future. The all integrated approach (the
only technical detail that makes the M1 fast and power efficient) is a
sign of failure not evolution for professional devices. But Apple had no
success in the professional market since 2010 with the last
cheesegrader. The M1 design is still 10 times slower (50 times slower 3D
with RTX3090) than a PC workstation.

Notice: I do own about $10000 worth in fully maxed out iMacs (2),
macMinis (1), iPad (2) and iPhones (1) and i will buy a M1 macMini one
day, but i'm not blinded enough to not see the bad things in this
products.

And this, of course, is the other aspect of the Apple aesthetic. The software is just so nice. Couple your favourite Mac apps with good-looking computers (okay, okay, Barbie-coloured good-looking computers) and you just don’t want to go near a Windows environment ever again. I do (have to) work in Windows, as it happens, mainly to run certain translation-related software that isn’t available for Mac. And the contrast hits me every time – despite all the progress Windows 10 has made, it just isn’t much fun to work in.

Also, nothing compares with the seamless transfer of data from Mac to iPad to iPhone (even to iWatch, although ironically I wouldn’t touch an Apple Watch with a bargepole – a complex, expensive wrist accessory you have to charge every day? No thank you very much! My cheap AmazFit device lasts 30 days before it needs recharging, and no, it doesn’t play music. My iPhone does, though.) That seamless environment is hugely attractive, and not easy to replicate in the Microsoft universe – I’ve tried, got so far and then given up in disgust.

Yes, I confess I do own an Android phone, mainly because I can’t run French Freebox apps on my UK-registered iPhone (they’re not available in the UK App Store), so that’s one down for Apple. Oh, and because it only cost EUR 80, but still has a 6.5-inch screen and a microSD card slot. So that’s two down for Apple. But hey.

Amontillado wrote:

Lothar Scholz wrote:
It's ugly, it's unfunctional, it's unergonomic, it's overpriced and it
>technically was a huge disappointment.
>

All valid concerns, although I get a lot of functionality out of my
Apple gizmos. The iMac would be better if the monitor stand were
detachable and adjustable.

I lived in Linux for a decade or more, then got lured to the dark side
(Windows) by not being able to sync Linux with a Blackberry (there are
ways, they just didn't work for me). Then, I discovered Scrivener, which
was at that time Mac-only, and got a Macbook Air as a writing machine.

Then, I discovered Devonthink. With that as my "binder" I moved to Nisus
Writer, which I like a lot better than Word. By "a lot better" I mean
hamburgers in a boisterous sports bar with good friends is a lot better
than raw vermin, shivering in a cave. But I also recognize there are
people whose voice is found in Word, and I respect that. One person's
rat is another's gourmet dining. :-)

At some point I got an iMac.

Recently I've started migrating my word processing to Mellel.

Curio and MindNode are great for planning. I prefer Apple Numbers to
Excel, not because it's an Apple product, but being able to do layouts
with multiple tables, images, etc, on a single canvas is pretty neat. I
also recognize I could create the same reports with a combination of
Excel and something else. Excel plus Powerpoint, maybe, or my recent
favorite, Affinity Publisher.

In other words, I got hooked on Apple-centric applications. If I had
this desktop experience under Linux, that's where I'd be.

Use what works. For me, performance is heavily weighted toward what I
can do, not what the machine can do. That's why I like Linux. I can
provision heavy iron for datacenters, one of my day job roles, and I can
interface motor controls to a Raspberry Pi in a box the size of a
paperback book. Linux is my katana.

Macs can be workhorses, too, but in a quite different way.

I love the looks in general, and the deep, saturated back and sides appeal to me. However I'm not attracted to the pastel front part and base, so I'm likely to purchase a 4.5K iMac model in Boring Old Silver.

https://bhpho.to/3xm5vhe
https://bit.ly/3gxiIht

People complained about a lot of new Apple products that ended up being beloved, from the original iMac and its various colors to the Airpods to even the original, now iconic Macintosh back in 1984. À Chacun Son Goût

I've used one of the M1 MacBooks and the speed is exemplary, it runs cool, and has amazing battery life. Even the limited 16Gb RAM have proven not to be a real-world limitation given how the internal SSD swap speed has been tested as close to RAM speeds.

Given that a high-quality 4K monitor goes for $600+ the pricing of the new iMacs seems fair. I'll probably miss the extra couple of inches off my 5K iMac

When I saw the colors I realized how grey Apple had become. Thank you Jony Greystoke.

In the two days since the iMac colors hit the market, I've received two ads in email from Apple, touting colorful things, with lots of images of colorful Apple products. Of course, in one ad the "colors" were the Technicolor images displaying on the faces of a black Watch, a grey iPhone, and a grey iPad. But, the next day, Apple sent an advert offering a purple iPhone. Change is good.

The color iMacs are playful and pleasant, and I like them. They would fit in well in New Horizons. Might not be technically perfect; but could be enjoyable to us.

The new iMac's? They're going to sell a ton of them!!!! ; - )

I don't use Macs. I've never used Macs. But these new Macs really do tempt me...

tightbeam wrote:

I don't use Macs. I've never used Macs. But these new Macs really do
tempt me...

I remember seeing a This Week in Tech video that showed an early OSX Mac with the "top" utility running in a terminal window. That's when I knew Macs were likely in my future. Pretty GUI, Unix under the hood, what's not to like?

Although playing devil’s advocate, a recent article (can’t remember who by) pointed out (not the first time, of course) that buying a Mac Mini and buying a couple of big 4K displays would still leave you with change from the price of an iMac…

Heh heh heh

Decent 4K displays are in the $600 range, and the minis only have USB-A (compared to all USB-C [w/2 Thunderbolt] on iMac, and the mini has poorer graphics. I specced out a single Mac Mini with a good 4K display and RAM/SSD with equivalent iMac, and the iMac was only around $200 more but overall a better deal for my uses. While also being more attractive.

Hm, I think you’re talking about the older Mac Minis – the new M1 Minis have got USB-C and support Thunderbolt displays. Apple claims they can support one 6K display and one 4K display using Thunderbolt for one and HDMI 2.0 for the other. They also have (optional) adapters for DVI and Thunderbolt 2.

But you’re right – let’s face it, the iMac comes in yellow!

satis wrote:

Decent 4K displays are in the $600 range, and the minis only have USB-A
(compared to all USB-C [w/2 Thunderbolt] on iMac, and the mini has
poorer graphics. I specced out a single Mac Mini with a good 4K display
and RAM/SSD with equivalent iMac, and the iMac was only around $200 more
but overall a better deal for my uses. While also being more attractive.

MadaboutDana wrote:

let's face it, the iMac comes in yellow!

Color is definitely the last thing on my mind when I purchase / use a computer.
And the next time you suffer a power failure and lose your precious work, you'll regret not buying a battery powered device.
(not to mention the obvious and numerous other advantages of a portable computer)

Pierre

MadaboutDana wrote:

Hm, I think you’re talking about the older Mac Minis &#8211

No I'm not. The current minis have two USB-A ports on them, and Thunderbolt 3.

The new mid/high-end iMacs have *all* USB-C ports, with two of them Thunderbolt 4. And a better graphics card.

https://www.apple.com/mac-mini/specs/

https://www.apple.com/imac-24/specs/

Pierre Paul Landry wrote:

And the next time you suffer a power failure and lose your >precious work, you'll regret not buying a battery powered
device.

I keep my desktop on 24/7, and my backup software does nightly backups, in addition to using background cloud backup. I’ve used desktops for probably twenty years this way and I have never once lost any data from power failure.

More, since I want a desktop and not a portable, and since notebook batteries degrade when not regularly used and recharged, and they have a limited lifetime as well, the cost in effort to periodically discharge and recharge, and then deal down the road with a diminished battery, is a detriment and not an advantage. And since I don’t need a small second screen off to the side I’d be paying for something I don’t need and wouldn’t use.

So I do not see the need for a notebook Mac for my desktop needs. For portable use I have other devices.

Pierre Paul Landry wrote:

And the next time you suffer a power failure and lose your precious
work, you'll regret not buying a battery powered device.
(not to mention the obvious and numerous other advantages of a portable
computer)

I imagine most people back up to the cloud these days, and even if they don't, a UPS device is relatively cheap.

The advantage of a NON-portable computer is that when finally I get up from using it, I'm not tempted to take it with me.

The iMac is perfect as a point-of-sale system for trendy boutiques and I suspect many will be sold for that purpose. As a working computer, not so much. It has all the disadvantages of a laptop and none of the advantages. With respect to the colorful new models, I consider a 24” screen too small for serious desktop work, and this one is not even height adjustable. Also, consider that the M1 gets its speed mainly from being a SOC, integrating CPU, GPU, RAM and storage on a single circuit board. That means that neither memory nor internal storage can ever be expanded beyond what the system came with initially.

Well, I guess this depends on what you mean by “serious desktop work”. I still do serious work on my 2013 MacBook Air (with just 4GB of RAM), although I was foolish enough to install Big Sur on it, which has slowed it down somewhat. I don’t, of course, run heavyweight graphics apps on it – but for writing, e-mailing, web searching, databasing and most other office tasks, it’s perfectly adequate. Not as good as my MacBook Pro, of course, but still.

The newly integrated M1 system is closest in concept to a smartphone or iPad – while you could argue that’s not good enough for “serious desktop work”, I think you would be grossly underestimating the serious work you can do on e.g. an iPad (and I don’t just mean the latest M1-based Pro models). There are plenty of good examples of prolific creators who have been using iPads as their main “desktop” tool for years (Federico Viticci is just one name to spring to mind). There are those who argue iPads aren’t suitable for intensive team-oriented office use; Federico’s example would suggest that’s simply not true. You can certainly do serious team-oriented work on a MacBook Air, even an old one.

I think it’s very easy to fall back into the “I need a heavyweight, supercharged desktop to do any serious work” mentality. And of course you may do! Perhaps you’re a videographer or a heavy user of Adobe Creative Suite? In that case, I could see your point. But for many people, “serious desktop work” is everyday stuff which the new iMacs are more than capable of supporting. As for extending the machine – well, okay, but again, you’re into graphic art, developer or serious gamer territory there. Not into “desktop work” territory. Modern networking means that desktop machines are rarely more than nodes in a broader system, and that’s the way more and more users, companies and services treat them.

xtabber wrote:

The iMac is perfect as a point-of-sale system for trendy boutiques and I
suspect many will be sold for that purpose. As a working computer, not
so much. It has all the disadvantages of a laptop and none of the
advantages. With respect to the colorful new models, I consider a
24” screen too small for serious desktop work, and this one is not
even height adjustable. Also, consider that the M1 gets its speed
mainly from being a SOC, integrating CPU, GPU, RAM and storage on a
single circuit board. That means that neither memory nor internal
storage can ever be expanded beyond what the system came with initially.

xtabber wrote:

The iMac is perfect as a point-of-sale system for trendy boutiques and I
suspect many will be sold for that purpose.

Apple has a global PC marketshare of around 10%, and last breakout I saw (unofficial, as Apple no longer breaks out by model) said around 20% of its Mac sales were iMacs, with *quarterly* Mac revenue of $9 billion. (Gartner estimated 6.9 million Macs sold in the last quarter of 2020.) https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/11/mac-shipments-up-4q-2020-gartner/ So Apple sells 2-4+ million iMac per year, which sounds like an awful lot of trendy boutiques.

MadaboutDana wrote:

Well, I guess this depends on what you mean by "serious desktop work"

I'm used to seeing people trying to dismiss Macs, and specific Mac models, for decades. I do serious work on my 3 year old Intel iMac, running FCPX and music DAWs and Photshop/Lightroom, and some hardcore Excel sheets. These M1 Macs will do everything I need faster, quieter, cooler and under warranty.