[chucker]

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 I have indeed. But have you noticed it ain't around anymore either? Did anyone actually buy one?

I don't know a lot of people with Macs, and yet a friend of mine did get one!

Configured to ~$6k, I believe.

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 I think that last round of 27" iMac updates make it kinda pointless,

Yes. For most use cases, the regular 27-inchers became good enough (and even better in some ways), although the Pro still won on its far superior cooling system. Ran much quieter.

Anyway, Apple just drove the price of the 14-inch MacBook Pro up to $1999, and of the 16-inch to $2499. In 2016, it launched the 13/15 (Touch Bar) at $1799/$2399. In 2012, it launched them (Retina) at $1699/$2199. Those have been creeping up, not down.

The 27-inch iMac has taken quite a different turn. Started at $1699 in 2009, went up to $1799 in 2012, further up (Retina) to $2499 in 2014, down again to $1999 in 2015, and then has been at $1799 since 2017. 2017 also saw the introduction of the $4999 iMac Pro, though.

I think at the very least what we'll see is something similar as with the Retina iMac: the price will go up at least briefly.

OTOH, the M1 iMac is $1299, just like its Intel 21-inch predecessor. So, maybe not? Maybe we'll see a $1799 30-inch iMac? I don't really see it.

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 If they want to create a super-expensive, zero-compromise full-tilt, customizable/explandable tower for that remaining 10-15%, by all means...have at it! I don't care. I just pay attention for the wheels.

Hah! It's gotta be way below 1 percent. All of desktops is those 10-15%, and most of that is occupied by the iMac.

[psmith2.0]

Ooh, then there you go. Even less. Wow, quite a sliver.

I don't see a 30" iMac being one cent less than $1,999. And that's barebones minimum everything, of course (16GB RAM, 512GB SSD and the lowest M1 Pro core configuration available. Then up from there.

[Frank777]

This rumour just has to be wrong. Reducing the bezels on the existing 27" iMac gets you to 29" or so.

The 27" size has been out on the market since 2009.

Apple will be openly mocked if they go 13 years without a screen-size update in a model largely used by professionals.

[kscherer]

Gonna be 6K, and 30". You wait and see.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by kscherer Gonna be 6K, and 30". You wait and see.

I hope you’re right, but I think that’d give the $2k iMac a better screen than the $6k screen.

[Frank777]

Further to chucker's point in the Apple Music thread:

Why isn't Center Stage on the 24" iMac? Could it be a feature on the upcoming 30" iMac?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Further to chucker's point in the Apple Music thread: Why isn't Center Stage on the 24" iMac? Could it be a feature on the upcoming 30" iMac?

I can’t think of any other reason* than those teams being too secretive and the iMac team therefore finding out about the feather too late in the process.

Might still be too early for the next iMac.

* note, however, that the same doesn’t hold true for the MBPs. For those, the answer is probably also: their lids are way too thin.

[psmith2.0]

Apple had a nice webcam years before they became such a thing (Zoom, etc.). And they did wifi (and the wireless backup via Time Capsule) so well.

I wish both iSight and the AirPort stuff were all still around. They Just Worked™.

In the past 10 or so years, Apple has gotten out of the webcam, wifi/wireless backup and display business. They all ditched their space grey accessories (mouse), iPod socks, etc.

If they came out with a standalone iSight 2, which could be as large/thick as needed to support all that lighting and centerstage stuff and in this era of Zoom and all the things FaceTime does/supports, they might have a popular thing? I know notebooks rule, and most notebooks have a built-in camera. But how good are they? And everyone who isn't on an iMac (Apple users or otherwise), they'd like a spiffy, high-quality Apple webcam.

As good as these front-facing cameras are in iPhones, iPads and Macs these days, take that tech/capability and put it into a nice external houses, powered/connected with a single cable and making everyone look as good as possible in all their online stuff (work, play or otherwise).

And I hate using this Netgear router. Anytime something goes a bit sideways, I don't know what to do in terms of trouble-shooting or resetting/tweaking anything. That was never the case, for years and years - decades, almost - with the AirPort stuff.

I'd go back to an updated, modern Apple Time Capsule thing tomorrow if they'd make them again. So easy to setup/maintain, for people like me who don't know anything.

[PB PM]

Apples move away from things like iSight make sense, there are better webcams, albeit without the software integration. Most of the third party cameras, that aren’t junk, have better image quality, from what I’ve seen. Apple always seems to use cameras that are a generation behind the rest of the industry. It is odd that they don’t have something like an iSight for Mac Mini and Mac Pro users though. I haven’t used a third party webcam with a Mac, so I don’t know what the issues might be.

Apple routers worked well on the software side, but the designs hurt them, not visually, but otherwise. They got hot so easily, which hampered performance (we never got an Apple AC router so I don’t know what they were like), but the N units cooked themselves. The Timecapsule was worse than the router, we had both. The ASUS unit I use now has better signal strength, doesn’t get as hot, and doesn’t have the huge god forsaken green light that made a room as bright as daylight. I can program it to reboot on a regular basis, so it doesn’t go wonky. With the Apple units the only recourse was to pull the power cord, how dumb is that? The ASUS also has the ability to use a QR code, so I don’t have to tell guests and friends the password to use the network. Plugged in USB drives can go into standby, something that never seemed to happen with Apple routers.

Apple did some things very well, others, not so much.

[psmith2.0]

I would assume any new stuff coming from them (AirPort or whatever) would be completely new, improved/re-thought versions that didn't repeat the hardware mistakes. Yeah, the software and ease was great. Whatever they had to do to make the hardware good, have at it.

I loved the idea behind Time Capsule, so a modern, improved take on it is something I'd gladly own again in a heartbeat (especially now that I'm currently using a MacBook). That wireless, never-even-have-to-think-about-it backup was awesome, and spoiled me (and quite a few people I know) for years.

We're all back to plugging in Seagate, Toshiba or WD USB hard drives for Time Machine, etc. It works, of course. But why be tethered?

[PB PM]

Most modern routers allow you plug a drive into to them. The ASUS I have even supports operation to use the drive as a time machine backup. Seems to work just as well, without the biggest fault of the time capsule, the much easier ability to switch the drive yourself if it fails.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM Apples move away from things like iSight make sense, there are better webcams, albeit without the software integration. Most of the third party cameras, that aren’t junk, have better image quality, from what I’ve seen.

I mean, it's anecdotal evidence, and I'm sure better ones exist, but I recently compared an iPhone 11, 2013 MacBook Pro, and Logitech external camera (unsure which one), and… boy, that Logitech image clearly had a very poor sensor that they scaled the hell out of to pretend it's "HD". The MBP's image wasn't great, but it was still way better.

In any case, I just don't think this is a market Apple is interested in any more. I'm of two minds about it; I kind of already feel Apple is doing too many things, both in a "single corporation taking over the world" sense and in a "they're losing focus and every individual offering is suffering in fit and finish as a result" sense. OTOH, that era where Apple pushed hard for such integration was nice. The displays, the camera, everything looked nice and worked well. It didn't need to have the best specs, it just needed to be satisfying to use.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM Most modern routers allow you plug a drive into to them. The ASUS I have even supports operation to use the drive as a time machine backup. Seems to work just as well, without the biggest fault of the time capsule, the much easier ability to switch the drive yourself if it fails.

Yup. (Although I would recommend a NAS, for some extra safety and configurability. Put three disks in a Synology. The setup isn't too hard. It is a little pricey, though.)

[turtle]

For my house my mom is actually still using a Time Capsule for her backups. Just the other day I had to pull the plug to reboot it too. She doesn't use it for wifi though, just backups. Simple and the drive still works. Eventually I'll move her to my NAS or something like that, but right now she is on a separate VLAN from my network so she can't reach my devices.

I'm with chucker on the NAS. Sadly, most who are technical won't jump on something like that. To overwhelming of a learning curve even though it really isn't, it just seems like it. Heck, I just got my uncle to get a 2-bay Synology for his house and he managed to do it all on his own.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by chucker Yup. (Although I would recommend a NAS, for some extra safety and configurability. Put three disks in a Synology. The setup isn't too hard. It is a little pricey, though.)

I wonder if Apple would consider making a multi-drivebay NAS? They could call it the “Time Capsule Pro”.

I don’t know what features APFS would need to be a good FS for such a purpose, but they could fallback on forking/using OpenZFS if they had to (I’d probably even prefer that… “different tools for different jobs” and whatnot).

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Dave I wonder if Apple would consider making a multi-drivebay NAS? They could call it the “Time Capsule Pro”. I don’t know what features APFS would need to be a good FS for such a purpose, but they could fallback on forking/using OpenZFS if they had to (I’d probably even prefer that… “different tools for different jobs” and whatnot).

Yeah, APFS is mostly optimized towards flash storage and therefore not the best fit. They might use btrfs at this point. That might be what they do in their own data centers.

But, I don't see this happening.

Maybe once they unify how backups work across macOS and iOS? You can backup macOS to a local disk or network disk, but not iCloud. You can backup iOS to iCloud, but (other than through Finder, manually) not anywhere local. I can't imagine they're happy with this weird discrepancy, and I sure hope their answer isn't, "got it! Macs, too, only backup to iCloud from now on", but rather them adding a way to backup an iPhone and iPad to Time Machine somehow. And maybe, just maybe, that's the context in which they bring back some kind of hardware solution.

Maybe they'll partner with Synology.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Dave I wonder if Apple would consider making a multi-drivebay NAS? They could call it the “Time Capsule Pro”. I don’t know what features APFS would need to be a good FS for such a purpose, but they could fallback on forking/using OpenZFS if they had to (I’d probably even prefer that… “different tools for different jobs” and whatnot).

Not going to happen, Apple wants people to use iCloud.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM Not going to happen, Apple wants people to use iCloud.

Their iPad Pro goes up to 2 TB, and their Macs 8 TB. I don't think Apple is under any illusion that their maximum iCloud plan, which is 2 TB, is adequate for those.

[Mac+]

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 Apple had a nice webcam years before they became such a thing (Zoom, etc.).

I still have this!

I also bought a Dyson Air Purifier this year and it struck me that the design language is very similar.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker Their iPad Pro goes up to 2 TB, and their Macs 8 TB. I don't think Apple is under any illusion that their maximum iCloud plan, which is 2 TB, is adequate for those.

Sure for people like us, but the vast majority of users likely wouldn’t even need the 2TBs. I’d be willing to bet most of the Macs and idevices sold have the smallest drive capacity installed.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM Sure for people like us, but the vast majority of users likely wouldn’t even need the 2TBs.

Sure.

But suppose your Mac is "only" 1 TB; even then, a few incremental backups later, your iCloud storage is full. And that includes no more space for photos, either.

Originally Posted by PB PM I’d be willing to bet most of the Macs and idevices sold have the smallest drive capacity installed.

Yes, but what I'm saying is it's not a practical solution for everyone. Perhaps for 80%, perhaps even 95%.

[turtle]

I have a family plan and we use ~3/4 of the 2TB plan. I can't imagine our computers going on there too. That is just a handful of files and all of our family images. Really, it is mostly videos nowadays that consume the space since they are all grouped in with the Photos storage.

I also can't see them moving Time Machine backups to iCloud just due to the state of most people's internet connections. That is a lot of bandwidth to put through the those servers. Restoring would be HIDEOUS for most for Macs from an internet backup.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker Sure. But suppose your Mac is "only" 1 TB; even then, a few incremental backups later, your iCloud storage is full. And that includes no more space for photos, either.

Does iCloud even do incremental backups? I thought it would be like idevices, one shot that only updates changes.

I’m not saying it’s practical as a backup solution, but it does seem like the direction Apple is going.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM Does iCloud even do incremental backups? I thought it would be like idevices, one shot that only updates changes.

Well, I don't know how iCloud stores its backups. I know iTunes supports multiple backup snapshots, but I'm not sure they're incremental. In any case, if they aren't, that means even more storage is needed.

[turtle]

It must store snapshots of sorts for iPhone backups because when you provision a new phone or iPad you get options on restore points when pulling from the cloud. At least, with my family plan we get it as an option. I don't know is the number of restore points is based on plan or space though.

[psmith2.0]

Re: the iMac, I guess the safe assumption is that at some point in 2022 it'll get the M2 (which is what the rumored MacBook Air update/replacement is getting). The natural, expected replacement to the M1 from last year.

Do you think one of the features of the M2 will be a higher RAM ceiling? 32GB? I ask because the aluminum 21.5" iMac, priced in the low/mid-$1,000's and that nobody saw as any sort of "pro" Mac, was, in its later years, able to be configured with 32GB.

Or is 32GB RAM (and up), for technical reasons, something that will only be part of the Pro/Max AS offerings?

Seems weird, in 2022, that a $1,500+ iMac (24" or otherwise) would be limited to 16GB, so will that be one of the main features/improvements of the M2, slated for non-pro Macs?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 Re: the iMac, I guess the safe assumption is that at some point in 2022 it'll get the M2 (which is what the rumored MacBook Air update/replacement is getting). The natural, expected replacement to the M1 from last year. Do you think one of the features of the M2 will be a higher RAM ceiling? 32GB? I ask because the aluminum 21.5" iMac, priced in the low/mid-$1,000's and that nobody saw as any sort of "pro" Mac, was, in its later years, able to be configured with 32GB. Or is 32GB RAM (and up), for technical reasons, something that will only be part of the Pro/Max AS offerings? Seems weird, in 2022, that a $1,500+ iMac (24" or otherwise) would be limited to 16GB, so will that be one of the main features/improvements of the M2, slated for non-pro Macs?

You just asked this the other day https://forums.applenova.com/showthr...t=39194&page=2

TL;DR: the M2 might offer 32. Maybe not. The M3 probably will.

[psmith2.0]

Ohmigosh, I'm truly losing my mind. I'm sorry, my apologies!

I honestly have zero memory of that.

Man...I think I'm gonna be in some trouble in a decade or so. I immerse myself in crosswords, Jumbles, Scrabble, trivia, brain/word/logic puzzles on the daily, trying to keep things "in shape"/working. May not be working or making a difference... I may not have to worry about a future Mac. Just get me an Etch-A-Sketch and set me in the corner with a banana and some juice.

[chucker]

It’s fine! I just found it a little funny.

[chucker]

So, the low-end Intel iMac is gone. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/30...1-5-inch-imac/

That thing was quite old (four CPU generations), and possibly discontinued in part because Intel discontinued the parts (same likely reason the iMac Pro was discontinued earlier this year).

But the reason I bring it up is pricing. Does Apple intend for the iMac to start at $1299 from now on? What about education?

My guess: they were hoping the Intel could hold out until the M2 iMac drops, and then the M1 would drop in price to $1099. Instead, I guess they’re now doing no low-end model at all for, what, three quarters of a year?