[Frank777]

Unless the Mac rumour mill has been seriously outwitted, it looks like this Tuesday, the 30th anniversary of the iMac will pass quietly.

There's no word on an updated iMac before November, and the M3 chip hasn't been publicly shown yet.

I think it would have been cool to see a 30th anniversary iMac come forward this Tuesday. Apple's last attempt at an anniversary edition was overpriced, and didn't really light the world on fire. But it actually released in 1997 and the iMac came out in 1998. So in many ways it seems like it set the stage for the wildly successful iMac, just like the Newton turned out to be a precursor to the iPhone.

I would have liked to see a 27-inch model return this Tuesday in space grey or midnight, with a M3 chip and a higher-end elegant design hinted at by the TAM. The current 24-inch iMac is aluminium, but somehow manages to look like it's made of plastic in photos.

As an anniversary edition, it could have a few unique features we haven't seen on an iMac before, like an integrated AirPods holder or a wireless charger integrated into the base. (Or maybe just height adjustment + rotation would be enough to drive iMac fans wild!) All of these would seem to be easy for Apple.

What do you think? Would a 30th anniversary edition of the iMac interest you?
Any new whiz-bang features you would like to see in the iMac line?

------

As chucker notes below, I typed 30th, but meant 25th Anniversary iMac.

[PB PM]

Not going to happen, they don't care. Not sure why I'd want one either.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 I think it would have been cool to see a 30th anniversary iMac come forward this Tuesday. Apple's last attempt at an anniversary edition was overpriced, and didn't really light the world on fire.

Rumor has it it was more of a Gil Amelio pet project, and that he bought a bunch for himself.

The execution struck me as lacking, and it was perhaps also the worst of 1990s' Apple (and kind of mirrored by early "Edition" Apple Watches). A luxury item that wasn't very practical.

But, at the same time, a sensible evolution of some of the original Mac's ideas. And just five years later, they managed to make "all-in-one LCD Mac for consumers" somewhat feasible.

I don't think a 30th (I think you mean 25th?) anniversary iMac is going to happen. Nor do I see a 50th anniversary (Apple Inc.'s) Mac four years from now. Mainly because Jobs culturally didn't care for nostalgia; he wanted to look forward, not backward, and I think Cook has just adopted this ideal.

But secondarily… whom is that Mac for, really? If it's just for a bunch of hardcore fans, that isn't a good fit for Apple's operations today. They optimize towards producing stuff at scale.

Originally Posted by Frank777 What do you think? Would a 30th anniversary edition of the iMac interest you? Any new whiz-bang features you would like to see in the iMac line?

It's a bummer the current iMac is limited to 16 Gigs of RAM; otherwise, I might have bought one in the early pandemic days. A mythical 25th Anniversary iMac (TAI?) could be…

• the first desktop Mac with a mini-LED display, with support for HDR.
• the first Mac with some new speaker technology, maybe?
• the first Mac with M3 Pro, though that wouldn't be a big deal since others would quickly get it as well
• a Mac to bring back Target Display Mode

I can't really think of much else. It wouldn't offer internal expansion. It also wouldn't feature an M3 Max (probably) for the same reason the Mac mini doesn't, and certainly not the M3 Ultra: they'd have to make it too thick.

It would be nice if it were a break from the boring basic design principle that started with the iMac G5 (put the entire computer behind the display). I think the iMac G4 was much cooler, at least in theory. I'm not sure today's Apple is interested in a daring new desktop computer design, though. In part because they've already reduced the iMac to its essentials, Jony Ive-style, and in part because desktop computers are kind of boring.

Which… maybe an anniversary Mac shouldn't be a desktop at all, but rather a daring laptop. Like the 12-inch MacBook, but better.

[Bryson]

I dunno why everyone is so down on the the TAM. It seemed like a "failure" at the time, and sure, it wasn't a commercial success at the time. But... It could well be considered to be the prototype of the modern (2004 onward) iMac design, in which case it was a resounding success. They just didn't quite have the technology available to meet their vision at the time.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Bryson I dunno why everyone is so down on the the TAM. It seemed like a "failure" at the time, and sure, it wasn't a commercial success at the time. But... It could well be considered to be the prototype of the modern (2004 onward) iMac design, in which case it was a resounding success. They just didn't quite have the technology available to meet their vision at the time.

I think it comes down to a difference in philosophy between Amelio and Jobs. Amelio thought this was a cool design study, so let's ship it. Jobs would've thought "yeah, but who's gonna actually use it in real life", and canned it, other than for internal research purposes.

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by chucker I don't think a 30th (I think you mean 25th?) anniversary iMac is going to happen.

You're right. This is why you shouldn't post late when you're tired. I meant 25th, and typed 30th all over the place.

Can a mod please change the thread title? I'll leave my post errors intact for posterity.

Originally Posted by chucker A mythical 25th Anniversary iMac (TAI?) could be… the first desktop Mac with a mini-LED display, with support for HDR. the first Mac with some new speaker technology, maybe? the first Mac with M3 Pro, though that wouldn't be a big deal since others would quickly get it as well a Mac to bring back Target Display Mode

I've read that TDM was dumped because Thunderbolt 2 & 3 didn't have the throughput needed. But TB4 does, so here's hoping it returns.

Originally Posted by chucker I'm not sure today's Apple is interested in a daring new desktop computer design, though. In part because they've already reduced the iMac to its essentials, Jony Ive-style, and in part because desktop computers are kind of boring.

Which is why I think it's needed. Put some excitement back in the desktop line.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Frank777 You're right. This is why you shouldn't post late when you're tired. I meant 25th, and typed 30th all over the place. Can a mod please change the thread title? I'll leave my post errors intact for posterity.

Done! 👍

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Frank777 I've read that TDM was dumped because Thunderbolt 2 & 3 didn't have the throughput needed. But TB4 does, so here's hoping it returns..

To me that doesn’t make sense. They honestly expect people to believe TB cannot handle as much data as DVI or VGA? TDM worked fine with those, albeit low resolutions.

[Frank777]

Yes, but "low resolutions" would be a problem.

If you are repurposing a 5K screen for use with another Mac, you are generally going to want to see a 5K image in front of you.

[PB PM]

Given that external GPUs via TB worked on Intel Macs, pushing high resolution screens, not sure why TDM wouldn't work. As for low resolution, I was specifically taking about VGA or DVI. TB is way beyond what they could do.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM They honestly expect people to believe TB cannot handle as much data as DVI or VGA? TDM worked fine with those, albeit low resolutions.

So, not "fine" at all.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker So, not "fine" at all.

Think about the resolutions available when DVI and VGA were standard, those were high resolutions then. We are talking about 1080p and 1440p here, not 800x600. Those were the resolution Macs were putting out at the time, would have been hard to output what the screens and GPUs couldn’t push. I don’t recall if DIV even supported 4K, and I doubt there were any 4K displays at the time anyway. My point isn’t what DVI and VGA could do, but that TB is far superior, and there is no reason it shouldn’t work for TDM now. Apple simply doesn’t want it to work, they want you to buy a new screen from them, not reuse an old iMac.

[chucker]

If you're arguing "I'd rather have Target Display Mode with a low resolution than none at all", sure, I can see that, but that's not really the Apple way.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker If you're arguing "I'd rather have Target Display Mode with a low resolution than none at all", sure, I can see that, but that's not really the Apple way.

That’s not what I’m arguing at all. What I’m getting at is that TB is already more than capable for full resolution, they just don’t want to do it.

[psmith2.0]

Honestly, the current design is as stylish/thin as it gets. Just do it in two-tone white/Bondi Blue, with maybe some curves/swoops between the two colors to mirror the original iMac look. In fact, make it plastic. Same design/body style of the current 24” models, just go back to the frosted white/translucent Bondi plastic on the body. Too tired/busy to draw it up. Use your imaginations. Do a matching keyboard/mouse, current design/look, but 1998 plastics/colors/touches.

[709]

[Frank777]

I know expecting a new iMac today was a faint hope. But I at least expected Apple to do something on the homepage to commemorate the date.

The bondi-blue iMac saved Apple. It's revitalization of the company led to the iOS revolution.

The fact that Apple hasn't even mentioned the anniversary feels like a vote of no confidence in the current machine. Very few seemed to like the white border, which makes it look like a toy, the processor is outdated, and the larger version never appeared.

I mean Apple calls it the iMac 24" - not iMac - on their own site. The implication being that a larger version was coming at some point.

Perhaps the November M3 update will reset the whole line. I still like large-screen desktops for my work at home.

[PB PM]

The Tim Cook Apple is a soulless money making machine, no room for sentiment. I wasn’t expecting anything for that very reason.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by PB PM The Tim Cook Apple is a soulless money making machine, no room for sentiment. I wasn’t expecting anything for that very reason.

Yeah, that's kinda my thinking. They seem like the kind of place we once used to mock/deride. When the Rebellion becomes the Empire.

Probably a little heavy-handed...Tim ain't choking anybody in the hallways (as far as we know).

[Brad]

Originally Posted by PB PM The Tim Cook Apple is a soulless money making machine, no room for sentiment. I wasn’t expecting anything for that very reason.

Truer words have rarely been spoken.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by Frank777 the processor is outdated

The M1 is still every-day faster than almost every other consumer-focused processor out there, and the Pro versions will still run circles around almost everything else.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 Tim ain't choking anybody in the hallways (as far as we know).

I know a few people who wouldn't mind that...

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by kscherer The M1 is still every-day faster than almost every other consumer-focused processor out there, and the Pro versions will still run circles around almost everything else.

Obviously, I meant in terms of Apple Silicon releases. Anyone paying attention knows that the M3 is right around the corner.

In general, I'm not sure I personally need more than an old Intel i7.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by kscherer The M1 is still every-day faster than almost every other consumer-focused processor out there, and the Pro versions will still run circles around almost everything else.

Not even close to being true. It’s not 2020 anymore, Intel and AMD have improved a lot since then. Even M2 Pro Max is behind Intels 13th gen desktop chips for raw performance. Power per watt is another story altogether.

[Kickaha]

What about power per $ ?

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Kickaha What about power per $ ?

Not much of a contest from a cost stand point. The Windows machines use more power, which costs more, but they also get the work done faster. A lot faster in some cases. Then you add that on average you can buy similar or better performing hardware for less money up front, and my guess is you come out even in the long run.

LTT did tests comparing the Mac Studio (M2 Pro Max), Mac Pro (M2 Pro Max) against a top of the line Windows PC with a top of the consumer Intel chip 13th gen (custom built, not from Dell or another maker). In almost every test, the PC was faster, not by just a little. Worse yet, for Apple, the windows machine cost less than either Mac. If you need Apple software it’s not debate, but if you use cross platform software, it’s not contest when it comes to value for the dollar spent.

[Kickaha]

Care to share the link? Went searching over there, did not see it, working late tonight. :P

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM the windows machine cost less than either Mac

WHAT!!

Stop the presses

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Care to share the link? Went searching over there, did not see it, working late tonight. :P

https://youtu.be/OtcSNiU9Zb8

I believe this is the one, but they did several on the new Mac Pro.

Originally Posted by chucker WHAT!! Stop the presses

When discussing performance per dollar spent, it’s hard to ignore. Not to mention that, depending on what you build or buy off the shelf, that is not always the case. As I said if you need Apple software, the Mac is always going to be the choice, but if you don’t, both options are worth looking at.

[709]

They've got a little less than 3 years to perfect the 2nm M5 MegaUltra, then dazzle us with a knockout product for Apple's 50th. Maybe it'll be a 50-inch iMac.