User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

New Mac Pro and iMac, circa 2021


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
New Mac Pro and iMac, circa 2021
Page 8 of 12 First Previous 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12  Next Thread Tools
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-11, 14:04

My impression was, and apparently incorrectly, that all but the 1&2TB models were slower for sustained read and write. If it's just the base model, meh. Don't know how anyone could get by with just 256GB on a modern machine, unless all they are doing is web surfing and video/music playback. Just a basic install of all my apps, music and documents is around 256GBs, but I don't use iCloud or Apple Music for that kind of stuff.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Anderson
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2023-02-11, 14:30

Because I don't work in high-res photo/pixel stuff, 3D (beyond basic Sketchup) or video editing, I've got a 256GB SSD in this 13" MacBook Pro, and using right at only ~90GB of it, so a solid 155GB+ of free, unused space. So I'd have no problem with just a 256GB SSD, but it would bug me that it's deliberately "hobbled" in a way that the previous generation wasn't. I didn't like hearing that, whatever the reason was. I don't think it was a supply issue; I think it's just Apple being Apple, always making that ~$200 step-up tier more enticing by going out of their way to monkey with the entry-level model...limiting a feature/spec, turning something off, making it less-than in some way, etc.

Being a vector-based graphics person has had its benefits...years and years of work/projects totaling up to barely anything, file-size/backup-wise. My entire Documents folder (which contains a "Projects" folder, with nested sub-folders of pretty much everything I've ever done, along with other folders of writing, guitar-based things (designs, builds, etc.), mockups, songs I've written, woodworking ideas/plans, resumé/work-related stuff, personal illustration/design, etc...basically everything I've ever done) is all under 3GB. And it's a TON of files.

My entire Photos library, going back to 2002, is under 20GB.

Applications-wise, my only third-party installs are Sketchup 2017 and the Affinity stuff I use. I've always run a lean and clean rig...

Last edited by psmith2.0 : 2023-02-11 at 14:41.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-11, 14:54

I couldn't possibly keep my photos on the boot drive (3+TB of RAW files), so that isn't even included in the 256GB basic install.

I do keep a few GB of iPhone photos on there, but that's about it.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2023-02-11, 16:13

512 was tight but possible on my previous Mac. 256 would drive me insane. I'm baffled how Paul can fit everything in 90.

I do think it's possible for certain folks to survive with 256. Don't underestimate modern web apps. They suck, but they're wildly popular, so people don't necessarily have the notion any more of installing/storing their stuff locally.

Regardless, I think Apple still selling Macs with 256/8 at all is getting a bit silly. Those configs seem to exist more to hit certain price points and less because they actually think they're good choices.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-02-11, 16:59

Awhile back we talked about booting off the main SSD and keeping your files on a separate drive. I've never split things up like that and it would feel weird to me, given that some stuff like Mail would remain on the main drive.

I guess if I could just boot from the main drive, and have my entire user folder located on another drive, 256GB might work.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Anderson
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2023-02-11, 18:03

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
512 was tight but possible on my previous Mac. 256 would drive me insane. I'm baffled how Paul can fit everything in 90.


It's just because of the type of work I do. 98% Illustrator (now Affinity Designer)-based projects, with very small file sizes. And what little pixel-based work I may do is all screen-res stuff. I just never got into the high-resolution image editing or video work that eats up storage. I've got fairly complex, layered vector files - infographics, technical/cutaway illustrations, editorial art, poster/playbill designs, logos, architectural stuff (elevations and floor plans), instrument and woodworking ideas/designs, etc. - and I don't think any are over 1MB(!) in size. Just lots and lots of 150-600K files.

I don't have a ton of personal photos (less than 4,000 total, going back 20+ years) and only 3-4 third-party titles in my Applications folder.

Just now did a "get info" on my hard drive:

Format: APFS
Capacity: 250.14GB (that may be a replacement drive, I'm not sure...this was a loaner/gimme/payment MBP)
Available: 171.93GB (9.36GB purgeable)
Used: 85,593,515,008 bytes (85.59GB on disk).

Not even using 90GB at the moment. So, yeah...me and 256GB get along just fine.

  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-11, 20:14

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
Regardless, I think Apple still selling Macs with 256/8 at all is getting a bit silly. Those configs seem to exist more to hit certain price points and less because they actually think they're good choices.
Even if you can fit your stuff on the 256GB, I'd be concerned about the longevity of the drive, specifically on those systems with only 8GB of RAM, they'd be paging to and from the drive right from boot up practically. I'm assuming Apple is using TLC flash to keep costs down, with that small a drive and constant paging, I couldn't see it lasting long.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Anderson
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2023-02-12, 16:32

Well, speak of the devil...

New iMac not expected to launch until late 2023 at earliest. And we know that "at earliest" is probably optimistic. It might be another full year, early 2024.

They must be sitting on info telling them it's not worth updating anytime soon with the M2 (kinda weird), but it's their stuff and they have their reasons. But I can't imagine anyone forking over full price for a machine about to be two years old, and then even older with each passing month this spring/summer/fall.

Refurbs on this model are the only things that really make sense, as it costs $1,899 for 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD new (which would be the bare minimum for a lot of folks). If you're okay with 8/256, even that's $1,499 to get the full ports, the second fan, etc.

It would be nice if Apple, if they're not going to be updated anytime soon and they're really not much of a good purchase in their current form, would consider a price reduction or some other "sweetener" (up the RAM and/or storage, include the Magic Keyboard with Touch ID on all models, ditch that $1,299 two-port, 8/7 core model and shift the other two down $200, etc.).

Something. But they won't, and then wonder why nobody buys one throughout the bulk of 2023...

"They're just not really selling..."

"Yeah, no shit. You're not updating them! Maybe try that?"

Chicken vs. egg.

This has to be the worst value, currently, in all of Apple's lineup. A 16/256 refurb for $1,439 is the only 24" M1 iMac I'd consider, being $260 off the $1,699 new price for that configuration (with the full ports, 8/8 cores, etc.). They do have those two-port 8/7 core models (8/256) for $1,099, so that's pretty decent for basic home user stuff. But even at that price, why not just get a M1 Air for $999 (or less, refurb) and be mobile/work from anywhere?
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2023-02-12, 17:20

One odd part is that they did reduce the price of the Mac mini. So not only did they upgrade it but didn't upgrade the iMac; they also increased the price gap to the iMac.

Before, an M1 with 8/256 was $699 for the Mac mini or $1299 for the iMac. A $600 gap. Now, it's $599 for the Mac mini, a $700 gap, and you get a faster CPU.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Anderson
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2023-02-12, 17:56

I didn't even think about that. Yeah, the 24" iMac - new, at full price - just makes little sense to spend money on (and won't, for the remainder of 2023 until it gets an update). A shame. They're throwing the M2 into everything else, including models - the 14" and 16" MacBook Pros - that were updated just over a year ago (the tail end of 2021). But they're cool letting this one go two (and possibly 2.5-3) years untouched.

Notebooks are king!

I can almost imagine a future with no iMac in the lineup, if this is any sort of indicator of things. The iPod line went away, so anything's possible. Past success/importance guarantees nothing. Someday the iPhone, as we know it, won't exist either. The whole AIO thing, while I love it and it's so clean and simple, is also kinda weird because in many (most?) cases the display outlasts the computer, and then you're tossing away a perfectly functioning display. And, as far as I know, you can't use it as an external "dumb" display for a Mac mini or MacBook (at least without some electronic/hacking skills I don't possess).

And that's a crying shame because I just happen to have both my old 20" non-booting aluminum iMac and my Mom's 20" non-booting aluminum iMac here with me (but both with perfectly functioning displays), both in my closet. In some perfect world, with the proper cable/hub, I could be flanking this 13" MacBook Pro with one (or two?) 20" Apple displays! I think about this every day and go "grrrrr!"
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-12, 22:04

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
One odd part is that they did reduce the price of the Mac mini. So not only did they upgrade it but didn't upgrade the iMac; they also increased the price gap to the iMac.

Before, an M1 with 8/256 was $699 for the Mac mini or $1299 for the iMac. A $600 gap. Now, it's $599 for the Mac mini, a $700 gap, and you get a faster CPU.
Apple can ship a crap ton of Minis in the same size crate compared to iMacs. Maybe that is where cost savings come in? To me the Mini has been a better buy from day one, unless you really want that AIO package.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-02-12, 23:16

Yeah, we're living in a Mac Mini moment right now. At least the next 12-18 months or so.
The iMac's not dead, it's just resting (until Apple sees how the new Pro shakes out, and decides the future of the Studio.)

And with the Mini, people keep comparing Samsung S9 screen to the Apple Studio Display, but that misses the point.

The new Samsung monitor doesn't move the ASD from the top of the heap. But it does render the LG UltraFine 5K obsolete.

LG is going to have to respond to this attempt to take away a market they currently own. If Samsung and LG get into a price war, and maybe one other player joins the 5K bunch (Dell?), the Mini will become an even better value.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2023-02-13, 02:56

While $700 is still too much for a display, you’re also not gonna find a 4.5K display for that price, so a Mac mini with separate display is gonna be a worse deal in that regard.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-02-13, 13:58

True. But there is value in having the detached screen.

And the way I look at it, a current Mini paired with a 27" screen should rightfully be compared against the larger iMac's price.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-13, 15:46

Not to mention that not everyone has a need or desire for ultra high resolution screens. A good 2.5k display is $350-400 And tax the weak Apple GPU far less.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-02-14, 09:43

That's a good point. I still use dual 2560x1440 displays. Also, if you're headless and not worried about mismatched display scaling, one could probably do very well with any number of 4K displays. Some UI elements may not be exactly at the expected proportion, but with 27-30" sizes and control over viewing distance, I don't see a problem.

.........................................
  quote
dglow
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-02-16, 18:13

There's an interesting tool I've been playing around with called BetterDisplay. With it you can enable HiDPI mode for any display, and further to dial-in almost any virtual resolution you desire.

I've been using it on a 2560x1600 display with 85% scaling. So macOS is rendering everything to 2X at 4352x2720, then downsampling to my display's resolution. It isn't retina of course, there's bit of real estate lost, but I like the tradeoff - sharper and larger text.

https://betterdisplay.pro

Free to download and try. There's a paid Pro version, but the functionality I described appears to be free.

Last edited by dglow : 2023-02-16 at 22:06.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-02-21, 15:17

The 8K TVs have finally exploded into the mainstream.

What does this mean for the new Pro, Apple displays, and maybe - later on - an updated iMac?

When 4Ks went fully mainstream, the iMac went 5K.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-02-21, 15:39

A $5k TV is mainstream?
  quote
dglow
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-02-21, 16:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
The 8K TVs have finally exploded into the mainstream.

What does this mean for the new Pro, Apple displays, and maybe - later on - an updated iMac?
I think it's straightforward: Apple cites 8K support for M2 Pro and Max models via HMDI. Any new Mac with these chips and an HDMI port would presumably do the same, with the imminent (?) Apple Silicon Mac Pro included.

Regarding their own displays, Apple have fully migrated to bespoke retina-friendly resolutions. If Apple did produce an 8K display at 218 dpi, matching their other desktop displays, it would be a rather massive 40" at 16:9 – or 42" if they opted for 16:10.

ProDisplay XDR2?
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-02-22, 22:02

I think we’ll see updates to the OS side that support 3x scaling before we see a 40” desktop display. 2560->5120->7680… 1x -> 2x -> 3x…
  quote
dglow
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-02-24, 11:19

Do you find Apple’s current desktop retina displays too pixelated?

3X for arm’s-length (monitor distance) viewing seems like a lot of squeeze for very little juice.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-03-01, 15:50

Apparently there were some hints that the Mac Pro is still in the works from someone higher up at Apple. That said it sounds like it might just be a Big Mac Studio. No upgradeable GPU, RAM or anything like that.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-03-01, 17:27

Yep. In a choice between a big Mac Studio and a small one - neither of which can be expanded, I think I show up wearing a sandwich board asking for the 27-inch iMac back.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2023-03-01, 19:15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
In a choice between a big Mac Studio and a small one - neither of which can be expanded, I think I show up wearing a sandwich board asking for the 27-inch iMac back.
So you can be stuck with a bog standard M2?
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2023-03-01, 19:32

The processor generally isn't a big bottleneck for me.
If my 27" hadn't spoiled me for large screens, I could probably get by with a upper-end 15" MacBook Air.

If I'm going to buy a sealed-up machine with no internal expansion, I might as well go for an affordable prosumer all-in-one.
I could buy a Studio, but I don't think I really need a Studio. I certainly don't need a $5,000 Mac Pro (but it would be fun to have one.)

Honestly, I just want to see where Apple goes with this. Is the Studio a stopgap machine like the iMac Pro or a long-term replacement for the 27-inch? If the Pro has no expansion, why does it exist? Is it just a really tall version of the Studio?
  quote
dglow
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2023-03-06, 17:04

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
The processor generally isn't a big bottleneck for me.
Honestly, I just want to see where Apple goes with this. Is the Studio a stopgap machine like the iMac Pro or a long-term replacement for the 27-inch? If the Pro has no expansion, why does it exist? Is it just a really tall version of the Studio?
Well, one direction may be if this rumor is accurate and applies to the Mac Pro.

If true this would be a bold approach from Apple for scaling its silicon, and would imply a wild future for its other devices.

Need a faster render of your Final Cut timeline? Thunderbolt your iPad into an external compute module and off you go.
Want more GPU heft and a larger display? Your Studio Display Pro has an M3 Max module already built into it.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2023-03-06, 21:17

Quote:
Originally Posted by dglow View Post
Need a faster render of your Final Cut timeline? Thunderbolt your iPad into an external compute module and off you go.
Want more GPU heft and a larger display? Your Studio Display Pro has an M3 Max module already built into it.
I was pointing out that possibility when Thunderbolt was first *announced*. It's an external PCI bus, for god's sake. LLVM compute units, adoption of Clang, cores over clock... every bloody thing in the development chain has been heading in this direction, slowly but surely.

Will it satisfy every use case? No. Nothing does.

Will it satisfy most? Possibly.

Will it cause much wailing and gnashing of teeth because it's not slots in a box? ABSOLUTELY.

@kickaha@social.seattle.wa.us
#IRC isn't old school... Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.
  quote
Brad
Selfish Heathen
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Zone of Pain
 
2023-03-06, 23:49

I'd bet two nickles that if these compute units ever come to fruition, they will have a totally custom interface that slots only into the next-gen Mac Pro because $$$.

No Thunderbolt. No USB. New proprietary Apple nonsense.

I want to be wrong, but I doubt I will be.

The quality of this board depends on the quality of the posts. The only way to guarantee thoughtful, informative discussion is to write thoughtful, informative posts. AppleNova is not a real-time chat forum. You have time to compose messages and edit them before and after posting.
  quote
drewprops
Space Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta
 
2023-03-06, 23:51

No, no, Brad.

It's because of the Hyperflip.

It's always the Hyperflip, or the dampers.

It simply isn't cross-compatible.

Stop with these conspiracy theories, already.

:;points at Hyperflip, rolls eyes::

...
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 8 of 12 First Previous 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Microsoft Office coming to Mac OS in 2021 as a one-time purchase. psmith2.0 Third-Party Products 29 2022-11-23 23:56
AirPods Pro 2 and iPhone SE 3 rumored for April 2021 psmith2.0 Speculation and Rumors 3 2021-01-12 00:14
Preparing to Finally Leave Aperture (in 2021) drewprops Genius Bar 4 2021-01-03 00:30
The Finder icon circa 10.0 - 10.2 Is it 1981? Apple Products 5 2006-03-25 07:24


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:07.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2023, AppleNova