| ▲ | hbn 8 hours ago |
| The modern iMac is the dream desktop that I'm sure Jobs would have loved to live to see, but Apple's laptops have gotten so good there's practically no reason to buy a computer from them that you can't take on the go. It only makes sense for niche use cases, like your grandpa who is happy to have a single spot in his home for the computer, or a reception desk at a business, etc. |
|
| ▲ | mixdup 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| >or a reception desk at a business This is basically 99% of the proposition of the iMac at this point. If you don't need the specific all-in-one, color, and other design aspects of the iMac or can afford a Studio display, there's no reason not to buy some other display + a Mac mini or a laptop + display |
|
| ▲ | hypersoar 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I actually think a desktop makes sense if you want to run local LLMs. I have an M4 Max laptop left to me when I got laid off. It can run good-sized LLMs, but the system heats up, the fans blast off, and it rips through the battery in under an hour. I'd rather have a desktop set up as a private inference server that I could connect to remotely. |
| |
| ▲ | hbn 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | But the iMacs only have the sans-adjective M-series processors. And is it really gonna have optimal thermals in that thin frame pressed against a big, bright high-res screen? If you need to push performance you'd probably go for a Mac Studio, no? Or at least a Mini. | |
| ▲ | asdff 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Desktop maybe, but Imac that costs more for the same specs of the mini you can shove in the drawer in a desk? I mean with the airspace taken up by an imac you only remotely connect to you could probably have two side by side stacks of I don't know, maybe 20 mac minis each? HPC territory. | |
| ▲ | pathartl 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Bingo, desktops are still king for actual raw processing. Apple laptops are great, but they're still just computers, given proper cooling and power they can perform even better. | | |
| ▲ | asdff 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | An imac doesn't strike me as a desktop with proper cooling. Maybe they do some funny business in the chassis, but its pretty clear that airflow has been put on the bench in favor of having a sexy thin backside. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | lukeify 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I agree with you, but Apple's monitor situation is letting everybody down. Not having a 32" monitor for professionals is frustrating. I am glad I bought my Pro Display XDR. |
| |
| ▲ | mixmastamyk 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Too big for the use cases above. iMac is not for “pro” use unless you’re a writer perhaps. |
|
|
| ▲ | rramon 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The new post Jony Ive design and limitation to 24 inches make it undesirable. I know a lot of folks with older 2007 - 2019 iMacs but none of them who upgraded from those have the new 2020+ one. |
| |
| ▲ | mahboi 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think it's mainly that from 2006 to 2019, the iMac was the only mid-tier desktop that Apple sold. Today, you can get a Mac mini or MBP that's the same or faster than an iMac. | | |
| ▲ | rramon 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | There was a quad core Mini back in 2011. The old iMac was a good all in one package for designers, especially because you'd spend half or more for an equivalent quality screen. | | |
|
|
