3 ms·

> - No iMac update (!!!). iMacs were refreshed in late 2015. It's typically ~3 years between new generations, often with a hardware refresh somewhere in betwee

by pfg 10y ago

> - No iMac update (!!!). iMacs were refreshed in late 2015. It's typically ~3 years between new generations, often with a hardware refresh somewhere in between. Nothing new here. > - No monitor announcement. They partnered with LG (I think?) on a 5k monitor. Sounds like a reasonable replacement for the Thunderbolt Display.

acdha 10y ago
> iMacs were refreshed in late 2015. It's typically ~3 years between new generations, often with a hardware refresh somewhere in between. Nothing new here. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac shows the days between releases in the past: 147 May 2015 215 Oct 2014 387 Sep 2013 298 Nov 2012 577 May 2011 280 Jul 2010 We're currently 380 days since the last release, which is on the long side other than the one 2010-2011 outlier. I don't think anyone expects Apple to ship radically different hardware designs every year but they desperately need a tick-tock strategy which ships identical cases with non-obsolete components if they expect anyone outside of the die-hard Mac fans to keep buying.
- pfg 10y ago
  This might have made sense a couple of years ago, but I don't think desktop hardware is advancing at a rate where yearly updates are a must. This seems even more true for typical Mac use-cases where users don't quite care as much about gaming performance. Intel deprecated tick-tock for a reason, so I don't think it would make sense for Apple to adopt that strategy now.
  - acdha 10y ago
    I don't think it needs to be a rigid update every year but they should have a policy of not staying more than one generation behind. The 5K iMac jumped to Skylake, so that's fine, but the rest of the iMac line is stuck on Broadwell, the Mac Mini is Haswell, and the Mac Pro is Ivy Bridge. The solid industrial design, long service life, etc. are worth something but probably not 3-4 hardware generations, especially for the premium market Apple wants to be in. The PC market hasn't been completely stagnant and while nobody is buying a Mac for super hard-core gaming they really don't want to be in a position where someone drops a fair amount of cash and their new computer struggles with a game which came out a year or two back, 4K video playback, etc.
  - nicky0 10y ago
    I'm more concerned about the ports. If Apple really is moving to Thunderbolt 3 over USB-C for everything, they need to start shipping iMacs and Mac Minis that support this too.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

by pfg 10y ago

acdha 10y ago

> iMacs were refreshed in late 2015. It's typically ~3 years between new generations, often with a hardware refresh somewhere in between. Nothing new here. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac shows the days between releases in the past: 147 May 2015 215 Oct 2014 387 Sep 2013 298 Nov 2012 577 May 2011 280 Jul 2010 We're currently 380 days since the last release, which is on the long side other than the one 2010-2011 outlier. I don't think anyone expects Apple to ship radically different hardware designs every year but they desperately need a tick-tock strategy which ships identical cases with non-obsolete components if they expect anyone outside of the die-hard Mac fans to keep buying.

pfg 10y ago
This might have made sense a couple of years ago, but I don't think desktop hardware is advancing at a rate where yearly updates are a must. This seems even more true for typical Mac use-cases where users don't quite care as much about gaming performance. Intel deprecated tick-tock for a reason, so I don't think it would make sense for Apple to adopt that strategy now.
- acdha 10y ago
  I don't think it needs to be a rigid update every year but they should have a policy of not staying more than one generation behind. The 5K iMac jumped to Skylake, so that's fine, but the rest of the iMac line is stuck on Broadwell, the Mac Mini is Haswell, and the Mac Pro is Ivy Bridge. The solid industrial design, long service life, etc. are worth something but probably not 3-4 hardware generations, especially for the premium market Apple wants to be in. The PC market hasn't been completely stagnant and while nobody is buying a Mac for super hard-core gaming they really don't want to be in a position where someone drops a fair amount of cash and their new computer struggles with a game which came out a year or two back, 4K video playback, etc.
- nicky0 10y ago
  I'm more concerned about the ports. If Apple really is moving to Thunderbolt 3 over USB-C for everything, they need to start shipping iMacs and Mac Minis that support this too.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]