Hacker News

points by hbn 2 days ago | 0 comments

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.

[–] hypersoar 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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.

[–] mixdup 2 days ago

>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

[–] lukeify 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

Too big for the use cases above. iMac is not for “pro” use unless you’re a writer perhaps.

[–] internet2000 2 days ago

Laptops are bad because you have to crane your neck down.

If you need portability, you have your phone already.

[–] rramon 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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 2 days ago

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.

[–] mahboi 2 days ago

Yeah, they had a "server" Mac mini that was faster multi-core at the cost of being slower single-core. But 2011 Mac mini server https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac-mini-c... or non-server https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac-mini-c... vs the iMac https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-i7-3... of the same year, the iMac is much faster than both in both single and multi core.

I did have a 2010 Mac mini server, don't remember how it compared to the non-server one other than having dual HDDs instead of the DVD drive. I put them in RAID-1.