Apple releases new low-end iMac, starting at $1,099

Apple took down its online store earlier this morning, and when it returned, a new low-end iMac had appeared, with a starting price of $1099.00. For that new entry-level price, you can get a 1.4GHz dual-core i5, 8GB of RAM, a 500GB hard drive and Intel HD 5000 graphics.

Apple is lowering the cost of entry for its popular desktop computer, which the company no doubt hopes will keep its sales momentum moving forward. Starting at $1099, this puts it in closer competition with other OEMs and reduces the ‘Apple tax’ that many associate with Apple products.

As with other iMacs, you can customize and boost many specs of the device in Apple’s configuration tool with the usual items like a Fusion Drive, although you cannot add any more RAM to the computer.

Seeing as OS X 10.10 has not been released yet, the iMac will ship with OS X 10.9 but will be upgradable to the upcoming release.

Aside from cheaper internals, nothing else has changed on the iMac but that’s not really a surprise. Apple rarely updates the physical exterior of its products and the iMac got a refresh back in 2012 to the new slimmer design that is shipping now.

Source: Apple

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple's online store is down, new iMacs inbound? [Update]

Next Story

Samsung's latest Galaxy S5 includes QHD display, 3GB RAM, Snapdragon 805

112 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The problem with Mac is there are just too few apps for the platform - apart from the usual ubiquitous Microsoft Office (years behind the Windows version) and Adobe (who seem to have gone off supporting Mac in recent years) and a spattering of aging lifestyle apps from Apple itself, what else is there?
Most TV/Video/Music/Media production has moved onto the more powerful Windows platform where there are literally millions of apps.
It's also years behind in that it doesn't even support touch and there's no stylus for artists to draw on the screen. You can't even add more memory and it's just simply expensive for what you get. There's nothing you can do with this that you can't do cheaper, faster and better on Windows.
Finally, I'd say it's wildly misleading to call desktop Macs "popular" - they account for less than 1% of all PCs sold worldwide.

Major_Plonquer said,
The problem with Mac is there are just too few apps for the platform - apart from the usual ubiquitous Microsoft Office (years behind the Windows version) and Adobe (who seem to have gone off supporting Mac in recent years) and a spattering of aging lifestyle apps from Apple itself, what else is there?
Most TV/Video/Music/Media production has moved onto the more powerful Windows platform where there are literally millions of apps.

Not enough apps? Mac's come out of the box with native PDF editing, movie creation and editing, photo editing, audio creation and editing, web content creation, Automator, AppleScript, Xcode...thats just out of the box included with every mac and thats just off the top of my head.

It may not have as many "utility" apps but thats because Mac OS doesn't need them, it doesn't use a registry, it defrags on the fly....Macs do not come loaded with bloatware, intact they come with zero bloatware...

Really, name something you require to do that you cannot do on a Mac?

Major_Plonquer said,
It's also years behind in that it doesn't even support touch and there's no stylus for artists to draw on the screen. You can't even add more memory and it's

Macs support tablets with pen input (I have one) and you can install your own RAM in an iMac,Mac Pro and MacBook Pro's (non-retina). The iMac posted above can handle up to 32GB of RAM

Not a bad machine but quite frankly if they priced it at $999 it would've been even more attractive in my opinion. Sub $1000 Apple PC ($1 yes but its about the perception). Still not bad machine if you want to buy your kid an Apple PC for their room.

Not very high end specs but I have an old iMac here at work running the latest beta of Yosemite and it runs very well (I imagine it will only get speedier once they release final builds without all debug stuff enabled). So this definitely has few years of solid use for most applications. I know you can get much better PC for that money but this is obviously geared at a little different market where that isn't as important as the fact that it's an Apple.

Yosemite DP2 is not a bad OS - however, exactly how taxing an OS is it? I didn't pull the proposed "Performa II" specs out of a hat - my current Hack is (except for the GPU) an exact match FOR those specs. (I'm talking the original "Performa II" spec - based on Kentsfield.) It triple-boots Yosemite, Windows 8.1, and Server 2012R2. The only real issue I have with Yosemite DP2 is compatibility - not performance, and not even aesthetics; the few complaints I have about aesthetics are decidedly in "quibble" territory. Apple purchasers are brand-loyal to a degree that any other OEM wishes for - however, such obscene brand loyalty does have limits, as even Sony found out.

I do love these, although I'm not into OS X. The screen is beautiful but tbh compared to offerings from ASUS and a couple of others, the bezels are actually pretty horrible now. I guess that's something they could improve on next time.

Still think its too expensive. But to be fair on them, as with any apple product, you know it'll be well built, designed and work as you expect it to. I'm in the market for a new desktop, but I won't be purchasing this for £900 odd pounds.

Zlain said,
Still think its too expensive. But to be fair on them, as with any apple product, you know it'll be well built, designed and work as you expect it to. I'm in the market for a new desktop, but I won't be purchasing this for £900 odd pounds.
Its not well built, its just aesthetically pleasing thats it. Apple uses the same parts, chipsets as every other OEM out there. There is nothing magical about Macs.

Gotenks98 said,
Its not well built, its just aesthetically pleasing thats it. Apple uses the same parts, chipsets as every other OEM out there. There is nothing magical about Macs.
They are well built, and anyone who works at a school or other institution that deals with large volumes of computers will attest to that. Apple computers have a failure rate in the 1-5% Range, Dell are closer to 10% (or more on a bad year), HP 20-25%, and other manufactures go up from there. I did my time with my collage, and with my local school board, in terms of how reliable they are nothing trumps Apple. Add on to that if there's ever an issue it was a phone call, and you'd have a new one on the door next business day. Only Dell comes close to that speed of service.. almost a week for HP, and other OEM's you can be waiting months while you send the old hardware back and they look for issues or otherwise waste time.

Maybe times have changed. Our main college library has a Learning Commons area that's a ratio of half and half with Apple's iMacs and Dell's OptiPlex desktops, and roughly 1/4-1/3 of the iMacs always seem to be down. Students often just grab the chairs to sit at the other desktop workstations with their friends/classmates.

Gotenks98 said,
Its not well built, its just aesthetically pleasing thats it. Apple uses the same parts, chipsets as every other OEM out there. There is nothing magical about Macs.

Actually that's not true. Unlike many OEMs, Apple never buys the latest, greatest chipsets. They tend to go for last year's models which they can buy cheaper. Many Asian OEMs such as Lenovo, ASUS and others tend to use more modern, up-to-date components. And as you may have heard, last year the Chinese government criticized Apple for their low quality manufacturing and poor customer service.

Ryoken said,
They are well built, and anyone who works at a school or other institution that deals with large volumes of computers will attest to that. Apple computers have a failure rate in the 1-5% Range, Dell are closer to 10% (or more on a bad year), HP 20-25%, and other manufactures go up from there. I did my time with my collage, and with my local school board, in terms of how reliable they are nothing trumps Apple. Add on to that if there's ever an issue it was a phone call, and you'd have a new one on the door next business day. Only Dell comes close to that speed of service.. almost a week for HP, and other OEM's you can be waiting months while you send the old hardware back and they look for issues or otherwise waste time.

I don't know where you get your numbers from, but over here in Asia, you're way off the mark. Even the Chinese government took a pot-shot at Apple's low quality and poor customer service. Apple publicly apologized.
I'll also bet you've never tried travelling with an Apple product. I've had 2 (one iPad one MBA) literally explode while in-flight. Then try to have them repaired in a country different from where you bought it. Their customer service is at the lower end of the scale. And they break far too easily.

Major_Plonquer said,
Even the Chinese government...

lol, you mean the same Chinese government that allows there to be literal replicas of entire Apple stores that sell nothing but unlicensed counterfeit Apple products? You mean the same friendly to foreign businesses government of China that stole source code from Google? The great Chinese government that monitors and censors the citizens internet activity?

Yeah I'll really be sure to listen to China's insight on quality control and customer service, that is too freaking funny.

Ryoken said,
They are well built, and anyone who works at a school or other institution that deals with large volumes of computers will attest to that. Apple computers have a failure rate in the 1-5% Range, Dell are closer to 10% (or more on a bad year), HP 20-25%, and other manufactures go up from there. I did my time with my collage, and with my local school board, in terms of how reliable they are nothing trumps Apple. Add on to that if there's ever an issue it was a phone call, and you'd have a new one on the door next business day. Only Dell comes close to that speed of service.. almost a week for HP, and other OEM's you can be waiting months while you send the old hardware back and they look for issues or otherwise waste time.
This is utter ###### right here. I work for a school and we service just as many mac and pc. They both have about the same failure rate on hardware. I swear there are so many people drinking the apple juice right now that think apple can do no wrong.

Steve121178 said,
Touch on a desktop is an ergonomic nightmare.

It depends on your use-case scenario. If I was sitting down at a desk for 8+ hours everyday, it wouldn't be friendly after a short while. But for graphics artists having a large display canvas to draw on, it can be an advantage. Another example is a mechanical engineer who can use touch to navigate a 3D design much more fluidly than a mouse / keyboard can. Apple does have the Magic Trackpad which is awesome and can simulate touch display interfaces, but still requires the usage of a mouse pointer showing on screen.

I'd like more hands-off interfaces as well, such as voice control. The Motorola X smartphone is quite good at this and it keeps getting better. The bottom line I'm getting at is give people more options, and observe.

Apparently according to apple $1,099 = £900 :-(

Yet based on the current exchange rate it really should be around £650

Even if that ended up being £650 + VAT it would still be less than the £900 apple UK want for it.

Does anyone else remember when iMacs were revolutionary and made fun of being the same old boring white box?

Low end iMacs? Plain white boxes... Tim Cook is the worst.

acido00 said,
That is a good price for a computer with the quality material and OS.

No, it's terrible. For $600 you can get a faster, better PC that will last even longer.

Dalamar6 said,

No, it's terrible. For $600 you can get a faster, better PC that will last even longer.

Which one? Link or never happen

Dalamar6 said,

No, it's terrible. For $600 you can get a faster, better PC that will last even longer.

Don't need it to last longer, you can sell it for half the price in 2 years and buy a new one. You couldn't do that with your PC.

acido00 said,

Which one? Link or never happen

You could comfortably build a PC for $600 that would beat the kit inside this iMac.

I did some digging around for similar "all-in-one" units as you'd no doubt ###### your pants if the comparison was a regular desktop.

As I'm in Canada the iMac in question is $1,149. A quick glance on the Future Shop website brought up an HP unit that has a similar dual core i5, 8GB ram, and similar resolution screen. Difference is the HP unit is a 23 inch touchscreen display, has a 2TB hard drive and is $100 cheaper.

They're even selling a 21.5 inch version with a 1TB drive but with an AMD processor for under $800 - saving over $300. It's also a touch screen. http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA...1314176bbaf64bceae6ca6den02

Gotta love hypocritical Windows fans when anyone points out how low spec Windows Phone hardware is its all, "But they don't need powerful hardware its all in the operating system!" but when a new Apple device is released its, "Overpriced because I can buy a Windows PC for less" ...

When you are buying a Mac you are not buying it for its specs you are buying it for the experience of Apple's software as well as Apple's innovative hardware design and aesthetics...not everyone wants a gigantic tower with a bunch of cables all over and Windows operating system...Not everybody is the same, imagine that

Sonne said,
Gotta love hypocritical Windows fans when anyone points out how low spec Windows Phone hardware is its all, "But they don't need powerful hardware its all in the operating system!" but when a new Apple device is released its, "Overpriced because I can buy a Windows PC for less" ...

When you are buying a Mac you are not buying it for its specs you are buying it for the experience of Apple's software as well as Apple's innovative hardware design and aesthetics...not everyone wants a gigantic tower with a bunch of cables all over and Windows operating system...Not everybody is the same, imagine that


It's not hypocritical, windows phone hardware is priced accordingly. Unless Apple makes a $60 iPhone I'm unfamilliar with...

Sonne said,
Gotta love hypocritical Windows fans when anyone points out how low spec Windows Phone hardware is its all, "But they don't need powerful hardware its all in the operating system!" but when a new Apple device is released its, "Overpriced because I can buy a Windows PC for less" ...

When you are buying a Mac you are not buying it for its specs you are buying it for the experience of Apple's software as well as Apple's innovative hardware design and aesthetics...not everyone wants a gigantic tower with a bunch of cables all over and Windows operating system...Not everybody is the same, imagine that


But they are not innovating at all. Its overpriced, the OS isn't that game changing. If it wasn't for them using slave labor their profit margins wouldn't be so high. Apple could make way more money via total sales if they would just price this stuff reasonably. They will never make the impact they should be making due to them pricing themselves out of potential customers.

greenwizard88 said,

It's not hypocritical, windows phone hardware is priced accordingly. Unless Apple makes a $60 iPhone I'm unfamilliar with...

That $60 Nokia 520 gets bogged down and is pretty slow. Price accordingly for low end performance. And before someone tires, I own a 520.

Not to mention that it has been repeatedly demonstrated that Windows Phone operates as fast or faster than handsets with greater specs. Yet Macs suffer from slow performance every bit as much as PCs when under spec'd.

At least Apple finally fixed virtual memory some time back so that you didn't have to over-buy RAM to have a decent experience. (At least, that's my understanding.)

Sonne said,
Gotta love hypocritical Windows fans when anyone points out how low spec Windows Phone hardware is its all, "But they don't need powerful hardware its all in the operating system!" but when a new Apple device is released its, "Overpriced because I can buy a Windows PC for less" ...

When you are buying a Mac you are not buying it for its specs you are buying it for the experience of Apple's software as well as Apple's innovative hardware design and aesthetics...not everyone wants a gigantic tower with a bunch of cables all over and Windows operating system...Not everybody is the same, imagine that

With respect, that's a truly ridiculous comparison. WP8 is a phone OS so of course it's preferable to be less taxing on the hardware. You can also buy really good windows phones for under $300. Where is Apples phone offering for $300 or less?. A $1000+ desktop PC on the other hand isn't the place for mobile CPUs or onboard memory and gfx.

shockz said,

That $60 Nokia 520 gets bogged down and is pretty slow. Price accordingly for low end performance. And before someone tires, I own a 520.

And? Do you have a point?

shockz said,

That $60 Nokia 520 gets bogged down and is pretty slow. Price accordingly for low end performance. And before someone tires, I own a 520.

Specs look quite close to my Ascend W1 which is perfectly fine. Dunno what you're doing to have it bogged down and slow

Gotenks98 said,

But they are not innovating at all. Its overpriced, the OS isn't that game changing.

You are telling me that when it comes to design, be it hardware or software Apple does not innovate at all? They may not have been first with a few things but if it were not for Apple I doubt that tablets and smartphones would be were they are today, same goes for digital music delivery, ultra books, tastefully designed hardware, all-in-1's, high resolution display panels in portables, speaker design, keyboard design, marketing, magsafe adapter, industrial design, typeface, minimalism, gesture peripherals etc....

And whether or not OS X is game changing or not is a matter of preference obviously people are willing to pay the price to use it, I am and have been for several years and I have been an IT student and entrepreneur for over a decade now. I would pay almost any price to use OS X. The fact that Apple marries it with such beautiful hardware is just icing on the cake.

Gotenks98 said,
Apple could make way more money via total sales if they would just price this stuff reasonably. They will never make the impact they should be making due to them pricing themselves out of potential customers.

I think Apple is doing just fine when it comes to sales and making money, and Apple has made much more of an impact on not only the IT world but also on our culture than Acer, HP, Dell or any other Windows OEM could ever hope to achieve.

Sonne said,

You are telling me that when it comes to design, be it hardware or software Apple does not innovate at all? They may not have been first with a few things but if it were not for Apple I doubt that tablets and smartphones would be were they are today, same goes for digital music delivery, ultra books, tastefully designed hardware, all-in-1's, high resolution display panels in portables, speaker design, keyboard design, marketing, magsafe adapter, industrial design, typeface, minimalism, gesture peripherals etc....

I guess Sony's and other companies never made tastefully designed hardware, all-in-ones, and such prior to Apple? Very interesting take on history.

Sonne said,
I would pay almost any price to use OS X. The fact that Apple marries it with such beautiful hardware is just icing on the cake.

Is this guy for real?

Granted, their hardware is gorgeous. I just find it hard to respect someone who purchases a computer for form over function, which may not be YOUR reason, but is the reason that most people buy Macs. Some people will spend $250 on a shirt, so it doesn't surprise me.

Quikboy said,
I guess Sony's and other companies never made tastefully designed hardware, all-in-ones, and such prior to Apple? Very interesting take on history.

I agree there are a select few that design nice hardware such as Sony, but then compare Vaio prices to Mac prices and you'll find you are going to pay for their design and engineering. Vaio's have never been cheap.

Hambone72 said,


Granted, their hardware is gorgeous. I just find it hard to respect someone who purchases a computer for form over function, which may not be YOUR reason, but is the reason that most people buy Macs.

I never said I preferred form over function but if I can have both then why not?

Sonne said,
Gotta love hypocritical Windows fans when anyone points out how low spec Windows Phone hardware is its all, "But they don't need powerful hardware its all in the operating system!" but when a new Apple device is released its, "Overpriced because I can buy a Windows PC for less" ...

When you are buying a Mac you are not buying it for its specs you are buying it for the experience of Apple's software as well as Apple's innovative hardware design and aesthetics...not everyone wants a gigantic tower with a bunch of cables all over and Windows operating system...Not everybody is the same, imagine that

"PC fans" are not necessarily "Windows" fans (we're stuck with it because stupid game devs are using DX instead of OGL/OAL), and Windows RT (phone/ARM os) is downright horrible, nevermind the fact that ARM cpus are slow. I could say the same about iphone's OS and Android, too - all the mobile OSes are terribad, but Android is the lesser evil.

Apple hardware and software is not better, and AppleCare is unnecessary. I have warranties and they are all that you need in the rare event of a failure. Once a warranty expires, simply buying a replacement part will not bring you anywhere near the high costs of owning Apple products.

Sonne said,

You are telling me that when it comes to design, be it hardware or software Apple does not innovate at all? They may not have been first with a few things but if it were not for Apple I doubt that tablets and smartphones would be were they are today, same goes for digital music delivery, ultra books, tastefully designed hardware, all-in-1's, high resolution display panels in portables, speaker design, keyboard design, marketing, magsafe adapter, industrial design, typeface, minimalism, gesture peripherals etc....

And whether or not OS X is game changing or not is a matter of preference obviously people are willing to pay the price to use it, I am and have been for several years and I have been an IT student and entrepreneur for over a decade now. I would pay almost any price to use OS X. The fact that Apple marries it with such beautiful hardware is just icing on the cake.

I think Apple is doing just fine when it comes to sales and making money, and Apple has made much more of an impact on not only the IT world but also on our culture than Acer, HP, Dell or any other Windows OEM could ever hope to achieve.


Again as I said it just looks nice that's it. Aside from the Retina thing there really wasn't anything that someone else didn't do first already. Apple didn't even make a ripple in the IT world is what I am saying. Only reason the ipad was so huge of a success is because there wasn't anything better out there at the time. Now that we have stuff like the Surface Pro and other Windows 8ish tablets there is something that can run real apps and not just the store stuff. Making an impact is when a whole corporate organization switches totally to Macs or if they offer a product that Windows users actually need in an IT environment such as Microsoft Exchange.

Don't get me wrong I am not biased against Apple. Hell I even own 2 macs (MBP and Mini). I just know not to drink the apple juice and be totally blind to the truth. That being said there are a few things they did get right that I wish Microsoft and Google/Samsung would do. Take total control of software that gets loaded on the various devices or give some kind of alternate way to restore the systems if something goes wrong like the internet recovery or iTunes restore.

Also to the person who says apple care isn't needed, I call BS on that. With Macs costing how much they do they are too expensive to not get the Apple care. Often times to replace the parts that stuff like the motherboard its going to be close to 2/3 the cost of a new Mac. Might as well get the Apple care. I see students everyday with Macs that have failing hardware that die on day 366 or later of that 1 year warranty. With Pcs getting stuff fixed or replaced usually is more cost effective to just buy a new one that's more updated.

FalseAgent said,
who the heck puts a Intel HD 5000 in a desktop?

I know right......who the hell puts HD 4600 in a desktop (oh, that would be lenovo)

Integrated Graphic HD5000 (no dedicated), mobile CPU, non SSD, lowend monitor... and a mid range price?? Not thank. For the same price you can build a powerfull Desktop i7 4770, decent dedicated graphic card, a much better monitor.. and maybe a SSD also, and all other extras with much better motherboard. even so I'm sure apple does mislead to some guys.

Suitcko said,
Integrated Graphic HD5000 (no dedicated), mobile CPU, non SSD, lowend monitor... and a mid range price?? Not thank. For the same price you can build a powerfull Desktop i7 4770, decent dedicated graphic card, a much better monitor.. and maybe a SSD also, and all other extras with much better motherboard. even so I'm sure apple does mislead to some guys.

You forget to mention no user serviceable parts - you can't upgrade/replace the hard drive or the RAM (then again, 8GB ought to be enough for anybody). I'm sure the screen would be decent quality, however HD 5000 graphics are a bit of a put off. At least it's not really low end (like what you would get on a $400 PC notebook).

1920x1080 on a 21.5" reasonable too.

68k said,
(then again, 8GB ought to be enough for anybody)

Depends on what you do…
I'm regularly exceeding 8GB…

offroadaaron said,

Well then you'd maybe buy a different machine then, wouldn't you?


Obviously.
But that doesn't mean that »8GB ought to be enough for anybody« is true…

Not really sure the intended market here... it's still high priced with low spec, this thing will be well slow without an SSD.

It may well be the low end of the product series with respect to hardware specifications, or it could mean the lowest priced model within the hardware series.

Chicane-UK said,
Hm. Not exactly a desirable specification or price to be honest.

If only they'd make a more affordable version of the Mac Pro :(

that's not a bad idea.....i did wonder if apple should release another product into their lineup. Something along the lines of a white mac pro, with a desktop i7 and regular graphics rather than a xeon and radeon pro graphics. Not a 'pro' but more of a desktop mac.

glen8 said,

that's not a bad idea.....i did wonder if apple should release another product into their lineup. Something along the lines of a white mac pro, with a desktop i7 and regular graphics rather than a xeon and radeon pro graphics. Not a 'pro' but more of a desktop mac.

Indeed. The specs of the Pro could be turned down a bit and made into a more affordable headless Mac for the home user who wants something more than the Mac Mini can offer.

That and the current Mac Pro sits JUST outside of the price point for my computer refresh budget at work... if it'd just come down by a few hundred $ I'd be able to get one come August... come on Apple!! ;)

I actually suggested that when Apple went Intel - an Intel Mac using the case of the Mac Pro, but based on the then-cousin of the XEON that Apple was using in that Mac Pro - the Intel Q6600 - Kentsfield. Intel had LOTS of Kentsfield CPUs on hand - and in warehouses; right after Apple rejected the idea out of hand (I was far from the only person with that idea), Intel had "the Great Kentsfield Fire Sale" - a massive pushout of Q66xx CPUs through the retail and OEM channels. I even suggested reviving an old mantle for the between-iMac and Mac Pro model - Performa II.

Apple could actually still do something like that - how many DESKTOP i5s is Intel sitting on? Since Apple didn't use the "Performa II" branding I suggested (Apple already owns it), it's still available. It won't cannibalize Mac Pro sales - it's a desktop Haswell i5 (or i5-K) - not Haswell-E. It can be compatible with the same external components that the Mac Pro uses - get those good sold out of the warehouses. Why won't Apple grab the opportunity?

PGHammer said,
I actually suggested that when Apple went Intel - an Intel Mac using the case of the Mac Pro, but based on the then-cousin of the XEON that Apple was using in that Mac Pro - the Intel Q6600 - Kentsfield. Intel had LOTS of Kentsfield CPUs on hand - and in warehouses; right after Apple rejected the idea out of hand (I was far from the only person with that idea), Intel had "the Great Kentsfield Fire Sale" - a massive pushout of Q66xx CPUs through the retail and OEM channels. I even suggested reviving an old mantle for the between-iMac and Mac Pro model - Performa II.

Apple could actually still do something like that - how many DESKTOP i5s is Intel sitting on? Since Apple didn't use the "Performa II" branding I suggested (Apple already owns it), it's still available. It won't cannibalize Mac Pro sales - it's a desktop Haswell i5 (or i5-K) - not Haswell-E. It can be compatible with the same external components that the Mac Pro uses - get those good sold out of the warehouses. Why won't Apple grab the opportunity?

I ended up returning to Apple ownership with a MacBook Air (swapping from a normal, reasonable spec for gaming, Wintel desktop PC) and honestly I've been very happy.. but what I was waiting and hoping for was a sort of Mac Pro Junior. So probably uniprocessor, using desktop class CPU's rather than the Xeon's, desktop grade GPU's, and with the memory and hdd being user upgradeable options. Maybe even the GPU's being upgradeable too.

Obviously Apple know more about their customers than I do, and clearly they think their customers aren't interested in such a thing.. but I was desperate for such a system. I didn't want the heft (or the cost) of the then aluminium tower Mac Pro, I didn't want the 'all in one' design of the iMac, and the Mac Mini is frankly too weedy and limited. This 'xMac' would have been perfect. Alas, Apple have gone further down the route of making their systems sealed boxes so I guess this is never going to happen.

scorpian007 said,
Looks like it's using a mobile CPU... urrggh, no thanks. I'll stick to my powerhouse PC :p

your power house pc will not fit inside an LCD monitor though as it will overheat

scorpian007 said,
Looks like it's using a mobile CPU... urrggh, no thanks. I'll stick to my powerhouse PC :p
New 21.5" iMac power consumption: probably around 20W on average. Powerhouse PC: probably at least 50 to 100 W (average, not max).

glen8 said,

your power house pc will not fit inside an LCD monitor though as it will overheat

It doesn't have to fit inside a monitor.

PhilTheThrill said,

It doesn't have to fit inside a monitor.

that's what an imac is? the motherboard is fitted behind the lcd panel

68k said,
New 21.5" iMac power consumption: probably around 20W on average. Powerhouse PC: probably at least 50 to 100 W (average, not max).

So?

glen8 said,

that's what an imac is? the motherboard is fitted behind the lcd panel

So what? Because it does you end up with an under powered and difficult to upgrade machine

PhilTheThrill said,

So what? Because it does you end up with an under powered and difficult to upgrade machine

define underpowered, for someone who surfs the internet and reads emails you could argue it's overpowered. You do know imacs are style over substance right?

PhilTheThrill said,

So what? Because it does you end up with an under powered and difficult to upgrade machine

I don't see your point, you might as well compare an iMac to a phone or tablet then or a high end PC to a phone or tablet....... Different form factor and different use.

E.G. Companies buy HP workstations (or Lenovo or whatever) - They cost just as much as a powerhouse PC at home.... But the companies workstation has all the certified drivers from microsoft, it has great back to base warranty and support. With you're whitebox PC, you have to troubleshoot yourself something goes wrong, then take it back to the damn store where you got the part or ship the part off to the manufacture and hope that's the part that is causing the issue.

Apple - You take it into the store, they figure it all out and if they can't you get a new one. No faffing around.

BTW, just so you know, I have plenty of Apple gear and a shitbox gaming PC (high end). So I know both worlds.

glen8 said,

define underpowered, for someone who surfs the internet and reads emails you could argue it's overpowered. You do know imacs are style over substance right?

You could buy an all-in-one PC that fills the exact same niche for $750. This machine costs over $1200. (prices in CAD with taxes inch)

As usual it's a poor value proposition

glen8 said,

define underpowered, for someone who surfs the internet and reads emails you could argue it's overpowered. You do know imacs are style over substance right?


So I Chrome Book would be better?

sdyaris said,

So I Chrome Book would be better?

Different form factor.

PhilTheThrill said,

You could buy an all-in-one PC that fills the exact same niche for $750. This machine costs over $1200. (prices in CAD with taxes inch)

As usual it's a poor value proposition

Better warranty, better made.

I don't understand why people bang on about the price anyways. You buy a Mac and you sell it for half price when you're done with it. PC you buy the thing and it's not worth anything after that. Try selling a PC and see how you go and then try selling a Mac and you'll be greatly suprised how much you 1) get back and 2) how much you actually didn't pay for that expensive equipment in the end.

techbeck said,
Really? I got an i7, 1tb HD, 8GB ram laptop for that price 1 year ago.

That's why its called apple tax.

The Dingus Diddler said,
But it doesn't have the Apple logo on it!

And the Apple Support, Applecare, OS X, all the other cool stuff!!!!!

techbeck said,
Really? I got an i7, 1tb HD, 8GB ram laptop for that price 1 year ago.

add on the cost of an OS, a monitor, wireless keyboard and mouse and you're probably not a million miles away from the price

recently built myself a hackintosh, and with a decent 27" 1440p monitor, nice looking case etc etc it was cheaper than the imac, but not THAT much cheaper

the upside is its desktop class rather than mobile class, and i could cherry pick the components

to be honest, if I could afford a second machine I'd love an imac

SuperKid said,

And the Apple Support, Applecare, OS X, all the other cool stuff!!!!!

Yep, I assumed by his comment of 'the apple logo' he meant the extra money for the design and research, stability, OS, the inc £100 wireless keyboard+mouse, the ac wifi and bluetooth 4.0 chip, and obviously not forgetting the monitor!!

I'm struggling to find an all in one, same spec, for less money (and no, I do not class an acer all in one as being of a similar quality to the mac). Cheap plastic vs aluminium.

so....neowinians......your mission is to find a 'better' all in one for less money

Yep, I assumed by his comment of 'the apple logo' he meant the extra money for the design and research, stability, OS, the inc £100 wireless keyboard+mouse, the ac wifi and bluetooth 4.0 chip, and obviously not forgetting the monitor!!

I think the chassis hardware actually plays less of a deciding role as far as desktops are concerned. Durability matters much less than mobiles, since these computers won't be moved often. Similarly, feel and build quality also matter less, since...I think most people won't be caressing these machines often.

Most users are going to spend 99% of their time staring at the screen, typing on the keyboard, or using the mouse. OS response time matters as well as how familiar/unfamiliar someone is with the native OS. Accessibility to peripherals also contributes to convenience. I think those factors ultimately outweigh how attractive or well-constructed this type of machine is when it comes down to a user's ability to get work done efficiently and with minimum hassle.

Also, with regards to the price, within this budget slot, I think a large percentage of potential customers will be cashing in education/academic or other forms of discounts. It wouldn't make a poor lab machine.

SuperKid said,

And the Apple Support, Applecare, OS X, all the other cool stuff!!!!!

"It just works."® What's the point of all that?

SuperKid said,
And the Apple Support, Applecare, OS X, all the other cool stuff!!!!!
You understand that support/care are 90 days phone 1 yr parts. It's not like you're getting a lot of bang for your buck there as nothing is likely to break in the first year.

glen8 said,
add on the cost of an OS, a monitor, wireless keyboard and mouse and you're probably not a million miles away from the price

recently built myself a hackintosh, and with a decent 27" 1440p monitor, nice looking case etc etc it was cheaper than the imac, but not THAT much cheaper

the upside is its desktop class rather than mobile class, and i could cherry pick the components

to be honest, if I could afford a second machine I'd love an imac

http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/d...ovo/c-series/c560/#features

It baffles me how most apple people seem to have the inability to actually do any research. Perhaps this is why you like to have 1 site and only a few models to choose from to buy your computers. Frankly, for the money, apple devices almost never stand up to Windows competition. Sure you can find some pieces of crap out there that are windows, but to mom's, dad's, grandparents they are perfectly fine. I feel bad for that old couple walking out of the Apple store having just spent 1200-1500 on an imac when a machine a third the price can give them the exact same experience.

glen8 said,

Yep, I assumed by his comment of 'the apple logo' he meant the extra money for the design and research, stability, OS, the inc £100 wireless keyboard+mouse, the ac wifi and bluetooth 4.0 chip, and obviously not forgetting the monitor!!

I'm struggling to find an all in one, same spec, for less money (and no, I do not class an acer all in one as being of a similar quality to the mac). Cheap plastic vs aluminium.

so....neowinians......your mission is to find a 'better' all in one for less money

The quality and design of a Mac are no better than a pc. And Apple should not be able to copyright things like rounded edges. (not that I care... I'm not gay/narcissistic/obsessed with looks)

I have never had a problem with a PC (I have plenty) in the last ~8 years, aside from one motherboard that couldn't handle 4 sticks of ram without being overvolted to a slight and harmless degree.

MrHumpty said,
http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/d...ovo/c-series/c560/#features

It baffles me how most apple people seem to have the inability to actually do any research. Perhaps this is why you like to have 1 site and only a few models to choose from to buy your computers. Frankly, for the money, apple devices almost never stand up to Windows competition. Sure you can find some pieces of crap out there that are windows, but to mom's, dad's, grandparents they are perfectly fine. I feel bad for that old couple walking out of the Apple store having just spent 1200-1500 on an imac when a machine a third the price can give them the exact same experience.


Did you spend the absolute least amount of money on your car because you just needed to get from point A to point B? Did your parents? Probably not...

People are allowed to have preference. As a Windows user who builds my own machines, we of ALL people shouldn't frown upon someone for wanting to have a choice in what they buy. Want an iMac? Cool! I can see the appeal. They look sleek, they work, and if it means I spend less time cleaning off viruses from your computer... well, that's just even better. (I don't like working on Macs anyway!)

MrHumpty said,
http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/d...ovo/c-series/c560/#features

It baffles me how most apple people seem to have the inability to actually do any research. Perhaps this is why you like to have 1 site and only a few models to choose from to buy your computers. Frankly, for the money, apple devices almost never stand up to Windows competition. Sure you can find some pieces of crap out there that are windows, but to mom's, dad's, grandparents they are perfectly fine. I feel bad for that old couple walking out of the Apple store having just spent 1200-1500 on an imac when a machine a third the price can give them the exact same experience.

and still nobody can find me a better system for less money....please try harder

1. That lenovo looks awful
2. TN panel vs IPS (compare monitor prices)
3. No Wireless AC
4. No Bluetooth

The apple keyboard is much nicer to type on then the lenovo one. Go to a store and try it out.

p.s. I have a nexus 5, Lumia, and win 8.1 machine at home (not a fanboy)...yes, I also own a few apple products. You see, I buy the best products to hit my requirements regardless of what badge is stuck to the side.

dead.cell said,

Did you spend the absolute least amount of money on your car because you just needed to get from point A to point B? Did your parents? Probably not...

People are allowed to have preference. As a Windows user who builds my own machines, we of ALL people shouldn't frown upon someone for wanting to have a choice in what they buy. Want an iMac? Cool! I can see the appeal. They look sleek, they work, and if it means I spend less time cleaning off viruses from your computer... well, that's just even better. (I don't like working on Macs anyway!)

I have no problem with people having a preference. I don't believe that was one of my arguments.

I have a car that fits my preferences and balanced it with value. I could drive a much nicer car, I don't. if someone chooses to do so, go on with your bad self.

glen8 said,
and still nobody can find me a better system for less money....please try harder

1. That lenovo looks awful
2. TN panel vs IPS (compare monitor prices)
3. No Wireless AC
4. No Bluetooth

The apple keyboard is much nicer to type on then the lenovo one. Go to a store and try it out.

p.s. I have a nexus 5, Lumia, and win 8.1 machine at home (not a fanboy)...yes, I also own a few apple products. You see, I buy the best products to hit my requirements regardless of what badge is stuck to the side.

1. I actually find it decent looking. I, personally, don't have a buzz in my pants for brushed metal everywhere.
2. $140 for IPS 21.5 vs $170 for 23 LCD TN (also it's touch enabled)
3. Who cares? Honestly. People are still lucky to have N in their house.
4. Yes, it does.
5. Self maintenance and expansion capabilities of the Lenovo are a huge plus to people who aren't going to replace their machines every couple of years, namely those grandparents I was talking about.

I took 5 minutes to find that one. I'm sure I could do much better. If you are married to the Brushed metal look, you're never going to be happy. Maybe a Samsung (those are nice too) http://www.samsung.com/us/computer/pcs/DP515A2G-K02US .

Keyboards are a matter of preference to the nth degree. I can't stand the Apple keyboard. It's so ergonomically horrible I can't even begin to explain it. I'm sure the same could be said for the Lenovo one. Again, it's brushed metal, yippe. It, and that mouse are horribly over-priced, if you like them then great, but it's definitely not a selling point for me.

P.S. I have plenty of random hardware. I have a Mac mini from a couple of years ago just because it was the cheapest mac I could buy. I'd consider buying an Air, but the X1 carbon has it beat imo.

Mouettus said,
"Low end". Those specs are great!

mmm, I dunno....half way through 2014 now, seems pretty much low end these days to be fair. You wouldn't want anything less would you? say if you had 4gb and an i3 with yosemite coming out this year it would probably start to struggle. You want something usable, so yeah this seems pretty good for 'low end'

A desktop class Core i3 processor would smash this mobile Core i5. Looks like this is the same CPU as what's inside the Macbook Airs.

The whole thing is just a Macbook Air without the SSD.

glen8 said,

mmm, I dunno....half way through 2014 now, seems pretty much low end these days to be fair. You wouldn't want anything less would you? say if you had 4gb and an i3 with yosemite coming out this year it would probably start to struggle. You want something usable, so yeah this seems pretty good for 'low end'

still rocking my c2d e6600 with 4gb of ram here. as long as you don't run any games, it's enough to run a lot of software. and I do a lot of photoshop. only thing that I don't like is that mobile cpu and dang... for that price... they could've included an SSD!!

I wouldn't call that low end anyway.

Mouettus said,

still rocking my c2d e6600 with 4gb of ram here. as long as you don't run any games, it's enough to run a lot of software. and I do a lot of photoshop. only thing that I don't like is that mobile cpu and dang... for that price... they could've included an SSD!!

I wouldn't call that low end anyway.

for that price its low end! I know the screens are nice on these iMacs but dam that's steep for what you get!

Dam, I read it as £ not $ so not too bad actually.

Saying that, just done a quick look at its £899 in UK.
http://store.apple.com/uk/buy-...ct=MF883B/A&step=config

A Lenovo c540 all in one with 23" 1920 x 1080 HD TOUCH screen is £599 - A full £300 cheaper!!! Its only got 4GB ram but its expandable to 8GB and has a 1TB Hard disk AND an Intel® Core™ i5-3330S Processor (2.7 GHz, 3.20 GHz with TurboBoost, 6 MB cache) - seems apple is way overpriced again here!
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/...in-one-pc-21433230-pdt.html

Mouettus said,
"Low end". Those specs are great!

That's expensive for those specs. You can get a PC with those specs for like 400 bucks. Apple needs to kick down those prices a bit more. I would consider it for 800 not 1099.

duddit2 said,
Saying that, just done a quick look at its £899 in UK.
http://store.apple.com/uk/buy-...ct=MF883B/A&step=config

A Lenovo c540 all in one with 23" 1920 x 1080 HD TOUCH screen is £599 - A full £300 cheaper!!! Its only got 4GB ram but its expandable to 8GB and has a 1TB Hard disk AND an Intel® Core™ i5-3330S Processor (2.7 GHz, 3.20 GHz with TurboBoost, 6 MB cache) - seems apple is way overpriced again here!
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/...in-one-pc-21433230-pdt.html

well done for finding a worse, but cheaper machine. How about finding one either the same or better for less money?

say £50 for the ram upgrade, leaves £250

it's a wired mouse not a magic mouse so there's £50 difference, leaving £200

doubt the keyboard or webcam would be better, and the screen on the lenovo undoubtedly is TN vs IPS on the iMac

the iMac has wifi ac and bluetooth 4.0 which leads me to believe they either have installed a combo card, or using something like intels 97 chipset (the lenovo is h61!!!)

glen8 said,

well done for finding a worse, but cheaper machine. How about finding one either the same or better for less money?

say £50 for the ram upgrade, leaves £250

it's a wired mouse not a magic mouse so there's £50 difference, leaving £200

doubt the keyboard or webcam would be better, and the screen on the lenovo undoubtedly is TN vs IPS on the iMac

the iMac has wifi ac and bluetooth 4.0 which leads me to believe they either have installed a combo card, or using something like intels 97 chipset (the lenovo is h61!!!)

But the ram can be replaced by the user, its std ram so more like £20. The device has a much better cpu and touch screen which is fully usable as it windows 8.

The screen is LED that's all I know on that score, bht agreed the imac screen will be nicer they always are.

Point is we have double storage, better cpu and touchscreen and for £20 equal ram.

I don't consider wireless mouse/keyboard a benefit on a stationary unit but a set of Bluetooth peripherals is cheap.

Mouettus said,
"Low end". Those specs are great!


You clearly do not know anything about computers if you think for that price the specs are great and why is Apple doing low end iPhone's and iMac's Steve Jobs would have never done this or bothered with I really do not see a reason for it when Apple's profit is basically hardware since pretty much all of the OS for iPhone or iMac is free now.

I've tried the Magic Mouse - in OS X 10.9; to be honest, my Logitech Cordless V220 leaves it waxed. (The same applies all the way back to Leopard.) Most two-button mice (and especially from Logitech OR Microsoft) would put a stomping on the Magic Mouse in real-world usage IMHO. (I'm not talking about Hacks, but real Macs - regardless of the CPU inside.) If anything, the majority of Apple's REVENUES aren't from Mac hardware, but two sources - device hardware and the App Stores/iTunes. OS X since Lion has cost nothing, while Mountain Lion and later cost nothing when upgrading from as far back as Snow Leopard.

scorpian007 said,
A desktop class Core i3 processor would smash this mobile Core i5. Looks like this is the same CPU as what's inside the Macbook Airs..

In what universe is that even remotely true? Certainly not this one.

duk3togo said,

That's expensive for those specs. You can get a PC with those specs for like 400 bucks. Apple needs to kick down those prices a bit more. I would consider it for 800 not 1099.

Good luck finding a PC with a stunning 21.5" IPS screen for $400.

I see what you mean, its just that better spec can be had for lower price - admittedly the iMac screens are nice but the model I found above has far better CPU and double storage, when you add 4GB of DDR3 laptop RAM for $30 your looking at $270 less - you could easily by a very nice 24" screen for that change and have a dual monitor system with better CPU, double storage and touchscreen on the main screen.

Little things like super mouse and thunderbolt I would guess most people wouldn't not care about.