I love the innovation Apple has brought with their investment in ARM. That said, I can't imagine buying a computer in the 21st century that can't be opened and upgraded, especially with a price premium attached. I just don't get it.
I am in no way trying to be combative, but I'd love to hear a counterpoint that makes sense for these machines.
For professional use, the idea of "opening up and upgrading a machine" feels wild. You're either given one by your employer or buying one yourself, and either way, it's on a 5 year deprecation schedule. It's a negative ROI for me as a solo or for my employer to ever do anything with a device that isn't "oh it's broken? too slow? new one being UPSed this afternoon".
I bought an M2 iMac for my parents. It’ll last at least five years for them - likely closer to 10. At that point, I’m happy to recycle or donate it and get them a new iMac - likely with some major updates (form factor? Display? Etc?) that wouldn’t get with a RAM / CPU upgrade.
Spending ~$150-$300/year for them to have an easy to use & fast computer feels very worth it for me.
All that said - I would love for the machine to be upgradeable as well! Just explaining why it’s not a dealbreaker.
Same, I had to panic buy a 13" m1, i was remote working extra remotely and my laptop got destroyed. The 13" m1 was not an ideal machine, it had limited usb ports, limited ram.. but it was pretty quick and I wasn't going to buy intel.
A few years later the m2pro/max's came out (i think technically in 14"). I picked one up and just handed my m1 down to family. Huge upgrade over their old intel air that had already lasted them like 10 years.
My main bitch is the soldered in storage. It's a shitty optimization that has to punish apple as much as it punishes users. To have a machine that I can't just go buy a harddrive and slot in when i want more storage or when the drive fails is a total fucking nightmare.
Most people don’t want to open up their computer. Ever.
And for most people who dont want to open their computer, they’ll probably use these iMacs until their ancient, and replacing the whole thing makes more sense anyway
I replace my computers before I ever feel a need to upgrade them. Computers are fast and performant for a long time now (4+ years, especially for non-professional use).
And as someone who works with computers all day long, I never ever want to open one up unless I build one from scratch and want a personal project.
Once upon a time I'd use the same monitor for several generations of desktop. But lately monitors feel like they're advancing more quickly and computers more slowly such that I end up replacing them after about ten years.
I personally appreciate not having to do both at the same time, but at least for me it has reduced that particular criticism against all-in-ones.
The computer that can be opened is larger and more janky. Most users derive absolutely no utility from ability to open the machine, as they will never open it. They do however benefit from a smaller, more aesthetic computer.
I have plenty of space next to my desk for a mini-tower computer - something like a Micro ATX. Since trading it for an ultra small form factor that's the size of a paperback book, I wouldn't go back to the larger one. The smaller one is just less janky, and I sometimes remove the computer from the desk entirely to convert the room to another use. The smaller computer is easier to throw into a box.
Sure I could do all of this with the micro ATX, but since the upgradeability did nothing for me, I might as well take the smaller size.
Tbf I agree with this sentiment. For phones and laptops for sure. But what I don't like is the premium they charge on memory, it's just ridiculous. And the sad thing is that Apple fans don't realise they could make things collectively better for everyone by sticking their feet down and saying no, this isn't fair to force Apple to change - but instead people will just defend the company.
They do make excellent laptops, but I absolutely loathe the suits and ties that run the place.
My guess is the only reason to open and upgrade a computer is if one needs (or wants) to be on the bleeding edge of what local compute is capable of on a day to day basis. With the advent of cloud compute the number of use cases that meet that criteria shrinks every day. With the iMac there is a price premium but what the users is paying for is a computer that just gets out of their way. For them the computer is simply a means, not an end.
Most of my buddies w/ PCs for gaming generally only open up their machine to upgrade their video card, once their motherboard no longer supports the latest and greatest they just dumpster the whole damn thing (maybe sell the card on ebay), or turn it into a plex server or something and start over.
One of the reasons I don’t buy into Apple’s marketing gimmicks especially when it comes to the “carbon neutral” initiative.
> especially with a price premium attached. I just don't get it.
Apple is a public company. Investors expect them to churn out profit so stonk goes up. As long as users are trapped in their Apple ecosystem/wall, then they will keep buying. If the devices were open and upgradable then the company will not be able to charge a stupid high markup for RAM or storage.
If products were easily upgradable, consumers would buy the base model configurable SKUs then take their business to repair shop and get ram and storage upgraded at a fraction of the cost Apple would provide out the door.
> but I'd love to hear a counterpoint that makes sense for these machines.
There is no counterpoint. Most people (ie, not fanboys) would agree with you. There is absolutely zero reason for devices to not be upgradable or easily serviceable. You don’t become a trillion dollar company by playing nice with your users.
Memory on graphics cards are not upgradable. Using HBM is again not upgradable. There are reasons to have memory on package. I’m guessing in a year or so, the on package memory will be underneath instead of the side (or are we there yet) to improve electrical performance.
I can see why Apple does it.
Now the storage… nope, can’t see a reason for that except profit.
I am in no way trying to be combative, but I'd love to hear a counterpoint that makes sense for these machines.