....But the new regular iMacs look good enough to me...
They are pretty good but H264 4k has caused a sea change in what editors need. Everything is just so slow on 4k -- transcoding, effects, etc. The large doc project I'm on is all 4k and it takes my top-spec 2015 iMac 27 three days to create proxies for the content to date, which is only about 1/3 of the expected total (probably 10-12 terabytes). It will take a week to create proxies for the final content. If anything messes them up and a proxy rebuild is needed -- that's another week. The only thing that can accelerate that is lots of cores, or else some kind of distributed transcoding farm. The 18-core iMac Pro will be pretty nice.
Effects can often harness the GPU, but not all effects can. Things like video noise reduction, de-flickering and stabilization are just mind-numbingly slow on 4k. Basically anybody editing large amounts of 4k (esp multicam) needs the fastest possible CPU and GPU they can obtain, and of course high-speed Thunderbolt RAID.
I'm happy that the top of the line (max graphics & processor, minumum other specs) regular iMac now is about €370 cheaper!!
I'm sure some people absulutely need the iMac Pro. But the problem is that it seems to be the same non-upgradable thing as the "trashcan" Mac Pro. So seems like it's just a stop-gap until the next Mac Pro come.
I'm on a 2012 MacBook Pro so the new regular iMac will be a massive boost for me (when/if I can afford it).
I can only buy things when I can pay in cash in full... which is why Apple's current all-or-nothing computers are badfor me.
I wish they release an upgradable Mac without things I don't need,such as Xeon processors and EEC ram that just makes them expensive... But had space for extra graphics and ramand harddrives... So you can buy a stripped down version and add things as you need/can afford them... But that seems unlikely, it's iMac or super high end. I'd be very happy with an iMac though.
....So seems like it's just a stop-gap until the next Mac Pro come....
The iMac Pro specs are way beyond what I was expecting. It is much faster than the current Mac Pro. That plus the delayed timeframe on the updated Mac Pro might indicate Apple originally planned to let the Mac Pro die out. The development of the iMac Pro is well along otherwise they couldn't ship it in December. Putting an 18-core Xeon in the iMac Pro is very aggressive. If they had originally planned on an updated Mac Pro they'd have been more conservative on the iMac Pro, and the Mac Pro would not be so delayed. But that's OK -- now we get a fantastic iMac Pro and (while delayed) Apple will produce a Mac Pro which will likely scale to the highest workstation range.
....I'm on a 2012 MacBook Pro so the new regular iMac will be a massive boost for me (when/if I can afford it).
That is certainly true. I have a top-spec 2015 MBP, and (while nice) I always use my iMac 27 if given the choice. The iMac is just much faster, quieter and more comfortable and the larger screen really helps.
The iMac Pro specs are way beyond what I was expecting. It is much faster than the current Mac Pro. That plus the delayed timeframe on the updated Mac Pro might indicate Apple originally planned to let the Mac Pro die out.
Kinda makes sense that they were planning to let it die out... because although the iMac Pro is impressive, it has allthe flaws of the trashcan. And the specs in the iMac Pro could have easily been achieved in a new version of the trashcan.
An iMac Pro would make more sense as something between the regular iMac and the Mac Pro in price and power...