2012 iMac New Sizes?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by 8CoreWhore, Jun 14, 2012.

  1. 8CoreWhore macrumors 68020


    Jan 17, 2008
    Big D
    It seems that Apple discontinued the 17 inch MacBook Pro because (in part) the 15 inch Retina Display gives more real-estate.

    By this reasoning, might the new iMac with Retina's be smaller? In other words, 19 inches and 24 inches, or in that ballpark?


  2. miles01110 macrumors Core


    Jul 24, 2006
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    I don't see them reducing the size of the iMacs. Retina displays on the iMacs are probably further off in the future that people think.
  3. theSeb macrumors 604


    Aug 10, 2010
    Poole, England
    Killing of the 17" MBP does not signify Apple's intents to go for smaller screens. They killed it off because it wasn't selling well. 2012 iMac sizes will be 21.5" and 27" at least. If anything, they will probably be increasing the sizes soon. 24" monitors are now fairly common.
  4. NTurner42 macrumors regular


    Dec 25, 2010
    Man, I'd sure love to see a 24 inch iMac. 21.5 isn't enough (I use a 20 inch external monitor with my MBP right now and I'd love more space), and 27 seems like too much. 24 inch would be perfect!
  5. Icaras macrumors 603


    Mar 18, 2008
    California, United States
    Exactly, and the 27" seems to be very popular so I don't think it's going anywhere.
  6. lozpop macrumors 6502

    Mar 6, 2006
    Retina Display on iMacs is not that necessary. I don't think we'll see in summer 2013 or later.
  7. necromorph macrumors regular


    Jun 5, 2012
    I beg to differ but i don't want to open that can of worms again ;)
  8. forty2j macrumors 68030


    Jul 11, 2008
    "Necessary"? Interesting choice of words. You could argue that no computer is necessary.

    Now, will it be a beautiful piece of work when it gets done? Yes. Will it get done in 2013? I'm guessing yes, but I'm not certain.
  9. profets macrumors 601

    Mar 18, 2009
    I've been holding off on getting myself an iMac for the past year thinking maybe a design change may come for 2012, but looks like that may be something to look forward to in 2013.

    I'm really hoping for even bigger models. Maybe 23 and 30? I use a 27" at work day to day and although it felt huge at first I find myself always wanting more desktop space.
  10. Crazy82 macrumors member

    May 3, 2012
    Stockholm, Sweden
    I would love to see a 30" iMac and that leads me to an question that inclueds a wiledly debated thing.

    If Apple desides to make (lets say) a 24" and 30" iMac would the size make any differens to the chin (not that I care about it, I like it) and/or the space inside for extra components like SSD/harddrive?

    What do you think?
  11. Melbourne Park macrumors 6502

    Mar 5, 2012
    30" would be expensive. Dell's 30" IPS monitor, costs around $1200. Their 27" IPS monitor, costs around $600. That's a $600 dollar difference. So, I doubt 30" somehow. It would be cool though. But surely a fair bit more expensive.

    And I do not know of 28" panels? Or 29" for that matter ... but 28 would be a nice improvement IMO.
  12. danetello macrumors 6502

    Dec 23, 2010
    London, UK
    I think they will keep the sizes as they are, the 21.5 and the 27
  13. FrankHahn macrumors 6502a

    May 17, 2011
    I bet that all computer displays will go "retina" much as the increase of resolution on TV sets. How soon the iMac can get the retina display depends on the affordability. If it is now affordable to a fairly good number of iMac users, I do not think that Apple will hesitate a bit to give the iMac a retina display.

    My above statement is drawn based on the simple fact that a retina display will make the text much crisp and the graphics much vivid and it is inevitable in the development of display technology.

    I compared the resolution of the original Macintosh Plus with that of the 27" Apple Cinema Display in my mind with the memory from the past. I noticed a huge difference, something like that between the resolution of a 27" ACD and that of a retina display.

    Can anybody recall the use of the Adobe Type Manager to make fonts crisp in the old days?
  14. Crazy82 macrumors member

    May 3, 2012
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Thanks but that wasen't any answer to my question.

    I mean if Apple desides to increas the screens to (lets say 24" and 30") would that make any differens on the chin and/or the space for extra SSD/harddrive?
  15. Razorhog macrumors 65816


    Sep 16, 2006
    A good question. I think it probably would provide more room.
  16. Crazy82 macrumors member

    May 3, 2012
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Thanks i think so to!
  17. TacticalDesire macrumors 68020


    Mar 19, 2012
    I wonder if they'll drop the optical drive in favor of making the machine thinner and to run cooler.
  18. Occamsrazr macrumors 6502

    Apr 26, 2012
  19. Imaginethe macrumors regular

    Feb 16, 2012
    I don't see that happening as they left it in the MacBook Pro (non retina). The imac would be the last to lose it I would think. Well apart from the pro.
  20. tungstentim macrumors regular


    Dec 1, 2007
    The only two sizes we have for a new iMac are none and not at all.:D

    If we're really lucky we might get just an ivy bridge refresh.
    I'm ok with this as my 5.5yr old iMac is seriously on it's last legs and I don't want to spend 2012 money on 2011 hardware.

    I know i could get a refurb, but that doesn't save very much as I'm able to purchase my next iMac through the education discount scheme.
  21. Bubba Satori Suspended

    Bubba Satori

    Feb 15, 2008
    Droping the OD will not make the iMac run cooler.
    Making it even thinner will make it run hotter.
    The iMac is a massive heat radiator already due to it's thiness.

    Just out of curiosity, why do you want the iMac to be thinner?
  22. iMcLovin macrumors 68000


    Feb 11, 2009
    me wants 30"....dont care about thinner, I rather have cooled down beefed up hardware.
  23. mikeytrend macrumors member

    Jul 8, 2007
    San Francisco, CA
    It would be nice to see the 24" again, but you have to think about the markets. Laptops are meant to be portable. It's why the MacBook Air took off. A 17" laptop is not portable and only really appealed to a few power users. The 27" iMac is awesome. Heck, I wish they'd bring back the 30" display, but that's because a desktop isn't going anywhere except the occasional move.

    Apple picks a few things and does them really well and 17" laptops was something they weren't doing well, so they dropped it and decided to focus that attention on retina displays.
  24. lozpop macrumors 6502

    Mar 6, 2006
    Sure, Retina Display is always awesome, but people use the iMac 50-60 centimeters from their eyes. Apple increased the PPI of the iPhone, the iPad and the MacBook relative to the distance from the eyes of the users.

    A display is called "Retina" when your eyes can't distinguish the grid of pixels. To make a Retina iMac, Apple would have to increase the PPI not that much. This is why I'm telling that a Retina Display on the iMac is not "that necessary".
  25. TouchMint.com macrumors 68000


    May 25, 2012
    Same here.

    On that note I would much much rather have a 30inch display at the current resolution than a 27inch at retina res.

Share This Page