Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
27" iMac Owners: Would you...
- Thread starter Sam Spade
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I just got an used 27" and yes it's a monster, Safari on full screen I've got to hunt for the cursor. The 27" IPS screen is a thing of beauty though.
But why would you ever run Safari full screen? The benefit of such a big monitor is to have apps side by side. And no web site is going to take advantage of the whole width of that monitor.
I had a 24" for years (with a second 24" monitor on it), and just sold it the other day when I ordered a 27". We have 27" cinema displays at work to go with our MBP's and I love it. The bigger the better.
Ahhh this again 
. 27" panels are about the price that 24" panels were at before. Apple also likes uniformity within their line. I would wager that as long as the thunderbolt display stays at 27", the imac will not change sizes at its upper end. The other consideration here is that Apple may not be able to use the same cpu/gpu components in a 24" without other compromises. These things generate a lot of heat. The 27" already gets hot enough. If they dropped its size there simply might not be adequate room for component spacing.
Personally I wish the imac would go away entirely. For many people unless ram is a major concern, it can actually be easier to simply plug a laptop into an external display than own an imac + laptop. We're getting to a point where it can make a lot of sense for anyone who doesn't deal with large files that demand more ram than the laptop can accommodate. Laugh now but the mac pro is a more functional desktop concept. They just charge too much for it on the low end. With the imac we're getting closer and closer to the point where if you own an imac + macbook pro, the imac may eventually not be replaced in your repurchasing cycle.
. 27" panels are about the price that 24" panels were at before. Apple also likes uniformity within their line. I would wager that as long as the thunderbolt display stays at 27", the imac will not change sizes at its upper end. The other consideration here is that Apple may not be able to use the same cpu/gpu components in a 24" without other compromises. These things generate a lot of heat. The 27" already gets hot enough. If they dropped its size there simply might not be adequate room for component spacing. Personally I wish the imac would go away entirely. For many people unless ram is a major concern, it can actually be easier to simply plug a laptop into an external display than own an imac + laptop. We're getting to a point where it can make a lot of sense for anyone who doesn't deal with large files that demand more ram than the laptop can accommodate. Laugh now but the mac pro is a more functional desktop concept. They just charge too much for it on the low end. With the imac we're getting closer and closer to the point where if you own an imac + macbook pro, the imac may eventually not be replaced in your repurchasing cycle.
Yes, a 30" Thunderbolt Display in the 16:9 format will be terrific! I will certainly get one!
No I wouldn't. Everyone's needs vary but, in my case, photo editing is a joy with the added screen space. An occasional HD movie preview on the 27' screen is also a nice luxury.
So, I'm way too spoiled to downsize.
So, I'm way too spoiled to downsize.
No, but I would think about buying a 30" or larger version, preferably with an 8-core CPU and two large built-in hard disks. And it still has to be noiseless.
----------
Yes, and that's probably the real translation of their "Think Different" slogan...
No
I'm used to the real estate....It's why I went for the 27" 24" just won't cut it for the stuff I do.
I have my Air and my MBP (17") for other things.
I'm used to the real estate....It's why I went for the 27" 24" just won't cut it for the stuff I do.
I have my Air and my MBP (17") for other things.
I do loads of video and photo editing. In fact, I have a seperate 23" earlier generation cinema screen as secondary monitor to my 27" iMac.
The more real estate, the better.
Now, how about a 27" retina display? Or am I dreaming?
The more real estate, the better.
Now, how about a 27" retina display? Or am I dreaming?
No, it is really nice top have a large screen. And you will get used to it very soon. I love photo editing on my 27".
And if they made the "snap" feature a standard in Lion I'd be totally 100% won over, its so useful in Win 7 and on a 27" screen just makes sense to have.
+1 I always wondered why Apple didn't grab that one with so much screen RE available on the iMac.
Cheers,
If you drag a window to the left side of the screen, it automatically extends to take up exactly half of the screen. Same with the right. If you drag something to the top it maximized, pull it down and it goes back to normal size, etc. Standard Windows 7 feature.
...and also possible on OSX with BetterTouchTool, which I use. It's awesome.
I think the issue with the 27" the resolution is too high at this point and time. Nothing is really built for this resolution so a lot of stuff is really way too small for the 27".
Having owned the 24 & now 27 I do love the 27" for some obvious scenarios, but the resolution is too high, type, websites too small. Clearly you can zoom in or resize, but when something is designed for a 1280px monitor its going to look awful upscaled.
Having owned the 24 & now 27 I do love the 27" for some obvious scenarios, but the resolution is too high, type, websites too small. Clearly you can zoom in or resize, but when something is designed for a 1280px monitor its going to look awful upscaled.