This is a bummer for me. I have a 2015 iMac 27 quad core i7 with 3TB drive, which I paid something like $3300 for back in the day. I was looking forward to the Apple Silicon version, and since I’ve created more data, was planning to purchase a 4TB drive. Now it would cost me roughly $5500 to purchase an Apple Studio with 4TB. The other option is a 16” MacBook Pro + monitor, which would also be in the mid $5000 range. No 4TB option on the Mac Mini. Apple may have left me behind, just not sure I can justify that kind of expense to suit my needs.
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.
Apple Not Planning to Launch Larger-Screened iMac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Apple dropped the tea leaves about this when the said "We have one more product to go, Mac Pro". In addition to the removal of the iMac Intel from their website.
I think some folks really want the 27" iMac in Apple Silicone. However, Apple is telling us its not going to happen.
I think some folks really want the 27" iMac in Apple Silicone. However, Apple is telling us its not going to happen.
It was a really cool device. I love the black color. I would like that in more of their computers. Black and Dark grey are much better looking to me than silver. I do also like their darker, more saturated colors like the blue iMacs too
I agree with you. Apple is frustrating me with their extreme price gouging on storage and RAM
It might be a good solution to use external storage, though. I use an external 8TB with my computer and the only reason it’s not perfect is that it’s a laptop. If it was a desktop it wouldn’t be an issue at all because it would always be right there with the computer
Gotta love the fog of rumors
www.macrumors.com
Kuo: iMac Pro Won't Launch Until 2023, 27-inch External Display Without Mini-LED Coming This Year
Apple will not launch an iMac Pro or a Mac Pro until 2023, while it still plans to release a 27-inch external display without mini-LED sometime this...
www.macrumors.com
Yes, but it doesn't make sense. Base 27" 5k iMac was around £1600 in the UK. Studio display with same display is £1500, go figure. If they can afford to produce 5k iMac with intel CPU and AMD GPU, they should at least provide an 27" iMac with M1 processor for the same price. I'm guessing an intel i5 CPU + AMD RX555X GPU is much more expensive than one M1 Processor.
My school has a lab of iMacs. The new 24" models lack a USB-A port. The school won't replace them with machines that lack universal thumb drives, which every student uses. Our IT dept was hopeful that the 27" model would come with full ports. Apple may be missing out on some big sales here.
The other labs on campus are all Windows already.
Why would cooling be an issue? The last few generations of imac 27 have had close to 300+ watts to cool when including the GPU and CPU. The M1 Pro/Max would fall well under this threshold and allow a thin enclosure
The main reason for killing the imac 27 is just plain greed as they want to upsell you a higher end computer for another $1000 Mac Studio/monitor combo vs M1 Pro imac 27.
I've been looking for a replacement for my wife's 2012 imac 27 and a mac studio isn't it as she wants AIO and imac 24 is too small for her. The M1 mac mini also has too few ports vs. her imac 27
My theory on why there will be NO 27" iMac: If you do the math, you will see that Apple literally split the difference between the 21.5" and 27" iMac to get the 24" sweet spot. An iMac with an extra 3" makes no sense, and it's unlikely to go bigger than that. So there you have it.
Yes, but it has a vastly better webcam and much betters speakers. They're also likely driving the backlight harder to get the extra 100 nits of peak brightness.
Last edited:
It's NOT the same panel as the previous 27" iMac and LG UltraFine, if that's what you mean. It's 600 nits. Those previous two are 500 nits.
And offering M1/M2 Pro and 32GB RAM options into the 24" iMac would likely address a fair bit of complaints about it.
The difference in area between 24 and 27 inches is basically the same as Apple’s App Store cut.
I expect it is the same panel, it is just being driven harder in terms of the backlight. Getting rid of the PC components would have reduced the thermal load significantly and therefore allow for more backlight heat.
We'll know for sure when someone tears it down and pulls the LG Display part number.
Huh? In the last decade, I have purchased two imac 27's. At msrp, combined they were still cheaper than a single studio combo. A nice side effect of that was I got a significant monitor upgrade each time (2013 qhd > 2017 5k/brighter).
If I buy a studio combo now, then upgrade just the mac in the future, I will have paid more than 3 imacs with no upgrade to the display.
My observation is that a lot of professionals want more screens, not necessarily more computational power. Obviously, there are exceptions like video editors and people doing scientific research. They can use and justify all the computational power they can get.
Anyway, this new Mac Studio can support how many screens? (Answer - a lot) That answers that customer demand.
That takes a lot of GPU processing. They've gone to a lot of trouble to make the cooling efficient, presumably to support all that. That might have been a challenge in an iMac package.
I won't even attempt to justify their pricing for SSD, but the memory they use isn't exactly a commodity. So, it's not surprising the pricing is higher. Plus, this has obviously always been a high margin item for them. It sucks if you're a techno-savvy customer, but I wonder how much of their market falls into that category.
It's funny... For years, I've read complaints here that Apple ought to sell a mini Mac Pro for people who want something between a Mini and a Pro. Maybe make the package a little larger, with more ports. Add a nice monitor. So, they did just that. Now people are unhappy again.
Anyway, this new Mac Studio can support how many screens? (Answer - a lot) That answers that customer demand.
That takes a lot of GPU processing. They've gone to a lot of trouble to make the cooling efficient, presumably to support all that. That might have been a challenge in an iMac package.
I won't even attempt to justify their pricing for SSD, but the memory they use isn't exactly a commodity. So, it's not surprising the pricing is higher. Plus, this has obviously always been a high margin item for them. It sucks if you're a techno-savvy customer, but I wonder how much of their market falls into that category.
It's funny... For years, I've read complaints here that Apple ought to sell a mini Mac Pro for people who want something between a Mini and a Pro. Maybe make the package a little larger, with more ports. Add a nice monitor. So, they did just that. Now people are unhappy again.
You do realize it is on the side which makes far more sense than on the back. I think Apple got it right.
You’ve got a point but I think that it is only to not create confusion for product support. Apple released this iMac as the iMac 24 inch, if they change the name for iMac nothing or iMac 2021, it may create confusion over customers who try to get support for their machine.
Yes please.
And if it was alternatively a touch screen, I would be a day one buyer. But not likely a reality to have both, knowing how Apple operates.
14" Macbook Pro with M1 Max is also very thin.
There is no reason for them to not able to build a thin 27" iMac with M1 or M1 Pro/Max. I'm not sure about M1 studio.
I'll be pretty disappointed if there isn't a 27" or larger iMac available when I'm ready to upgrade. The 27" iMac has been my daily driver at work for a decade, and I've liked the ones I've used at work so much I bought one for home. They're fantastic machines.
Oh - I guess I don't consider those things to be big "win" as a better monitor (just personally, since I don't use a webcam and I vastly prefer my external speaker set up).
The part that matters to me (the panel) is basically unchanged from iMac 5k
