Apple Not Planning to Launch Larger-Screened iMac

[ThunderSkunk]

No one really knows what Apple has in mind. Stands to reason the 27” iMac is popular in office and at home and that the Mac Studio is higher end which many people don’t need
Hopefully Apple puts a new iMac out later in the year

Well it'd be a shame if I were a 35 year Apple fan and all my Macs and devices were outdated relics from years past, when they were full of features and user friendly, but the way they're headed, that's what my technological outlay looks like. It seems like some highly questionable territory they're expecting us to follow them into.

 

[eifelbube]

Apple has no plans to release a larger-screened iMac, according to a new report from 9to5Mac. Citing unspecified sources with knowledge of Apple's product pipeline, the site says that Apple will not be introducing a bigger iMac "in the near future."

With the launch of the Mac Studio, Apple discontinued the Intel-based 27-inch iMac, creating some confusion about the future of the iMac line. Apple confirmed to Ars Technica that the 27-inch iMac "has reached end of life," indicating the company has no intention of releasing a refreshed 27-inch model to go along with the 24-inch iMac.

Despite the discontinuation of the 27-inch iMac, there have been rumors of a larger-screened iMac Pro that could be in development, but at least some of those rumors may have been mixed up with the Studio Display. Display analyst Ross Young this week said that what his sources thought might be an iMac Pro was actually a "Studio Display Pro" that's coming later in the year, perhaps alongside the Mac Pro.

Young no longer believes that an iMac Pro is coming this summer, and 9to5Mac's information seems to agree with that take. The site says that Apple "currently has no plans to release new high-end versions of its all-in-one desktop for now," though there is a 24-inch M2 version of the iMac that's set to come out in 2023.

Other sources continue to suggest that we might see an iMac Pro at some point. Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said last Sunday that an iMac Pro would come out in 2023, and Bloomberg's Mark Gurman claims that Apple is still developing an iMac Pro.

It is not clear how an iMac Pro would fit into the Mac lineup now that the more powerful Mac Studio exists, and it's looking more and more like we might not be seeing a new larger-screened iMac in 2022. For now, Apple suggests that customers who want a powerful desktop machine invest in the Mac Studio, which is priced stating at $1,999, while those who want an all-in-one machine can opt for the 24-inch iMac.

Article Link: Apple Not Planning to Launch Larger-Screened iMac

The more powerful the MacBook Pros get, the less of a need for a bigger iMac. Need a bigger display size than your M1 Pro/Max MBP offers, add the Studio Display, enjoy the additional ports. An M1-Pro/Max iMac wouldn‘t give you significantly better performance anymore. An M1-Ultra based iMac would … but where in that iMac could Apple make room for the copper cooler? If you need mobility and power, go MBP + Mac Studio and Display. And maybe you have to take that Mac Studio somewhere occasionally … you wouldn‘t do that with a 27-inch iMac. Modular is great — why would Apple want to make a 24+ inch iMac anymore?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

We have fifty (50) 27” inch iMacs in our one educational department alone. These are upgraded every three years. What are we gonna do now?

If we replace Mac mini’s with 27” Apple screens that will cost us more and present all kinds of security issues. We really depend on our 27” inch iMacs.

Shop for 27” monitors or even bigger from all of the other monitor makers? Apple isn’t the only game in town. Not all of them demand or can get comparable margins.

Then in 3 years when it’s upgrade time again, keep using those monitors, upgrade the minis and save a relative fortune.

Then in 3 more years, keep using the same monitors, upgrade the minis, and save a fortune again.

Or relatively overspend for these Apple monitors this cycle, them recoup the overage by using them through the next 2+ computer upgrade cycles. People around here are still using the last round of Apple monitors discontinued 10+ years ago.

We seem to be in a mental state of seeing this purchase just like an iMac purchase and worried about the greater expense. However on down the road at upgrade time, we don’t have to replace the monitor too. That’s the benefit here: buy once, use for maybe 10+ years.

 

[FasterQuieter]

It’s because they can’t price it sensibly now they’ve released a $1,600 monitor. That monitor is a 27” iMac with the same ancient panel and the Mac removed. The Studio computer plus monitor lets them charge an extra grand.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It makes sense. Mobile systems rule the roost across the industry. They’ve created one new desktop and retired a desktop. In the future, if they bring a larger iMac, it will likely be replacing one of the other desktop systems… replacing a 24 with a larger iMac? Possible.

 

[zorinlynx]

You might have hit the nail on the head there - good price considering the display you get, plus you could easily upgrade the RAM. Probably looked at the profit margin rather than the number of sales.

Heh, my PC using buddies always thought the 27" iMac was super overpriced. They'd laugh at this comment. Shows how things are all relative. PC users tend to be happier using cheap junk than Mac users though.

 

[wellander1]

Kuo needs to go

 

[zorinlynx]

32GB minimum is downright sensible and as un-apple-like as I've seen.

Now if they wouldn't charge $200 for 512GB more SSD, we could start asking "Who are you, and what have you done with Apple?"

 

[CWallace]

Are there any downsides to this?

There really should not be.

Even worse, Apple is basically saying that the price to produce a 5K screen hasn’t come down at all in the past 5-6 years.

In all honestly, it might not have considering Apple pretty much is the only buyer of them from LG Display. LG Electronics take a handful for the UltraFine LG and iiyama even less for the XB2779QQS.

 

[Le0M]

It's kinda obvious that with Mac Studio there won't be any iMac Pro. And it makes more sense this way.
Perhaps Apple will consider two different screen sizes for future iMacs, like a 24" and a 32", but other than that I doubt they'll release any other desktop that would compete with the new Mac Studio.

 

[zorinlynx]

We have fifty (50) 27” inch iMacs in our one educational department alone. These are upgraded every three years. What are we gonna do now?

If we replace Mac mini’s with 27” Apple screens that will cost us more and present all kinds of security issues. We really depend on our 27” inch iMacs.

Similar sitch here (.edu, 27" iMacs).. we're just going to start buying iMac 24s. "Price went up too much" if people complain. People who can justify a need can get either a second display (probably non-Apple) if they need more screen area.

As a sysadmin I love deploying the 24s; we've already bought a few in the past couple months. They're smaller, lighter, and being able to plug ethernet into the power brick under the desk solves cable routing issues. I thought I'd hate them but as someone who has to deploy a bunch they've been happiness.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Well it'd be a shame if I were a 35 year Apple fan and all my Macs and devices were outdated relics from years past, when they were full of features and user friendly, but the way they're headed, that's what my technological outlay looks like. It seems like some highly questionable territory they're expecting us to follow them into.

I don’t think they’re really expecting too many folks to follow them. For the 20+ million folks buying Macs today, half have never owned a Mac before. Some long time users may also like what Apple’s making today, but those liking what Apple’s making today and buying Macs for the first time are the ones that are more likely to buy again for the next 35 years.

 

[Justin Cymbal]

Makes sense from a sales aspect- why release a $2000 iMac that would potentially cut into sales of their new $2000 Mac studio ($3600/$3900 when paired with a studio display)

Apple has a long history of doing this exact thing

I purchased the first iMac to have the retina display, the 27 inch iMac that came out in 2014, for $2499 - subsequent releases were $1999 followed by $1799

In this instance, it’s not new technology that’s being incorporated into the product but rather the product competing with a more expensive alternative and the 27 inch iMac being very much satisfactory to the buyer’s needs considering the unparalleled power of Apple silicon

I have no doubt that Apple has plans to eventually release a 27 inch or possibly a 30 inch iMac but considering it would be much cheaper than their Mac studio set up, I don’t see it being released until the spring of next year at the earliest but we’ll see what happens

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It's kinda obvious that with Mac Studio there won't be any iMac Pro. And it makes more sense this way.
Perhaps Apple will consider two different screen sizes for future iMacs, like a 24" and a 32", but other than that I doubt they'll release any other desktop that would compete with the new Mac Studio.

I suspect that Intel Mac Mini will eventually be replaced with Mac Mini M1 or M2 PRO starting at about $1500. And yes, that will compete with Studio. But those that can't afford Studio but needs a little more than M1/M2 will have a "mainstream" Mac they can afford. And those more easily able to spend $1500 will likely be tempted to spend the extra $500 for at least M1/M2 MAX in the base Studio... or perhaps even more Studio extras.

 

[Doomtomb]

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.

Increasing backlight output doesn’t mean new panel folks.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

I still think a larger iMac will come eventually, but there are growing indications that it isn't going to be soon.

If it happens, I think it won't be 27 inches, because the difference between 24 and 27 inches is a bit ridiculous. It would have to be 30+ inches.

Dude, if I added three inches to your height, it would be ridiculous--ridiculously a big deal. Don't kid yourself--the difference between 24 and 27 inches on a screen is remarkable. It's a big deal.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Makes sense from a sales aspect- why release a $2000 iMac that would potentially cut into sales of their new $2000 Mac studio ($3600/$3900 when paired with a studio display)

Apple has a long history of doing this exact thing

I purchased the first iMac to have the retina display, the 27 inch iMac that came out in 2014, for $2499 - subsequent releases were $1999 followed by $1799

In this instance, it’s not new technology that’s being incorporated into the product but rather the product competing with a more expensive alternative and the 27 inch iMac being very much satisfactory to the buyer’s needs considering the unparalleled power of Apple silicon

I have no doubt that Apple has plans to eventually release a 27 inch or possibly a 30 inch iMac but considering it would be much cheaper than their Mac studio set up, I don’t see it being released until the spring of next year at the earliest but we’ll see what happens

I generally don't believe this kind of thinking goes on at Apple. If they wanted to roll out an iMac too and had this kind of worry about it stealing Studio profits, they could brand it iMac Pro (and there were plenty of rumors even pointing that way) and price it like they did with Intel iMac Pros which is way out in the middle of Studio BTO configs.

Then there WOULD also be an iMac "bigger" for those that really, really want that but it would be priced UP like this deluxe Mini was priced UP. Apple accountants would be happy either way... probably more happy at selling those iMacs because in a few years when macOS updates make the guts "long in tooth," those wanting to keep up would have to buy the whole iMac pro again instead of just the tech guts and keep using a separate monitor purchased back in 2022.

This reminds me of all of the forum worry about putting PRO & MAX in Mini because that would heavily undermine the pricing of MBpro with those chips. Same thing. Going into MAR 8, I fully expected Mac Mini with PRO & MAX options. But, I also expected them to be priced like MBpro 14" configs with those chips, minus about $500-$700 for not including lid, keyboard, trackpad, etc.

More directly, I was expecting Mac Mini with M1 MAX maxed out at about $5K... not $699-$1299.

 

[02-serious-stent]

I don’t get it. Apples MO after Jobs righted the ship was the basic retail philosophy of “good, better, best”.

Where you drive consumers to high margin “better” by giving the perception it is “close enough” to the “best” option.

 

[Jim Lahey]

Not a surprise if true. First thing I took away from the event was that 24” iMac is probably going to be their iPad of desktop computers while the more serious stuff is Studio up.

 

[btbeme]

Well, if I wish to replace my failing 27" iMac, I need to start with a $1600 screen, another three hundred for a keyboard and mouse, and then buy a computer. The Mac mini cannot be configured with my necessary RAM and storage, so it's gotta be the Studio. I was ready to spend $2700 or so for a new iMac... Now, I'm easily $1500 over budget, and for no reason whatsoever. I have owned 17 Macs in my life, worked for the company, and retired early on that success. But I really need to think seriously about rewarding Apple for trying to force me to spend 50% more to get the machine I expected...foolishly expected, I guess. That is quite an ask.

 

[Justin Cymbal]

I generally don't believe this kind of thinking goes on at Apple. If they wanted to roll out an iMac too and had this kind of worry about it stealing Studio profits, they could brand it iMac Pro and price it like they did with Intel iMac Pros which is way out in the middle of Studio BTO configs.

Then there WOULD also be an iMac "bigger" for those that really, really want that but it would be priced UP like this deluxe Mini was priced UP. Apple accountants would be happy either way... probably more happy at selling those iMacs because in a few years when macOS updates make the guts "long in tooth", those wanting to keep up would have to buy the whole iMac pro again instead of just the tech guts and keep using a separate monitor.

It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Apple does release an iMac Pro by next spring before they release the regular 27 inch iMac- possibly in the fall

Apple seems to like the 2-3 tier approach for each product category with the entry iMac and iMac Pro; entry Mac mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro

 

[theluggage]

Heh, my PC using buddies always thought the 27" iMac was super overpriced.

The iMac was always a bargain if you wanted a 5k display.

...but only Mac users give a wet slap about having 5k so that they don't need to use GPU heavy and slightly sub-optimal 'scaled mode'. That's not because PC users are too easily pleased, it's because Windows has a fully scalable UI so you can just set the UI scale to (say) 150% to get the icons and system fonts the right size for a 4k screen. Now, I'd say the Mac method works better in terms of App compatibility and dealing with a mixture of standard and high def screens - but it still removes any 5k advantage in Windows.

Yes, of course, 5k is "sharper" than 4k given the same screen size, but the reality is that 4k@27" is already past the "retina" limit when viewed from 21" so 5k is well into diminishing returns.

That, and the slow uptake of DisplayPort 1.4 meant that you either needed dual DisplayPort 1.2 cables or Thunderbolt 3 - less common on PCs - to drive a 5k display, left us in the current situation where you can count the number of 5k displays (not counting ultra-wide 2160p displays) available to PC users on the fingers of one foot.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Apple does release an iMac Pro by next spring before they release the regular 27 inch iMac- possibly in the fall

Apple seems to like the 3 level tier approach with the entry iMac and iMac Pro; entry Mac mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro

I agree. As a long-term Apple consumer myself- starting with the screen-less PowerMac G4 and separate CRT monitor😱, then through generations of iMacs, I very much enjoyed having iMacs as my main Mac (and PC with bootcamp)... EXCEPT at the end when the value proposition flips because when the tech guts conk or when macOS upgrades can no longer be installed, the WHOLE thing- my best Mac, my best PC and my best monitor- all get chucked together.

That actually just happened to me a few days before MAR 8. So I felt the most obvious compulsion to buy a new Mac ASAP... but was 100% committed to NOT buying one with a monitor married to the tech guts again. My dying iMac still has a perfectly-good monitor that would otherwise probably have 5+ years of life in it if it could be used. Instead, it goes when the tech finally fully throws in the towel.

So I was mentally "all in" for the rumored Mac Mini with M1 MAX no matter what kind of iMac "bigger" Apple rolled out... and even though I have never owned a Mini before. Instead, Apple rolled out only Studio which is basically Mini PLUS with super deluxe margin for Apple too. Mine arrives FRI at significantly more than I expected to spend for that Mac Mini MAX.

I'll ride it for years and then, when it dies or- more likely- when macOS updates make it "long in tooth," I'll get to do something that throws me all the way back to PowerMac G4 days- buy only new tech guts in a box and hook them to the same monitor I'm pairing with this Studio.

I lose some typical economy on the purchase but I will save the cost of wasting the screen and buying another screen in the next round (maybe even TWO rounds)... because screens can easily go upwards of 10+ years.

Going into MAR 8, people were hoping for iMac 27", iMac 30", iMac 32", etc. Now, everyone can build their Mac with whatever size screen they want. My new "iMac" is going to be 40" ultra-wide... like my old iMac screen paired with another screen right next to it in a single bezel frame. There's 49" ultra-wides for anyone wanting an "iMac" 49". 32"? Yes. 30"? Yes. 27" Yes. 60hz? Yes. 120hz? Yes. Curved? Yes. With an extra display port for a console or maybe a PC if you need a new version of "bootcamp"? Yes. Need jacks other than or more numerous than 3 Thunderbolt jacks? Have it your way. All options are on the table- er desk- now.

And if Mini guts are fast enough for some, there are plenty of brackets to strap a mini to the BACK of a monitor which creates an "iMac" hunchback edition with ANY size screen anyone wants. It won't be as "pretty" from the back, but from the front nobody will be able to tell if the guts are hanging on the back or built inside the monitor body.

 

[turbineseaplane]

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.

Same panel

 

[Enlightened Doggo]

The iMac Pro was always a bit of an awkward product IMO. It's just not clear where a larger iMac would fit into their current lineup. M1 iMacs are more than fine for the vast majority of use cases, the Mac Studio is a more practical form factor for professionals that need more thermal management, and presumably the upcoming Mac Pro will cover the slim remainder of people who need obscene power.