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
Well, obviously the M1 Ultra would be an issue, but the M1 Max fits inside the 14" MacBook Pro, so...
The 18 core XEON in the iMac Pro had a TDP of 140W, which isn't too far below the entire M1 Ultra. And that's not even including the 250W Vega 64X that was the high end GPU option in that iMac.
Last edited:
Which is the quandary I find myself in. As someone who spent $3000 on a 27” 2019 iMac i9 I don’t want to go back to another 4K display as my main video source. I do own an LG 4K monitor that I use as my 2nd monitor but it pails in comparison to the 5K screen. And working from home the last 2 years half the time it is used for my work PC. Besides LG has terrible software applications that have never worked properly on my system. Several iterations it still crashes constantly.
I know I’ll have to make a decision soon if I want to upgrade but I’m just unsure of what the right upgrade would be at this point for my needs.
Last edited:
its nice to see someone say the same thing I was about to, and right off the start of the thread.
Still probably going to wait for WWDC. I'm guessing the MacPro is going to be more power and more expensive than I need, but it'll answer the question what the full lineup is going to look like for the next few years. It'll also be interesting to see how the early M2 machines compare with the larger scale M1s.
I'm still guessing we're looking at a 2 year cycle time on Macs. The M(x+1) will be released just as the M(x) version of the MacPro releases. The M2 will be significantly faster than the M1, so it will advance products in that class, but the MacPro version of the M1 will be so stupidly powerful that the new architecture won't take the shine off of it.
I'm still guessing we're looking at a 2 year cycle time on Macs. The M(x+1) will be released just as the M(x) version of the MacPro releases. The M2 will be significantly faster than the M1, so it will advance products in that class, but the MacPro version of the M1 will be so stupidly powerful that the new architecture won't take the shine off of it.
At the very least, i'd love to see an M1 Pro (or M2 Pro) option.
They have been focusing on making the iMac depth thinner and thinner for years. The latest one is so think that an ethernet jack wouldn’t fit so they had to put on the power brick. /fail
fu ny thing is that your desktop display being 2 deep is a problem that hasn’t existed since the m9gration from CRTs. Apple obsessed on something that was not an issue and it makes absolutely no sense.
form over function all day long
That's not completely true. Yes the LCD panel is made by someone else (LG probably), but the rest of it is Apple. It has an A13 in it, surely you don't think LG makes a "monitor" with Apple's A13?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Right. LG will use some other chip to make what may be the exact same screen in their own frame to display the same picture.
On the other hand, LGs will prob come with height-adjustment stand without costing $400 more, flexibility to switch to any third party VESA mount during the life of the monitor without having to decide that up front, etc.
So yes, build quality and specific bits and pieces will be different, including which logo shows and maybe from where the power cable is sourced or its shade of color.
But the most important part of a monitor- the screen- will simply be a part made by LG or whoever is making it for Apple. If they then put it in their own frame, odds are high the picture it displays will be identical, even if they don’t demand as much margin… or so much extra- if anything- for a stand with some useful features.
On the other hand, LGs will prob come with height-adjustment stand without costing $400 more, flexibility to switch to any third party VESA mount during the life of the monitor without having to decide that up front, etc.
So yes, build quality and specific bits and pieces will be different, including which logo shows and maybe from where the power cable is sourced or its shade of color.
But the most important part of a monitor- the screen- will simply be a part made by LG or whoever is making it for Apple. If they then put it in their own frame, odds are high the picture it displays will be identical, even if they don’t demand as much margin… or so much extra- if anything- for a stand with some useful features.
Last edited:
There is no way Apple can believe the Mac Studio + a $1600 27" display (total cost $3800 with keyboard) is a real replacement for the 27" iMac ($1800 starting price which is only $200 more than the new display by itself - think about that), which was the most popular desktop Mac. Apple will be forced to release a redesigned larger iMac to replace the popular 27" iMac, price needs to be in the $2-$3k range.
1. The Mac Pro is going to be stupid powerful and expensive (more so than it is now).
2. If you go back two generations in the A-series, the jump from the A13 to the A15 is about a 40% increase in performance (based on GB5 CPU multi-core scores). Use that against the M1 and you get an M2 that 's a bit above the the binned (8-core) M1 Pro in CPU performance. Which might explain why there's no M1 Pro mini. haha.
30+ inches screen will be too big for eye travel. Your eye will be fatigue, unless you sit further away.
Many YouTubers has compare the 27" vs 32" screen.
Didn’t the iMac Pro start at $4,999?
That is probably the more reasonable comparison for the Mac Studio.
The 24” M1 iMac is a 4.5k display - exactly half way between the 4k and 5k intel iMacs. That is the replacement for both the 21” and 27” iMac.
It is a lovely machine. If I had my heart set on an iMac, I wouldn’t let that half k of resolution stop me from getting one.
I feel like the 27" iMac filled a significant niche that is going to be sorely missed, and Apple has either inadvertently, or perhaps intentionally misread the room. Most folks are not plunking down six-plus grand on a Mac Pro. The larger iMac, despite the chagrin of expandability die-hards like myself, had the virtue of being a gorgeous and powerful all-in-one that (relatively speaking) wouldn't break the bank, even with decent specs (not the paltry defaults Apple sticks us with).
To say nothing of the Studio Display, the Mac Studio, while a remarkable piece of engineering, is most definitely not the middle road many of us prosumers were looking for. There is still no internal expandability. This, of course, is by design, but for my money, it's no better than the Mac mini, and checks less boxes than any of their laptop offerings. Until Apple markets a sub-3k expandable desktop, they are spitting in the face of many professionals.
Once again, Apple flips us the bird and expects us to smile back.
To say nothing of the Studio Display, the Mac Studio, while a remarkable piece of engineering, is most definitely not the middle road many of us prosumers were looking for. There is still no internal expandability. This, of course, is by design, but for my money, it's no better than the Mac mini, and checks less boxes than any of their laptop offerings. Until Apple markets a sub-3k expandable desktop, they are spitting in the face of many professionals.
Once again, Apple flips us the bird and expects us to smile back.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Or maybe Apple already decided some time ago to “split the difference”between the old 21” and 27” by rolling out one iMac model at 24” and then go another direction with desktop Macs.
Last edited:
Not really. The panel is just the panel. There's backlighting, filters, etc. that can be added to the panel to make it sharper, brighter, more color accurate, higher contrast, less prone to ghosting, etc.
Plus there's a lot software/AI features, for the camera, mics and speakers that you wouldn't get with any other display.
Do you iMac guys realize that you can take a Mac Studio or Mini and mount it under your desk? Then run one extra cable alongside the power. It's just as clean of a setup in a much more heat efficient design.
Everyone talks about the 24", like it is almost 27". Guys, it is actually 23.5". There is no way I am going down to 23.5" having got used to 5k 27". For my photo-editing, I would actually like a slightly larger screen, but I don't really need much more computing power than I already have in my 2020 27" iMac.
The studio display is not at all enticing - no bigger, and where is the rumored miniLED and 120Hz?
I can only hope for a something like a 5.5k 29" screen, and an improved Mini with something like an M1 Pro and 32GB RAM. Maybe in a couple of years. The Studio is way overkill for me, and the current Mini is way inadequate.
Or do I have to buy non-Apple? Surely that is not the outcome that Apple desires.
The studio display is not at all enticing - no bigger, and where is the rumored miniLED and 120Hz?
I can only hope for a something like a 5.5k 29" screen, and an improved Mini with something like an M1 Pro and 32GB RAM. Maybe in a couple of years. The Studio is way overkill for me, and the current Mini is way inadequate.
Or do I have to buy non-Apple? Surely that is not the outcome that Apple desires.
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I’m confident that if LG is making it for Apple, they can probably handle backlighting, etc too.
However, Apple has rolled out a beautifully-packaged, high-quality Apple monitor. Anyone who wants it should buy it. There's now an option that doesn’t cost $6000 from Apple. I’m 100% confident it will “just work” really well with Apple computers.
None of my comments are intended to put it down or anything. My first post on this topic was because someone seemed to be mentally locked into it being the ONLY monitor they could buy... and that it made replacing an iMac with 2 pieces much more expensive than had Apple rolled out a new iMac 27". To that perception, there are plenty of fish in the monitor sea... and anyone can basically assemble ANY-size monitor they wished would show in the next iMac... including this new one from Apple if it checks all of their boxes.
All those people hoping for 30" or 32" can make their next Mac have those sizes. Anyone wishing for an ultra-wide (like me) can make their next Mac be an ultra wide (like me). Etc. And when their next Mac conks or macOS makes it increasingly obsolete, the very same monitor can be the monitor used with the Mac upgrade... instead of having to throw it ALL out and then rebuy ALL of it again.
Last edited:
BuT tHaT's NoT tHe SaMe ThInG! /s
I actually have my old 27" iMac (in TDM) sitting on top my M1 mini. Looks like an iMac with a thick base. Plus it lifts the iMac up a bit.
M1 laptops are more than fine for the vast majority of use cases, 80% of folks buying Macs are buying those. Anything in a desktop form factor is starting out as a minority use case. Apple’s laptops are the number 1 AIO, iMacs are a distant second.
You are ignoring if you have external devices that may already be on the desktop and the requirement now for longer cables and additional money?
I get that a lot of folks are not iMac fans but there is still a large segment of the market that are and Apple has dropped the ball and quite frankly in my opinion left many of us out to dry.
But then again Apple has never been known to listen to it’s customers. They’d rather set the bar and force them to conform to what they think is the way forward. Case in point, FireWire 800.
Probably not from anyone upgrading from an older iMac 27. Once you go larger you can’t go to a smaller screen without feeling cramped.
It won’t be from me. Going backwards from a 27” would be a serious downgrade. I owned a 24” before this and it is just not big enough especially for my eyes.