Apple Says There Won't Be a 27-Inch iMac With Apple Silicon

[acrakes]

But the M1 iMacs have fans already, why would they need to be fanless before getting higher end chips ?

If a MacBook Pro can fit an M3 Max and 96GB of RAM, getting internals into a slightly roomier iMac chassis (iMac Plus?) is easy.

if I were king of Apple I’d do a 28 or 30” iMac Pro that maxes out as a midrange Studio build. Like, Max chip, 64GB RAM, 2TB SSD, 6 TB4 ports.

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

Obviously if Apple IS planning to release a 27” iMac they won’t just tell someone who asks, but I have a feeling it’s not actually happening

I have no access to sales data obviously so it’s complete speculation on my end (pretty much on par with every other “analyst” that gets published) but I suspect the 27 inch was never much of a seller.

 

[Richdmoore]

I wouldn’t care so much if there were affordable 5k 27” retina monitors, but there are only a few models available, all higher end.

The scaling of macOS UI on a 4k monitor isn’t ideal, even if the performance hit is minor with apple silicon computers.

Most of us intel 27” iMac users (they are targeting existing intel holdouts like me with the m3 release, if I read between the lines of the scary fast presentation) are use to a retna display, and 4k is a downgrade if we want the cheaper option it will be noticeable.

Of course the best display for these systems is a $1600-$2000 studio display, but an 5k lg ultrafine is still almost $1000 as the “low end” 5k display.

It is what it is, I am glad apple at least is trying to stop this rumor of a new iMac so we can weigh our real options.

 

[dwaite]

I wonder a) how much interest there is for a larger (27", 32", or other size) iMac, and b) how Apple gauges that interest?

They used to sell 27" iMacs. They probably understand the overall interest.

 

[Richdmoore]

Too bad the 2019 Intel 27" could not be booted into a Target Display OS to work with AS Studio. Likely would have made the transition already if it could function as a monitor. Cannot justify tossing this perfectly fine 5K display just to change to an AS machine at this time.

I agree. I am hoping someone offers a conversion kit to allow us to gut & convert the 5k intel machines into a display/speakers/webcam at some point, but it will probably be too late by then.

I did see an Australian company is offering a 2011 iMac to display conversion kit soon, hopefully they will get a 5k kit out the door soon (if it makes financial sense.).

Home Page - Juicy Crumb Systems

juicycrumb.com

 

[Abazigal]

I really don’t get all this love towards all in ones. I actually despise them greatly. Having your monitor and computer paired is horrible. I like having my choice of both computer and what monitor and multiple monitors I want. And especially I need all my monitors to match.

The iMac worked at a time when it was pretty much the prosumer Mac of choice. Prior to the M1, the Mac mini was too limited (only integrated graphics) and the Mac Pro was overkill for the majority of users. The iMac paired decent performance with an excellent display (you won’t find 5k screen being sold anywhere else), at a reasonable price. The presence of a webcam and decent speakers just made the “ready to use right out of the box” value proposition more appealing to a first time Mac user (my first Mac was a 2011 27” iMac).

It’s also a family computer, so I wouldn’t be able to pair a second screen without my dad making a lot of noise. We are really paying for a giant display to watch videos and edit spreadsheets on.

It just ticked all the right boxes for me back then.

 

[Ethosik]

The iMac worked at a time when it was pretty much the prosumer Mac of choice. Prior to the M1, the Mac mini was too limited (only integrated graphics) and the Mac Pro was overkill for the majority of users. The iMac paired decent performance with an excellent display (you won’t find 5k screen being sold anywhere else), at a reasonable price. The presence of a webcam and decent speakers just made the “ready to use right out of the box” value proposition more appealing to a first time Mac user (my first Mac was a 2011 27” iMac).

It’s also a family computer, so I wouldn’t be able to pair a second screen without my dad making a lot of noise. We are really paying for a giant display to watch videos and edit spreadsheets on.

It just ticked all the right boxes for me back then.

This is partly why I despise iMacs. There was no alternatives. Crappy Mac mini or way over priced Mac Pro. Nothing in between.

 

[jouster]

This is partly why I despise iMacs. There was no alternatives. Crappy Mac mini or way over priced Mac Pro. Nothing in between.

Well, apart from the Mac Studio.

 

[Bobby Smallwood]

The display you linked to is not a 5k monitor. It is a 1440p monitor.

The same way the Alienware OLED AW3423DWF monitor is not a 4k monitor though I guess you'd call it one or a 3.5 monitor or something. It is also a 1440p monitor though.

If you think the display you linked to is on par with sharpness compared to the Studio Display (an actual 5k monitor), it is a waste of time even discussing this with you.

FYI 5K is a display resolution measuring 5120 x 2880 pixels. That's what the Studio Display is. That is not what your linked display is.

Making something bold does not make it accurate. But I guess I can do it for you.

5K resolution is a display resolution measuring 5120 x 2880 pixels.

And you would be wrong, it can be both 5k and 1440p at the same time.

 

[fathergll]

The display you linked to is not a 5k monitor. It is a 1440p monitor.

The same way the Alienware OLED AW3423DWF monitor is not a 4k monitor though I guess you'd call it one.

If you think the display you linked to is on par with sharpness compared to the Studio Display (an actual 5k monitor), it is a waste of time even discussing this with you.

FYI 5K is a display resolution measuring 5120 x 2880 pixels. That's what the Studio Display is. That is not what your linked display is.

Making something bold does not make it accurate. But I guess I can do it for you.

5K resolution is a display resolution measuring 5120 x 2880 pixels.

5k is horizontal resolution of around 5,000 pixels.

There is no one specific resolution for 5k. There are multiple ones. There is a lot of different marketing around that term that gets thrown around but the origins of K refers to the horizontal pixels and comes from projection cinema formats as it originated when movies were still shot on film then scanned to digital images.



This is why if you go on say RTINGs and look up best 5K monitors they will correctly list a 5120 x 1440 resolution monitors as one of them. As far as 'sharpness' goes I believe the correct term you want is 'PPI' which is a different topic.

 

[J___o___h___n]

This news sucks.

I’ve been waiting and waiting to buy a big iMac. 27” would have been great. 30” or 32” would be amazing.

I’d happily buy a Mac Studio if I could use my existing iMac 5k as a display - it’s awesome.

 

[spcopsmac21]

May 2021 I bought the 27” intel iMac because I needed to upgrade and didn’t think the new 27” was coming out soon. Looks like that was a good move. At this point, even if they come out with a 30/32” iMac, I think the Mac Studio and a great monitor will be the next move for me. Photography is a lifelong hobby and the image sizes in RAW keep getting larger. The iMac was great, but we may need to move on.

I have a 2017 21.5” educational only iMac my son uses. Pulled the screen off, added a SSD, upgraded the ram.

I don't think pros want an all in one, I think the target market for a 27" pro iMac would be people with more money than brains. They are the same people that buy their kids a $5000 MBP to play Roblox and surf the web. These are the same people that would buy a second iMac to be used in Target display mode in order to have matched dual displays.

Maybe Apple is ignoring these people because they are bad for the environment, if you WANT a nice all in one, get a mini with a vesa mount and connect it to a killer display or 2, that what I did with my dual dell 34" monitors. When I upgraded from the Mini I kept my monitors and gifted the mini to my daughter who is using it with a pair of 15 year old dell 2408's.

the iMac Pro sold like hot cakes.

 

[chinesedemo]

Nah, fluff article… Of course they won’t be releasing another 27”…… The future iMac 27” “replacement” will be significantly larger.

 

[jmckenzie]

Just priced it out. The last 27" iMac, in 2020, was $2299 for the high end i7 (not i9) version, 8 GB (user-upgradeable) ram, and 500 GB Storage. Let's say upgrading to 32 GB of Ram cost, what, $100? So that's $2399 for a pretty decent design workhorse. I'd go for more storage but I don't know what apple would have charged so let's keep it at 500 GB for comparison’s stake.

Closest config to this now would be the 10 core M2 Pro Mac Mini, with 32 GB of ram and a 500 GB SSD. Got to add the Studio Display, but we won't go for the fancy nano-glass or fancier stand. And then we’ve got to add the keyboard and mouse you would've gotten with the iMac.

That comes to $3800.00 for what would again be a pretty decent design workhorse, though nowhere near a system you would brag about... basically middle of the road at best but with a great display.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Just priced it out. The last 27" iMac, in 2020, was $2299 for the high end i7 (not i9) version, 8 GB (user-upgradeable) ram, and 500 GB Storage. Let's say upgrading to 32 GB of Ram cost, what, $100? So that's $2399 for a pretty decent design workhorse. I'd go for more storage but I don't know what apple would have charged so let's keep it at 500 GB for comparison’s stake.

Closest config to this now would be the 10 core M2 Pro Mac Mini, with 32 GB of ram and a 500 GB SSD. Got to add the Studio Display, but we won't go for the fancy nano-glass or fancier stand. And then we’ve got to add the keyboard and mouse you would've gotten with the iMac.

That comes to $3800.00 for what would again be a pretty decent design workhorse, though nowhere near a system you would brag about... basically middle of the road at best but with a great display.

Yep -- it's a pretty big price hike

That's the real reason they have gone this route

 

[Bobby Smallwood]

This news sucks.

I’ve been waiting and waiting to buy a big iMac. 27” would have been great. 30” or 32” would be amazing.

I’d happily buy a Mac Studio if I could use my existing iMac 5k as a display - it’s awesome.

And this is exactly why I would never buy an iMac, I'm still using monitors that are 15 years old

 

[Bobby Smallwood]

I have a 2017 21.5” educational only iMac my son uses. Pulled the screen off, added a SSD, upgraded the ram.

the iMac Pro sold like hot cakes.

I did because the Mac Pro was a failure, if you wanted the top performance the iMac was more or less your only choice. Today you can get a Mac Studio or MBP for the most performance

 

[JamesMay82]

Still rocking my Intel 27" iMac from 2020 here. Whenever I upgrade this will push me to a Mac Studio with a HP 5K monitor.

That bad boy has another 7 years left! its still a pup

 

[AF_APPLETALK]

I would've bought a 27+" iMac by now. Mac Mini and a 5k display

surprising, though, because the AIO is part of the brand aesthetic. Simple, elegant, minimalist, whatever. A separate box for the computer means more cables to run and manage, larger footprint. It’s regressive.

but how many of us grumbling 27 iMac users are out there?

Completely agree with you about brand aesthetic. It's just unwieldy to do anything with after you've finished using it.

I love that they brought the iMac back to its roots though - a home consumer machine.

 

[AF_APPLETALK]

I did because the Mac Pro was a failure, if you wanted the top performance the iMac was more or less your only choice. Today you can get a Mac Studio or MBP for the most performance

Quirky, but I got a secondhand 2013 Mac Pro for a really good price recently. I actually love the thing. Almost wish they'd bring it back, I think it would be a smash success with Mx chips.

 

[LoggerMN]

They need a 27"/32" display in the $700ish range that supports all modern display tech.

Curious what specs you would find acceptable. Apple avoids lower margin products like the plague. Compare Studio Display to comparably spec'd LG and Samsung displays. If you find a good sale, maybe you can get one for $950, but they list around $1300. I can't recall the last time Apple tried to compete on price alone. Those markets are well served any those competitors anyway. What Apple could bring to the table, that they don't? Apple would have to lower the build quality to compete on price, and that's not their brand.

 

[SoYoung]

Sadly Apple become arrogant just like Microsoft were before the iPhone era. They just do what they want and completely ignore costumers. For those unhappy about this you know you can vote with your wallet. Personally there’s no more computers that suits my needs anymore on Apple side so when I’ll have to change my computer I’ll just go back to Microsoft and PCs.
Yes the ecosystem is good and all but for a desktop computer that’s not the most important stuff.

 

[Nick A]

Curious what specs you would find acceptable. Apple avoids lower margin products like the plague. Compare Studio Display to comparably spec'd LG and Samsung displays. If you find a good sale, maybe you can get one for $950, but they list around $1300. I can't recall the last time Apple tried to compete on price alone. Those markets are well served any those competitors anyway. What Apple could bring to the table, that they don't? Apple would have to lower the build quality to compete on price, and that's not their brand.

That's a fair point. I think what they should do is drop the price of the Studio Display to around $700, and release a pro-sumer display with a 4K panel, HDR, 120hz+, and VRR. There's really nothing about the Studio Display that warrants the $1600 price tag unless you, for whatever reason, need to have 5K over 4K. There's plenty of 4K 60Hz displays even in the sub-$500 market.

There's new monitors coming out shortly that are around 32" like the Alienware AW3225QF and MSI 321UPX that are 4K, QD-OLED, and 240hz. A monitor with similiar specs could and should be their $1,600 monitor.

I think what makes the Studio Display seem extra dissapointing is how good the MacBook Pro displays are, people want that same experience in a desktop and feel that for $1,600, it should be that experience.

 

[Bobby Smallwood]

Sadly Apple become arrogant just like Microsoft were before the iPhone era. They just do what they want and completely ignore costumers. For those unhappy about this you know you can vote with your wallet. Personally there’s no more computers that suits my needs anymore on Apple side so when I’ll have to change my computer I’ll just go back to Microsoft and PCs.
Yes the ecosystem is good and all but for a desktop computer that’s not the most important stuff.

Have you seen Windows all in ones, they look like garbage and are mostly junk.

 

[burpootus]

I‘m a 2015 iMac 27” holdout. I replaced the mechanical hard drive of the Fusion Drive earlier this year and it is running well. But it will be 8 years old on Christmas Day, so it is getting time to upgrade. Currently have 3TB storage, will need 4TB for the upgrade machine, which puts any Apple solution well over $5K with the Studio Display. Very dissatisfied with the current options. I came over from PC’s back in 2014, and I can go back.