I diagree; I have a single 4k 27" at home and I feel like it's too big...too tall, anyway. I don't like the screen to be much higher than eye level.
At work, I have dual 24" monitors and like it much better.
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 Says There Won't Be a 27-Inch iMac With Apple Silicon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I diagree; I have a single 4k 27" at home and I feel like it's too big...too tall, anyway. I don't like the screen to be much higher than eye level.
At work, I have dual 24" monitors and like it much better.
The Studio Display is just too expensive for me. I can't justify buying one. That's why I've been holding out for a larger iMac.
I loved my 27" iMac – that beast lasted almost 7 years. I regret switching over to an MBP paired with a non-Apple display, mainly because of little annoyances and quality issues. I wish Apple would make a more affordable display.
I loved my 27" iMac – that beast lasted almost 7 years. I regret switching over to an MBP paired with a non-Apple display, mainly because of little annoyances and quality issues. I wish Apple would make a more affordable display.
It's a little kludgy and does require some tech expertise, but it is possible to hollow out a 5K iMac 27 and put in a converter board that turns it into a monitor.
You must really hate the inability to upgrade or replace RAM and SSD on the Apple silicon computers then. Right?
RETIRE THE iMAC!
Simplify the line up by streamlining 3 use cases:
1. Education/children/cheaper
2. The common use case/best for most people
3. The power user/professionals
3 Laptops: MacBook SE, MacBook, MacBook Pro (retire anything named “air”)
3 Desktops: Mac mini, Mac Studio, Mac Pro
This also works well with iPhones and iPads.
Then, introduce a new lower end affordable display that slots in along with the Studio Display and Pro Display to pair with the Mac mini.
Simplify the line up by streamlining 3 use cases:
1. Education/children/cheaper
2. The common use case/best for most people
3. The power user/professionals
3 Laptops: MacBook SE, MacBook, MacBook Pro (retire anything named “air”)
3 Desktops: Mac mini, Mac Studio, Mac Pro
This also works well with iPhones and iPads.
Then, introduce a new lower end affordable display that slots in along with the Studio Display and Pro Display to pair with the Mac mini.
I agree with everyone so far who said there will be a 32 inch iMac. They were very careful with their words to specifically mention just the 27 inch.
This exactly was my thinking. I had to get rid of my 27" iMac 2015 cuz it was getting slow but still had to get rid of the beautiful perfectly fine monitor part obviously. Got a Studio Display and mini and couldn't be happier. When ready I will just replace the mini part and it will be cheaper than getting a whole new iMac. I love the setup although I must admit I don't like all the cables.
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.
They said this two years ago as well. It’ll sink in eventually.
Other sizes beyond 27" exist and they didn't say much about that.
Conversely, a base Studio, non-textured Display, and peripherals is $4050. The 24" iMac maxed out is $2828. The 2015 RiMac i7-4790K, 32 GB RAM, 1 TB Fusion drive, and included peripherals was $4300. There's room in there for a larger iMac with M3 Pro chips. Maybe not the Max's, which I think should only be an option for the Studios and Pros, but they have a gaping hole in their lineup that could be profitably filled with a new iMac Pro.
Conversely, a base Studio, non-textured Display, and peripherals is $4050. The 24" iMac maxed out is $2828. The 2015 RiMac i7-4790K, 32 GB RAM, 1 TB Fusion drive, and included peripherals was $4300. There's room in there for a larger iMac with M3 Pro chips. Maybe not the Max's, which I think should only be an option for the Studios and Pros, but they have a gaping hole in their lineup that could be profitably filled with a new iMac Pro.
I'm glad the era of the mid-range Mac tied to a display is over.
Nothing against a 27-inch iMac, but I'm glad to be able to buy Mac Studio and Mac mini M2 pro, where I can choose if I want a display at all, and if so, what size and quality. Buying a Mac Pro for these reasons was overkill.
Nothing against a 27-inch iMac, but I'm glad to be able to buy Mac Studio and Mac mini M2 pro, where I can choose if I want a display at all, and if so, what size and quality. Buying a Mac Pro for these reasons was overkill.
Although you can take this literally i.e. no 27" iMac.... (but an even bigger one to come)
I think anyone could have predicted that i.e. we went from a 21" iMac to a 24" M1 machine so logic dictates that IF there was ever to be a replacement for the larger iMac it would be bigger than 27 and therefore 32 is a reasonable assumption..
.... HOWEVER - this statement from Apple seems to me to be more likely they are saying "No, we arent making bigger screen iMacs"
And yes, if youve been waiting patiently for one for the last 2.5 years since the 24 was released... it basically isnt coming. I admire your resolve waiting for it but it's been clear for a while that the bigger one most likely isnt coming. The analyst rumours stoking the embers of hope arent helping matters.
So, Apple is right - if you are in the market for a display bigger than 24" then you are well catered for already either with Apple's expensive option or 3rd parties cheaper displays paired with an Mac Mini.
This announcement, to me at least, just cements my long held belief that there probably wont be a bigger Mac. If Apple did eventually reveal a 32" iMac that makes todays statement in very poor form basically forcing a buying decision where it was not necessary. Time will tell there.
I think anyone could have predicted that i.e. we went from a 21" iMac to a 24" M1 machine so logic dictates that IF there was ever to be a replacement for the larger iMac it would be bigger than 27 and therefore 32 is a reasonable assumption..
.... HOWEVER - this statement from Apple seems to me to be more likely they are saying "No, we arent making bigger screen iMacs"
And yes, if youve been waiting patiently for one for the last 2.5 years since the 24 was released... it basically isnt coming. I admire your resolve waiting for it but it's been clear for a while that the bigger one most likely isnt coming. The analyst rumours stoking the embers of hope arent helping matters.
So, Apple is right - if you are in the market for a display bigger than 24" then you are well catered for already either with Apple's expensive option or 3rd parties cheaper displays paired with an Mac Mini.
This announcement, to me at least, just cements my long held belief that there probably wont be a bigger Mac. If Apple did eventually reveal a 32" iMac that makes todays statement in very poor form basically forcing a buying decision where it was not necessary. Time will tell there.
FWIW I went that route a little over a year ago and, once you get over the expense, I’ve never been happier.
Now that I think about it I guess it’s fine the base spec is still 8/256. All in ones have never made sense to me. The computer tech is moving faster than the display tech, except every now and then vice versa. Why literally be stuck with both unless the whole thing is essentially disposable past a certain lifetime.
As soon as I buy a Mac Studio and 27" studio display, Apple will release a 40" iMac. 😂
I feel like this is part of the knock-on effect of moving to processors that can perform at max capacity inside just about any enclosure. Obviously they haven't really figured out how to differentiate the Mac Pro from the Mac Studio, for instance. If they put an M3 Max inside a 27" iMac, who would buy a Studio? et cetera.
That giant fan in the Mac Studio M2 Max buys you less than one percent performance increase over the MBP 16" M2 Max, according to the Geekbench scores reported in MacTracker.
But it's also down to the fact that the iMac used to be "The family computer" and I get the feeling families don't share computers as much anymore
That giant fan in the Mac Studio M2 Max buys you less than one percent performance increase over the MBP 16" M2 Max, according to the Geekbench scores reported in MacTracker.
But it's also down to the fact that the iMac used to be "The family computer" and I get the feeling families don't share computers as much anymore
Last edited:
I think it's fine if they don't come out with a 27" iMac and instead push users to the Mac Mini or Studio, but if they're going that route they need to fix their display line-up.
The $1,600 Studio Display is too expensive for most people, doesn't come with a height adjustable stand, and it's STILL lacking HDR, 120hz, and VRR.
They need a 27"/32" display in the $700ish range that supports all modern display tech.
The $1,600 Studio Display is too expensive for most people, doesn't come with a height adjustable stand, and it's STILL lacking HDR, 120hz, and VRR.
They need a 27"/32" display in the $700ish range that supports all modern display tech.