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.
End of iMacs?
- Thread starter dvoros
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nobody knows, but I would be very surprised if Apple discontinues the iMac completely, it's still a popular form factor. There are conflicted reports regarding a larger iMac coming this summer or next year, we will probably have more informations at WWDC. But if there's a larger iMac coming, it will probably be a 27 inch, there are 0 rumors about a 30+ inch iMac for now
My best guess is that there will be an iMac Pro next year once mini LED prices have come down a bit, probably a 27 inch with 5k, 120hz. Based on usually reliable display leaks there is a 27 inch 120hz monitor coming near WWDC this year, but I feel like that could be an optional upgrade to the studio display (probably quite a pricey one given mini-LED and 120hz!)
All guesses of course, I’ve been waiting to replace my 2014 5k iMac for a few years with a mini LED desktop (I do mainly photo/video stuff) - hoping we’ve not got too long to wait!
All guesses of course, I’ve been waiting to replace my 2014 5k iMac for a few years with a mini LED desktop (I do mainly photo/video stuff) - hoping we’ve not got too long to wait!
OK, here's a Fishrrman totally off-the-wall prediction:
I saw an article yesterday (I think it was referring to an ifixit teardown of the new 27" Studio display) that mentioned that the internal layout of components in the Studio display resembled that "of an iMac" (rather than "a display").
Not sure if that signifies anything, but...
... since the Studio display has an m-series chip inside already, I'm wondering if Apple has long-term plans to "transmogrify it" into some kind of MacOS/iOS hybrid computer?
That is to say, it could become a "large screen" iPad-like device, although of course it would use a keyboard and pointing device instead of a touchscreen.
The Studio display has something like 64gb of internal RAM... although only about 4gb of it is used for actual display purposes (the rest is "just there"... for now). Why would that be there?
Perhaps Apple sees "possibilities" for this that are yet to be apparent...
I saw an article yesterday (I think it was referring to an ifixit teardown of the new 27" Studio display) that mentioned that the internal layout of components in the Studio display resembled that "of an iMac" (rather than "a display").
Not sure if that signifies anything, but...
... since the Studio display has an m-series chip inside already, I'm wondering if Apple has long-term plans to "transmogrify it" into some kind of MacOS/iOS hybrid computer?
That is to say, it could become a "large screen" iPad-like device, although of course it would use a keyboard and pointing device instead of a touchscreen.
The Studio display has something like 64gb of internal RAM... although only about 4gb of it is used for actual display purposes (the rest is "just there"... for now). Why would that be there?
Perhaps Apple sees "possibilities" for this that are yet to be apparent...
Apple discontinued the 27" iMac Pro last year and the regular 27" this year. I find it doubtful that there will be a replacement. I see the 27" Studio Display and Mac Studio as the replacement. For a few reasons.
First they made a 24" iMac at 4.5K. An in between size of the 27" and 21" models. Which indicates that they intended it as a one size fits all solution.
A 30" would likely cost way too much. Apple is really stuck on Retina resolutions. If they made a 30" iMac. That would require something like a custom 5.5K panel. That paired with what would likely be a M1 Pro or M1 Max, at the least. Would mean the iMac would likely start at around $3K-$3.5K.
A 30" iMac would also overshadow the Studio Display and Mac Studio. Those two products would hurt each other's sales. In what is already a limited market.
First they made a 24" iMac at 4.5K. An in between size of the 27" and 21" models. Which indicates that they intended it as a one size fits all solution.
A 30" would likely cost way too much. Apple is really stuck on Retina resolutions. If they made a 30" iMac. That would require something like a custom 5.5K panel. That paired with what would likely be a M1 Pro or M1 Max, at the least. Would mean the iMac would likely start at around $3K-$3.5K.
A 30" iMac would also overshadow the Studio Display and Mac Studio. Those two products would hurt each other's sales. In what is already a limited market.
The last time Apple revived Macbook was 5 years later.
For Mac Mini it was after 4 years.
For iPad Air it was 5 years.
For Macbook Air it was 3 years.
For Mac Pro it was a long time.
For iPod it was infinite time.
So, even there will be a larger iMac with more advanced chip, I don't think we'll see it in 3-4 years. Maybe we won't see it anymore because they clearly indicated at the event that Mac Studio is a replacement for 27" iMac users.
For Mac Mini it was after 4 years.
For iPad Air it was 5 years.
For Macbook Air it was 3 years.
For Mac Pro it was a long time.
For iPod it was infinite time.
So, even there will be a larger iMac with more advanced chip, I don't think we'll see it in 3-4 years. Maybe we won't see it anymore because they clearly indicated at the event that Mac Studio is a replacement for 27" iMac users.
Well, at the launch event Apple said that, with the Mac Studio, the transition to Apple Silicon was complete apart from the forthcoming Mac Pro. That's as close to Apple explicitly saying "the 27" iMac is cancelled" as you are likely to get.
Apple can always U-turn in the longer term, so a few years down the line, who knows? But I'd say it's dead for the foreseeable future. If they do release a new large-screen iMac this summer after people have bought "Studio" set-ups then they are really, really going to tick people off - plus, if it had a display more like the Pro XDR, it would probably be in a higher price bracket than the old iMac.
I suspect one thing behind it might be that 5k displays have turned out to be a dead end in the wider PC world, with Apple and LG (in a display targeted almost exclusively at Mac users) the only customers, so that the economies of scale to build one into the lower-end iMac simply aren't there any more. Getting that display in a $1800 iMac was always something of a bargain, and while Apple probably weren't taking a loss, they wouldn't have been making quite the margin they're used to. Meanwhile, it looks like a mini-LED replacement at an affordable price is still a way off. OTOH, if you look at the high-end 2020 iMacs with i9s and souped-up GPUs, which already cost something like $3600 by the time you'd added 32GB RAM, you can now get a Studio Max + Studio Display for the same price.
Whatever the reasons, it's still a blow to anybody who was waiting for a lower-end iMac. On the other hand, others are happy to have a more powerful headless desktop in the $2000+ price range so that they can choose their own displays.
The only rationale behind that seems to be that because it has fans and an on-board ARM processor it must be a prototype iMac. Really, really doesn't follow - it's probably got fans because it has extra-bright 600 nit backlighting and a 100+W internal power supply so that it can charge a MBP via Thunderbolt. It's got an ARM processor because, as in any comparable display, there's video/audio processing, OSD and control stuff to be done, and Apple know some guys who make ARM processors with good video/audio processing capabilities that can drive a 5k display. I bet you an Internet that it's not the only high-end display with fans and an on-board processor. (Dunno about the Pro XDR - but that has a fancy/expensive 3D-machined heatsink on the back).
If it was a proto-iMac, the cooling fans would be sitting on top of the processor chip, or at least connected to it via heat-pipe, so it could support at least a M1 Pro/Max. In the teardown, they're nowhere near the processor.
I think it’s clear that the Studio Display and Mac Studio together is intended to replace the 27” iMac. It’s a more modular setup in a time where you might want to replace your Mac Studio when an M2 Max or M2 Ultra comes out. It’s a new world where the Studio Display is a long-term investment, while the Mac Studio depreciates more quickly.
What I find disappointing is that Apple has completely overshot the price point. A 27” iMac with 6 core Intel i5 base config used to sell for 1999 euro’s, while a Mac Studio with Studio Display sells for 4108 euros. That’s a big hole in the product lineup for a semi-pro machine, which could be bought by those who need a little extra power and display room.
John Ternus said in the March special event, “there is one more Mac to update to Apple Silicon, and that is the Mac Pro.” To me that is a clear sign that there will be no in-between 27” iMac at a 2000 euro price point featuring M1 Pro, and instead Apple is creating a division in their machine lineup, making a clear distinction between Pro machines (which benefit from Pro, Max and Ultra chips and 32 GB or more of RAM and a larger number of ports) and consumer machines (which run the base M1, 8 or 16 GB of RAM and limited numbers of ports and external screens).
The whole point of course being to charge what the market will bear for the Pro machines, as they are doing for iPhone Pro and iPad Pro.
What I find disappointing is that Apple has completely overshot the price point. A 27” iMac with 6 core Intel i5 base config used to sell for 1999 euro’s, while a Mac Studio with Studio Display sells for 4108 euros. That’s a big hole in the product lineup for a semi-pro machine, which could be bought by those who need a little extra power and display room.
John Ternus said in the March special event, “there is one more Mac to update to Apple Silicon, and that is the Mac Pro.” To me that is a clear sign that there will be no in-between 27” iMac at a 2000 euro price point featuring M1 Pro, and instead Apple is creating a division in their machine lineup, making a clear distinction between Pro machines (which benefit from Pro, Max and Ultra chips and 32 GB or more of RAM and a larger number of ports) and consumer machines (which run the base M1, 8 or 16 GB of RAM and limited numbers of ports and external screens).
The whole point of course being to charge what the market will bear for the Pro machines, as they are doing for iPhone Pro and iPad Pro.
Last edited:
Apple just released a brand new design; if there were no more iMacs its design would have been iterative like the Mini, and 13" laptops were. There likely wont be a 27" iMac until the M2 so probably a year from now.
There's no telling what Apple has up their sleeve. I find it difficult that Apple would kill off such a popular product in favor of an all-new product, the Mac Studio, which starts out at a steep $2K (excluding the display, a separate product that costs and additional ~$1600; which is around what the base 27" cost - a complete Mac computer). I know the 27" iMacs were more popular than the prior gen 21.5" ones. I have literally seen these things everywhere - schools and colleges, offices, in homes - and they were clearly the larger 27" ones.
The iMac is the perfect desktop Mac in my opinion. It's all-in-one design fits all you need into a single enclosure, one power cable, and wireless keyboard and mouse. It's that simple.
If they didn't release the Mac Studio, all you said was pretty accurate. However, once Mac Studio is released, 27" iMac is dead. I can't see a reason it will come back at least within 3 years if not longer.
Just think about it, if they release another Apple Silicon 27" iMac, it would at least pair with a M1 Pro and 16GB ram and 512GB harddisk. If they target this as $2000 USD. That will basically kill all the sales of Apple Studio. The Apple studio have a similar spec M1 Max with 32GB ram and 512GB harddisk starting at $1999. Why anyone on earth would buy the Apple studio if iMac 27" is pretty much close in performance and half the price of Apple studio + Apple studio display? Add a 3rd party 16GB ram on Amazon for 80 bucks, who will need the Apple Studio?
iMac 27" will kill the Apple studio sales for sure 100%. I don't see it coming back unless someone can convince me how to revive the iMac 27" without killing Apple Studio. I can't.
Last edited:
The 24" iMac with 512gb of storage and 16gigs of memory is $1899. The equivalent Mini and Studio Display are $2698.00. The price difference is $799. That kind of makes the Mini/Studio Display combo seem like a good deal.
As usual, Apple won't say. It's their marketing strategy to get people to purchase their "current" line of products. Like the ridiculously overpriced and non-upgradeable Studio and Studio Display. I am looking to replace my late 2013 27" iMac but flat out refuse to fall into Apples' "24 inch-or-Studio trap". I just won't do it. I'll go back to PC before I'll do that. I seriously considered that anyway when Apple stopped supporting older iMacs with the upgrade to the Monterey OS. I'll wait a couple more months to see what comes out of the 2022 WWDC in June, but if there isn't a new iMac between the 24" and the Studio I'll more than likely have a PC built and dump Apple.
Just upgraded my late 2014 5k iMac to a crucial 2TB SSD and went from 16GB to 32GB of RAM. Why upgrade a nearly 8 year old iMac? Simple reason actually. The current iMac is not the replacement for my 27” iMac I have been looking for and the studio + studio display is just too expensive for my use case.
I can keep going as it is until Big Sur is no longer supported in late 2023. Hopefully later this year new or upgraded products will be introduced that I can see as a good upgrade path for my use. If not, the wait my continue until I simply can’t wait anymore and will have to choose from what is available. I will never go back to Windows.
I can keep going as it is until Big Sur is no longer supported in late 2023. Hopefully later this year new or upgraded products will be introduced that I can see as a good upgrade path for my use. If not, the wait my continue until I simply can’t wait anymore and will have to choose from what is available. I will never go back to Windows.
The 24" iMac should get a M2 refresh around Q4 of this year. Some rumours say Summer but who knows.
It would appear that M1 hardware is on a 18-24 month refresh cycle. Probably not originally intended but the chip shortages and pandemic saw to it that it was.
I think Apple will release a larger iMac in 2023. I just think the days of the 27" iMac being a relatively affordable option are long gone. I would expect the larger iMac to come with Pro or Studio branding and cost a bloody fortune.
So I don't think the larger iMac is dead, it's just on a hiatus while Apple try and flog people the Mac Studio & Studio display combo as the current alternative.
It would appear that M1 hardware is on a 18-24 month refresh cycle. Probably not originally intended but the chip shortages and pandemic saw to it that it was.
I think Apple will release a larger iMac in 2023. I just think the days of the 27" iMac being a relatively affordable option are long gone. I would expect the larger iMac to come with Pro or Studio branding and cost a bloody fortune.
So I don't think the larger iMac is dead, it's just on a hiatus while Apple try and flog people the Mac Studio & Studio display combo as the current alternative.
Agree with all of this. Feels like an iMac Pro in 2023 with a mini LED screen/120hz and M2 pro/Max chips is obvious (Although I really wish they’d released it already with M1 chips!)
I was originally thinking this would start at $2,499 in line with the 16 inch MBP, with the same specs. Given the price of the studio display though, I could easily see it starting at $2,999, or even higher. For me I’m happy paying the premium, I just want apple to make the damn thing!
Apple will stop supporting that then.
but you can support BigSur for more years.
kudos on the upgrades, your iMac seems to be a great computer now with a incredible screen!
If you want the equivalent of a modern 5K 27" iMac, people are talking as though the only option is to mate the 27" $1,699 Studio display to a $1,999 Studio computer and kiss goodbye to the best part of four grand, whereas the outgoing 27" was under $2k. But as far as I know it's very possible to mate the Studio display to an M1 MacMini, and in so doing, have something that utterly kicks a 2014 27" iMac into the weeds for under $2,400 (commonly less: lots of places discounting the M1 Mini atm).
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
OP, build your own. Buy a Mac Mini or Studio and pair it with ANY size monitor you want. If that's actually 30", get yourself a 30". If you might really want 32", get yourself a 32"? 36"? 40"? 48"? Ultra-wide? All such options are now available to all of us who were wishing for iMac "bigger." We simply make it in 2 pieces instead of 1.
Why is that better? When iMac guts are outdated by macOS updates, the screen typically has 5+ years of life left in it. Disconnect tech guts from screen and when the guts are "long on tooth", you can simply replace those guts and keep using the same screen.
Generally, this will NOT be as good of a value going in because you have to buy both (more expensive) guts and a monitor. However, towards the end of useful life of those guts, it will be less expensive to only replace them instead of throwing out a perfectly good screen too... and replacing ALL of it.
My guess is that if a 27"-3X" iMac comes back, it will be rebranded iMac Pro again and be priced accordingly. You can somewhat anticipate that now by looking at the Studio Monitor pricing. If Apple added some robust macOS tech guts to that thing (M2 Pro? M2 Max?), where is it going to be priced? Not at the traditional "starting at" $1799 price. Wild guess: the next iMac "bigger" will "start at" $2999... but to get a configuration that gives one confidence about longer-term use beyond the minimums, I'd guess typical build-to-order averages are up in the $4XXX range-$6XXX range... and "loaded" on up into the former iMac Pro "loaded" range.
If you need something now, build your own now. That way, you can get ANY sized screen you want right now. Apple has spoken. If you don't really want a 27" screen or a $6K screen, shop the multitudes of other monitors available at all sizes, shapes and price points. There's PLENTY of them out there.
Why is that better? When iMac guts are outdated by macOS updates, the screen typically has 5+ years of life left in it. Disconnect tech guts from screen and when the guts are "long on tooth", you can simply replace those guts and keep using the same screen.
Generally, this will NOT be as good of a value going in because you have to buy both (more expensive) guts and a monitor. However, towards the end of useful life of those guts, it will be less expensive to only replace them instead of throwing out a perfectly good screen too... and replacing ALL of it.
My guess is that if a 27"-3X" iMac comes back, it will be rebranded iMac Pro again and be priced accordingly. You can somewhat anticipate that now by looking at the Studio Monitor pricing. If Apple added some robust macOS tech guts to that thing (M2 Pro? M2 Max?), where is it going to be priced? Not at the traditional "starting at" $1799 price. Wild guess: the next iMac "bigger" will "start at" $2999... but to get a configuration that gives one confidence about longer-term use beyond the minimums, I'd guess typical build-to-order averages are up in the $4XXX range-$6XXX range... and "loaded" on up into the former iMac Pro "loaded" range.
If you need something now, build your own now. That way, you can get ANY sized screen you want right now. Apple has spoken. If you don't really want a 27" screen or a $6K screen, shop the multitudes of other monitors available at all sizes, shapes and price points. There's PLENTY of them out there.
Last edited:
Yeah the Mac mini + studio display is an interesting point, but I still can’t help feel like 27 inch iMac users have been shafted In the apple silicon transition.
The Mac mini, MacBook Air, macbook pro all got huge improvements in performance while maintaining their price (give or take £100 either way). Not only did they discontinue the 27 inch imac, but even building the base Mac mini + studio display + keyboard/trackpad comes to around £2,450. Comparing that to the now discontinued 27 inch base iMac, which was £1,700, seems like a really bad deal to me. Obviously tricky to compare, but from a quick look the CPU performance of the M1 is a decent step up from the 6 core i5, but I doubt the M1 would prove much faster than the radeon 5300 for graphics? Overall I’m sure the M1 would outperform the old base imac (and run much quieter) but it’s hardly a leap in performance. if you’re going for 16gb of ram (which I’d think most iMac users would do) then you’re saving even more money by being able to upgrade it yourself in the 27 inch iMac.
So in summary, to configure an apple silicon setup to replace the 27 inch iMac (and get similar/slightly improved performance) you’re having to spend an extra £750, and for this you lose the all in one design and the ability to upgrade ram and storage down the line. You can argue whether the studio display is overpriced or if the previous iMac was hideously good value, but either way - it sucks now.
I sold my 2014 27" iMac for a cool $1000 a couple years ago. I used that money to turn around and buy an LG 27" UltraFine monitor and a M1 Mac mini to pair it with. I've been happy ever since. Based on the comments made at the last Apple event, I doubt another iMac is coming outside of newer 24' models in the future. I'd cut your losses and sell your current rig before it gets too old and look at a similar setup that I ended up doing.
For the $1800 - $2300 27" Intel iMacs, it rather depends what you think is a worthwhile upgrade. The way I'd look at it is that the old $1800 i5 27" iMac was roughly equivalent, CPU wise, to the $1100 i5 Mini so it "felt like" you were getting the screen, speakers, webcam, keyboard and mouse for about $700. That deal is over.
Even if you decide that a base $700 M1 Mini + studio display is a "worthy upgrade" from an i5 iMac, you're paying $2500 (don't forget about $200 for a keyboard and mouse/trackpad). It probably is "worthy" CPU wise - but while the GPU thrashes the Intel Integrated in the old Mini it might not quite be so impressive c.f. the old iMac discrete graphics. You're also a bit swings-and-roundabouts on I/O and monitor support - fewer external displays, fewer USB 3 ports vs. better TB3 bandwidth on the M1, and the 10GB Ethernet option.
If you're looking at a top-end (but non-pro) iMac then the Studio Max plus Studio Display is pretty much the same as you used to pay for an iMac with the best CPU, best GPU and 32GB of RAM. Likewise, the Studio Ultra + Studio Display (or cheaper alternative) seems like a reasonable substitute for the iMac Pro (esp. with the 20 CPU core Ultra vs. the 18 core Xeon option that used to cost $7000+)
The downer is that the display panel is pretty much the same as you got 4 years ago, too (just 100 nuts brighter which may not even be helpful)....
What seems to be really missing are (a) the lowest-end 5k iMac and (b) a half-way house between the Mini and the Studio Max (to pair with either the Studio display or a third party unit). That would have been a M1 Pro in either Mini or Studio style. Personally, if that's what you needed, I'd pin my hopes on a (regular) M2 Mini appearing which is likely to offer better bangs-per-buck than the M1 Pro until/unless a M2 Pro appears.
I think the problem with the future of the iMac is that while some people like the all-in-one-ness of the iMac, others prefer the flexibility to chose your own displays offered by the Mini and Studio - so you'd have the Mini, Studio and iMac competing for the mid-range desktop market, and Apple don't like competing with themselves.