Have We Seen the Last of the 27-inch iMac?

[Legend of Ive]

I personally think the M1 is overrated if you're a normal desktop user, the biggest plus is battery life which isn't a concern for desktop.

I bought base iMac 27 for $1750 from Costco in 2020, after $130 easy ram upgrade, its a beast. Never upgrading and end of an era to upgrades and cheap prices.

 

[philzaleon]

I would imagine there are many Mac users like myself who have held onto old 27" iMacs in the hopes of a reasonably priced 27" iMac. I've nursed a 2011 i7 with SDD which I've found more than adequate for my Photoshop needs, and I've even resorted to Parallels in order to do my taxes for the last two years as my OS can't be updated to TurboTax's requirements.

That said, there is absolutely no reason other than increased revenue for Apple in their decision/delay in producing a 27" iMac replacement. Apple Silicon which runs much cooler than Intel is the perfect solution for a cool running incrementally improved iMac. They have the screen, they have the processor, they have the team needed to design and produce the product we've all been waiting for.

To Tim Cook:

While you've produced a less expensive sublime video/music editing suite in your new Studio... you've disappointed many more of your potential buyers then you've satisfied. Most of us require economical practicality, not extreme speed. Having purchased so many Macs since 1987 that I've lost track, I remain disappointed.

 

[HazardousT]

As a user of a 2019 27" i9 990k iMac and 1 TB SSD. I upgraded the memory myself to 64GB as opposed to buying Mac memory because it was overpriced. I was holding off until I could find an equivalent replacement but now I don't see a comparable option in this price point. The 24" has become to small for my eyes and just isn't practical to me.

I spent $3000 for this system and from what I can see any upgrade would be $4000 or more.

Apple has left a hole in the market imo. To say I'm dissapointed might be an understatement.

 

[bluespark]

I love the big iMac and am using one right now, but I honestly think this new direction makes much more sense. People can get the Studio Display and then decide whether they need the Studio Mac power or whether they just want to hook up a Mac mini or a MacBook. That flexibility has been sorely missing and is nice to have back.

 

[KoolAid-Drink]

I see this as a way for Apple to both make more money, and phase out the "i" naming scheme. The iMac was actually the first Apple product to get the i-prefix, way back in 1998. Over the past 5 years or so, we've seen subtle efforts here and there by Apple to phase out the prefix, which started with the Apple Watch. Apple could have called it "iWatch" but instead, chose to use "Apple Watch". Now, it's "Mac Studio" instead of "iMac" as many had expected. Perhaps the next 24' iMac will be replaced by "Mac Studio Mini" and a mini studio monitor instead.

I'd give it maybe 5 or 7 more years, and the iPhone and iPad will get a new name, as part of a rebranding, and then there won't be any more "i" products left.

I could be wrong, but that's my two cents.

 

[danrad]

Well I'm glad that I didn't wait and bought a 24" M1 iMac to replace my old 27" last year.

My father on the other hand is going to be very disappointed, as his 2015 27" iMac is failing (fusion drive kaput!) and he likes the larger screen size for his photos. He's certainly not going to be in the market for a Mac Studio, though perhaps I may be able to bring him around to considering a Mac Mini with the studio display. All he wants is a large screen not insane processing power, and I know he'd much prefer an all-in-one.

What would be nice is if they incorporate a method into the Studio to use a 27" iMac as a monitor. That would instantly make the Studio very attractive to me as an upgrade option. Not so much if I have to factor in the cost of a monitor (even a far cheaper one than the Studio Display).

 

[PatriotInvasion]

I'm sure this has been said, but combining a Studio Display + base M1 Mac mini + Magic Keyboard + Magic Mouse costs just under $2,496. Certainly a lot more than the $1,799 base 27" iMac. There's definitely a gap in the product line here that a 27" version of the colorful M1 iMac could fill.

That said, the calculus may be that the market willing to spend ~$2,000 for a 27" iMac will be willing to spend at least $2,496 for the decoupled approach of Mac mini or Mac Studio. We'll see.

 

[mannyvel]

Mac M1 (8gb/512GB) + Studio Display = $2498.
Refurb 2020 27" i5 with 8/512 = $1,439.00.

The refurb a pretty decent price, especially for general office work. With a ram upgrade it'll last for 10 years.

 

[symphony1010]

Since buying the Mac Mini M1 I had held off on buying a monitor just hoping that Apple would make one. The new model seems more like a 27" iMac without a computer. It's dated, not proper HDR and loaded with 'features' most true designers and creators don't need. It should also have been available as a 32". For me though the biggest turn-off was the idea that Apple would charge $400 to achieve such a basic requirement as height adjustment. So much for being customer focussed. They would obviously prefer users to have health issues. As you can tell, I won't be buying one.

 

[macsteve27]

As others have mentioned not replacing the 27" inch iMac leaves a gap in performance for desktops. I still hope they will offer a 27" iMac but it would definitely make sense if they didn't to and forced users to pair a mini/studio with the Studio Display. As others have mentioned what is missing is the "M1 Pro" option from any desktop. I do think apple will fill this in some way, with at least one of the following:

• 24" inch iMac with M1 Pro
• Mac Mini with M1 Pro
• 27" inch iMac with M1 Pro

If the 27" inch is indeed dead, the next best thing for most "prosumers" who want a larger screen is a replacement of the current "high-end" intel mac mini. If apple updates this with the M1 Pro we could conceivably see them replace it at a similar $1100-1300 price point. Paired with the Studio Display the "low-end" 27" iMac replacement would then net at around $2700-2800. Still about $1k more than the old entry level 27" imac, but closer in price and performance than the Studio.

• "Good" - Mac mini (M1 or M2) with Apple Studio Display ($2300-$2500)
• "Better" - Mac mini (M1 Pro) "high end" with Apple Studio Display ($2700-$2900) (Hypothetical)
• "Best" - Mac Studio M1 Max with Apple Studio Display ($3600-$3800)
• "Top of the line" - Mac Studio M1 Ultra with Apple Studio Display Pro ($5600+)

Going to wait for WWDC (and possibly October Event if there is one) to see where apple takes this. In the meantime, my 2015 5k Retina iMac is getting long in the tooth.

 

[icwhatudidthere]

The last 27" iMac was my first and only iMac. Honestly the only reason I even got it was because of Apple's refusal to make a high quality display at the time. So the only way to get something Retina quality at that size was to get an iMac. Then Apple moved to Apple Silicon and the biggest negative to an AIO reared its ugly head. It was a great machine but I'm glad to be rid of it and doubt I'd ever get an AIO again.

 

[chucker23n1]

Why are you limiting yourself like this. Just buy a 4K display.
The LG display above is like an Apple monitor. You can only connect one computer.

Yeah, but where do you find a 4K display with >=200 ppi?

 

[ronotaco]

i love this post as an free day corona obsession...
but please guys: obviously there will be an imac, they just stagger the releases (as they did with the studio after the macbook pros) one youtuber i watched yesterday say. so i can be triggered once for the mbp, which i got, now for the studio display, which i want, and the imac in a bit, which i need for work actually.

and also i dont get all this "modular" thing. how is the studio modular?
the good thing about imacs, that when you use them professionally, and so you have to update them every 2-4 years you can still sell them at a very good price, because they are perfectly functioning systems. if the studio gets dated, im sure the % price drop is much higher... anyways, it is a great computer. if i would have only 1 place i work i would definitely get one

 

[happydude]

As a user of a 2019 27" i9 990k iMac and 1 TB SSD. I upgraded the memory myself to 64GB as opposed to buying Mac memory because it was overpriced. I was holding off until I could find an equivalent replacement but now I don't see a comparable option in this price point. The 24" has become to small for my eyes and just isn't practical to me.

I spent $3000 for this system and from what I can see any upgrade would be $4000 or more.

Apple has left a hole in the market imo. To say I'm dissapointed might be an understatement.

same! specing out my replacement for 2017 5K 27" (3TB fusion, 64GB memory for $3K) - the 24" iMac can't do more than 2TB and 16GB, even just the the base studio processor with upgraded components comparable to what I have now (4TB SSD, 64GB memory) + monitor is $5200.

there's a hole in the lineup and it's either 24" iMac with screen less than I want and am used to or I have to shell out $2K more than I am ready for. just gonna hold on to this 27" from 2017 as long as I can...

 

[macsteve27]

Mac mini M1 ($699) and the studio display ($1599) is probably the soliton for someone who was previously in the market for a 27” iMac. One thunderbolt cable gives you a 27” monitor with webcam and speakers. It is likely the same price as a 27” iMac.

For some this is probably the case, but for those who want a little bit more than M1 or more than 16GB of RAM there are no good options. Not to mention the graphics offering for the M1 (8-Core) is much weaker than the entry level 27" from 2020 (Radeon Pro 5300).

The price point is also much higher. The iMac 27" started at $1800, M1 Mini + Studio Display is $2300 and that doesn't include a mouse or keyboard which apple branded would put it around $2500.

 

[ronotaco]

Why are you limiting yourself like this. Just buy a 4K display.
The LG display above is like an Apple monitor. You can only connect one computer.

i have been using 4k monitors as second screen of my imac. it gets you mad. the ppis tear your eyes

 

[macsteve27]

This is your opinion. In my world the 27” iMac was the most popular computer Apple sold. For 5-7 years I’ve watched designer after design, ad agency after ad agency switch from the expense over power Mac Pros to 27” iMacs. They did everything users needed. They were priced about right and they were compact. Now what are those users suppose to use? Laptops suck for designers. They get hot, slow, have to have a separate keyboard, mouse and monitor. The Mac mini needs a monitor. In my opinion Apple told the world of designer f you. You’ll have to paid us $5000 now for a computer. Apple always try’s to say they are for the creatives of the world. But over the last 5 years they have done nothing but hurt freelancers, pro designers and design students.

Agreed. My wife and I are both designers and for us this leaves a gap. Having that larger screen but not needing an M1 Max is the sweet spot for many designers.

Will be sticking it out and hoping for either an M1 Mini with M1 Pro to pair with the Studio Display or a new 27" iMac with M1 Pro. The Mac Studio is probably marketed toward designers from Apple's perspective but it is well beyond what most designers actually need. I agree that this feels a bit like a slap in the face and feels like a chance to push an upsell whether or not a more reasonable option is added in the future.

 

[Mr. Bear]

Well I'm glad that I didn't wait and bought a 24" M1 iMac to replace my old 27" last year.

My father on the other hand is going to be very disappointed, as his 2015 27" iMac is failing (fusion drive kaput!) and he likes the larger screen size for his photos. He's certainly not going to be in the market for a Mac Studio, though perhaps I may be able to bring him around to considering a Mac Mini with the studio display. All he wants is a large screen not insane processing power, and I know he'd much prefer an all-in-one.

I have a 2015 27” and my fusion drive went kaput last summer. Interestingly, it was the SSD that died. I had the local Mac shop remove it. The HDD had to be reformatted, and startup is a LOT slower, but it basically works fine.

 

[kguay]

I just got an email from my Apple Business rep saying that it has been discontinued.

 

[chucker23n1]

I just got an email from my Apple Business rep saying that it has been discontinued.

I mean, yeah, it has. That's not what the article is asking.

 

[Will Co]

I'm sure this has been said, but combining a Studio Display + base M1 Mac mini + Magic Keyboard + Magic Mouse costs just under $2,496. Certainly a lot more than the $1,799 base 27" iMac. There's definitely a gap in the product line here that a 27" version of the colorful M1 iMac could fill.

That said, the calculus may be that the market willing to spend ~$2,000 for a 27" iMac will be willing to spend at least $2,496 for the decoupled approach of Mac mini or Mac Studio. We'll see.

I agree with you about the gap. If the Studio display had been priced a little more competitively, say $1200, that gap would be much more narrow. But I also agree with the sentiment of your last sentence - people will be willing to stump up the cash - the gap isn't too big. And that's Apple pricing strategy for you, right there.

 

[macsteve27]

Since buying the Mac Mini M1 I had held off on buying a monitor just hoping that Apple would make one. The new model seems more like a 27" iMac without a computer. It's dated, not proper HDR and loaded with 'features' most true designers and creators don't need. It should also have been available as a 32". For me though the biggest turn-off was the idea that Apple would charge $400 to achieve such a basic requirement as height adjustment. So much for being customer focussed. They would obviously prefer users to have health issues. As you can tell, I won't be buying one.

Agreed. I feel like this hasn't been mentioned enough. The Studio Display is fairly disappointing as a value proposition when you consider the value the 27" iMac screen offered. It's still 60Hz, it's still 5k, it's still 27". This is roughly the same screen as the 27" iMac with slightly better brightness (600 nits), a better camera, and slightly improved speakers. These improvements are welcome, but are not worth the $1600 price tag.

 

[tonkem]

I disagree that the bigger iMac is gone as noted by other posters here, that the naming of the MacBook Pro is MacBook Pro 13" and MacBook Pro 14" and MacBook Pro 16". As has been mentioned, if the iMac is only to be the 24" then why do they continue the naming of it as "iMac 24" on the desktop comparison page. There will be a larger iMac for all the reasons already mentioned, as I am another customer that is waiting to purchase 4 of them. I have 3 27" iMacs of varying years that need upgrading and a 2010 Mac Pro that will likely be replaced with a new larger screen iMac. Time will tell, but it is not likely that Apple has abandoned the larger iMac, and since they never comment on future products we should not be surprised that we have not heard if a new one is coming.

 

[HazardousT]

Agreed. I feel like this hasn't been mentioned enough. The Studio Display is fairly disappointing as a value proposition when you consider the value the 27" iMac screen offered. It's still 60Hz, it's still 5k, it's still 27". This is roughly the same screen as the 27" iMac with slightly better brightness (600 nits), a better camera, and slightly improved speakers. These improvements are welcome, but are not worth the $1600 price tag.

More good points. To be honest I could care less about the camera, I don't use the one I have hardly at all, and I use external monitors for speakers. Excluding those it's exactly the same monitor they've had for at least the last 3 years. And to top it off they want us to pay $400 just for the ability to raise, lower, & tilt the monitor? Ridiculous

 

[wyarp]

Ditching the 27" iMac is an utterly BONKERS decision however you look at it. We have multiple versions and sizes of phones, tablets and MacBooks ... even watches... so why they wouldn't do the same with the iMac is beyond me. People may say things like 'its a commercial decision', but they are one of if not THE richest company in the world, it may not make them anywhere near the figures that phones and tablets do, but it still would still make them a decent profit. The Mac studio and standalone display IS NOT a valid replacement as the cost is simply far too high for most.

I suspect I am one of may 27' iMac owners that simply prefer the iMac but want one that i) is a little large ii) has a larger storage capacity iii) has some more ports iv) is available in more neutral colours. Nothing extravagant or greedy, just common sense things that many many people would want. Oh, and crucial, for less than $3000!!!