iMac Display Sizes during Refresh

[CylonGlitch]

I was just discussing, with a friend, the next refresh of the iMacs and if it was worth buying one now or waiting for the next refresh. He is considering the 27" iMac. Out of all possible advantages of waiting was the display size. I believe that the 21.5" iMacs will be replaced with 24" versions. I say this because the 21" screens are quite small by today standards and the prices of the 24" screens have come way down. Besides the 21" iMacs have been around for many years now; time to get up to spec.

That brought up another question, will the 27" iMacs move up to 30" or 32"? If so, that would be a big advantage of waiting. I don't see them going to 32", but I could see them potentially going to 30".

What's do you guys think? Is it worth waiting for to see what they do? If they leave the 27" alone (screen only), and up the 21" to 24" then the difference between low end and high end is blurred quite a bit. A 24", if priced the same as the current 21" would be sweet.

Thoughts?

 

[S.B.G]

I haven't seen anything, myself, indicating that they will dump the 21" iMac and/or make a 30" iMac. That doesn't mean they won't, but I doubt they'll kill off the 21" because some people may be happy with that or only have enough room for that size.

I do think that it is possible they could end up with a 30" iMac someday, but I've not seen any rumors pointing in that direction yet.

I say if your friend needs a computer now, go ahead and buy one. If not, then wait. He will likely be waiting until May 2012 for the new iMac's though.

 

[SR20DETDOG]

While I think a 30" iMac would be fantastic, and would love to have one myself, I don't see it happening not in the next line of iMacs anyway. I think Apple will stick with the 21.5" and 27" combo for now.

 

[PhoenixMac]

doesn't seem that logical to me, i mean they used to have 24" iMacs and they stopped making them, why would they go back to making them next refresh?

 

[thekev]

Maximum size up until now seems to have been governed by panel costs. The 24" panels have come way down in price over the past couple years. The 27" panels kind of replaced the niche that used to be made up of 26" displays that were really more like 25.5" if measured accurately . It really does depend on panel cost and how big they feel people want to go.

 

[CylonGlitch]

Maximum size up until now seems to have been governed by panel costs. The 24" panels have come way down in price over the past couple years.

This is my thought as well; I mean, 21" seems kinda puny now. In fact once panels become unpopular the price of them goes up. I don't think the 21" are quite there yet; but it won't be too long. The 24" is a great price point right now, it would make sense to move toward it.

 

[Sandman1969]

I don't think they will drop the 21.5. It really is a good size and definitely isn't "Puny". A lot of people don't have room for the larger screens on typical desks.
The previous 24" is only 1.6" wider than the current 21.5

I think they will stay at the current sizes, though maybe in the future we could see a 30". Possibly going back to having three sizes.

I would say get one now.

Just got one of our two today. The other shows up tomorrow. Though have to wait until Christmas.

 

[1nsanity]

Seriously, what advantage would Apple obtain by doing this?
Why would they include a 30 inch iMac when the panels cost more to produce than the 27 inch? In addition, unless Apple plans to increase the resolution of the screens, they would gain nothing by changing the size of their screen, except increased supply chain and production costs.

Also, with having 3 different iMacs, as some suggested, Apple would also increase the number of skus they have, thus the number of parts they would need to order and have in stock for production would be significantly more, something doesn't fit well with the efficiencies they've been developing over the last decade.

If you are unsure, just get a Mac Mini or a mac pro and get a screen size that fits your preferences.

 

[Sandman1969]

Seriously, what advantage would Apple obtain by doing this?
Why would they include a 30 inch iMac when the panels cost more to produce than the 27 inch? In addition, unless Apple plans to increase the resolution of the screens, they would gain nothing by changing the size of their screen, except increased supply chain and production costs.

Also, with having 3 different iMacs, as some suggested, Apple would also increase the number of skus they have, thus the number of parts they would need to order and have in stock for production would be significantly more, something doesn't fit well with the efficiencies they've been developing over the last decade.

If you are unsure, just get a Mac Mini or a mac pro and get a screen size that fits your preferences.

I didn't say they would. I say maybe. Also, they have had three separate sized models not that long ago. A large percentage of the parts are identical between the iMacs, so there wouldn't' be 3x the parts needed for the supply chain. The price for the panels goes down. WHich is probably a good reason we see a 27" now instead of the 24".

I don't think it is likely, but I could definitely see them doing it in the future at some point.

 

[doktordoris]

Hmm, i think there are more things to consider than just display inches. I'm sure all the old displays were all 16:10 so they lent themselves to the previous sizes. And pixels don't want to be too big, so the 21.5 is perfect for 1080, and the 27 is ideal for 1440.

doris