iMac Pro screen >27" ?

m0nkeyb0y

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 16, 2009
71
58
I would love to see a new ibigger Mac option at 32" or even 30". Whether this would be a third size (21/27/30+) or a revamping of the two-size (24/30+?), I don't know. It would also create more interior volume (bigger GPU card?) and surface area to disperse heat, but might also allow for that ever-important "and it's .5 mm thinner."

How likely is a bigger screen?

And what resolution would Apple go with? Personally, I think a 5k 27" is overkill and would be happy with a 5k 30 (which is still about 200 dpi) or even 5k 32 (184 dpi). I don't see Apple jumping to something like Dell's 8k 32", but I also don't see them offering less PPI on a "pro" 32 than their 27". Seems like they'd have to engineer some new panel resolution/size. That seems unlikely, but then, Apple's getting back in to the display market, so perhaps.
 

Sirmausalot

macrumors 6502a
Sep 1, 2007
994
229
I would love to see a new ibigger Mac option at 32" or even 30". Whether this would be a third size (21/27/30+) or a revamping of the two-size (24/30+?), I don't know. It would also create more interior volume (bigger GPU card?) and surface area to disperse heat, but might also allow for that ever-important "and it's .5 mm thinner."

How likely is a bigger screen?

And what resolution would Apple go with? Personally, I think a 5k 27" is overkill and would be happy with a 5k 30 (which is still about 200 dpi) or even 5k 32 (184 dpi). I don't see Apple jumping to something like Dell's 8k 32", but I also don't see them offering less PPI on a "pro" 32 than their 27". Seems like they'd have to engineer some new panel resolution/size. That seems unlikely, but then, Apple's getting back in to the display market, so perhaps.
The 5K resolution was a total surprise. So although no one is expecting a larger screen, we may be surprised :) But in the past, Apple has kept their product lines (and sizes) consistent over a number of years. Except when they don't.
 

saberfi

macrumors member
Oct 7, 2015
50
43
Well, I do not think 5k at 27" is overkill. It is a sweet spot for normal computing at 200% scaling (good real estate, retaining crisp details).

I have seen both 4k and 5k on a 27" monitor and 4k is a pixelated, non-retina viewing experience in comparison (ie. bad). Clearly inferior. Sufficient? Maybe, but after the 5k iMac display, I bet most would find it disappointing.

I don't believe 5k at 32" will ever happen, simply because you are likely to detect pixels. I see many people saying they'd love something like this, but.. I see it as slightly delusional. Apple just moved away from non-retina - so why would they take a step backwards?

8k at 32" would be ideal however. The tech is quite expensive as is, but prices will come down, and as Apple brought 5k to the 'masses', I don't see why they couldn't do the same with 8k. Who knows, perhaps next year will already tell.