Is 27 inches too big?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by appleman108, Jul 30, 2010.

  1. appleman108 macrumors member

    Jul 26, 2010
    i use a 23" lcd apple cinema HD display now and am happy with it in all respects

    i'm thinking of an imac because i need a new computer and can use my 23" display somewhere else

    but i'm not sure i'd like to go down in monitor size with the 21" imac and worry the 27 incher would be too huge

    i also worry about eye strain as i do suffer from that occasionally (basically from over viewing)
    and wonder if the 27'' would exasperate that.

    thanks for your thoughts
  2. CBAviator macrumors 6502

    Jun 10, 2007
    There are some people here that complain about the LED backlight being too intense for their eyes. It hasn't bothered me, however. So, it just depends on the person.

    As far as whether a 27" is too big or not, you're probably going to get a pretty split group of people telling you yes and no. It all depends what you are going to use it for and if a large 27" screen is going to look right wherever you're going to put it. For me, I would love to have a 27" for photo editing purposes. For my parents that just type e-mails and browse the web? A 21,5" is fine for them.

    Just remember that when you go into the Apple store, it's kinda like buying a Christmas tree. It doesn't seem too big at all until you try to bring it in the front door... :D
  3. iBookG4user macrumors 604


    Jun 27, 2006
    Seattle, WA
    It'll look big initially, but the more you use it, the more you'll appreciate the size. Back when I bought a 24" display it was huge at first, but now it seems normal.
  4. nicroma macrumors 6502a


    Jun 20, 2009
    Midwest, USA
    At first, I thought it might be slightly too big. That only lasted an hour or so after using it. Once I had adjusted to the screen size, I realized what I had been missing. I can only hope Apple adds in some of the window management features Windows 7 has. It is so nice to be able to have 2 full size windows up side by side. I know there are 3rd party applications that mimic this.

    Honestly, I think that 30" 16:10 would be just as great as well. I think anything bigger than 27" 16:9 or 30" 16:10 would be too big. It would require too much eye movement from where it sits on my desk.
  5. Tigerman82 macrumors 6502

    Jul 27, 2010
    I am having difficult time as well deciding which size to get. I've seen both live but it's not really the same to look at them at a store standing up and look at them while sitting down on your desk. Anyway, the 27" iMac is so wide that it'd take too much space on my desk (baring in mind that I have active speakers which will be placed around the iMac).

    One thing that makes these discussions difficult is that there are people who do not think any display can be too big. I've seen comments like "I would gladly take 50" iMac on my desk". Sure some of them are just jokes but some of them aren't. It is clear that for most people 27" is pushing it sizewise and so they get confused when they read comments like that.

    I think you can definately multitask with a 21.5" iMac and Snow Leopard does have Spaces which is a useful feature. Sure I could multitask even better with a 27" but then everything would be small. Moreover, I usually like to focus on just one window. I doubt I would like concentrating on one window when there are several other windows of the same size open around it.
  6. opera57 macrumors 6502

    Feb 15, 2009
    Probably not. As said previously, when I got my 24" it seemed huge but now it just seems normal.. and in my opinion, you can never have enough space on the screen! [​IMG]
  7. Sammy Cat macrumors member

    Jul 28, 2010
    North America
    I just got back from the Apple store.

    They 21.5" is not too small. It is a very comfortable size for web browsing.

    The 27" is not too big. It is brighter than the 21.5" and the colors are better as well. The 27" is also very crisp and clear (text). I believe that it has to do with the upgraded 1GB video card. Seriously, there was eye strain from looking at the 21.5" due to the lack of crisp text. I decided not to purchase the 21.5" and will buy a 27" when they get more in. I thought it would be too big but it is not.

    The additional cost for me will now be $700. I'm very disappointed that my Samsung 204T 20.1" from 2005 is clearer and crisper than the 21.5" Mac.
  8. gbarlow macrumors newbie

    May 28, 2010
    Ottawa, ON
    As has been said a couple of times, it really comes down to what you're using it for and if you're going to find that the real estate benefits you. For me personally, I use a 27" with the 23" cinema as a second display it's perfect as it allows me to keep windows open tracking, e-mails, twitter, rss feeds, while working on multiple web pages or editing video.

    However, that being said I picked a desk that specially allows me to use this much space, if your desk or setup isn't going to support the 27" size then you may want to reconsider.

    After using the 23 dropping to the 21 will give you a noticeable difference in the way you work, whereas if you jump up to the 27" you'll be pretty surprised at how quickly you adjust to the size. Only major downside, it will make working on any other display feel a little painful :p
  9. animatedude macrumors 65816

    Feb 27, 2010
    yes the the 21.5' is a moderate size and the 27' is WAY too big.when will Apple get that? i don't know...
  10. rgarjr macrumors 603


    Apr 2, 2009
    Southern California
    That's... what she said :D
  11. newmacnooby macrumors regular

    Apr 21, 2010
  12. EarlofCroydon macrumors member


    Jun 4, 2010
    I've got the 20" iMac from 2008 and lke others it SEEMED a monstrosity when it arrived compared to my old 15" Dell Laptop. But sure over time it will become "normal size". My advice is not to buy the 27" because you'll find that really anything requiring the whole screen i.e Films needs no more than 21.5". In my opinion it isn't "necessary" but it really is just taste. Some might say it's pretentious to have it but I wouldn't judge ya'!
  13. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    May 19, 2002
    RE: is 27 inches too big?

    Yes, anything over 12" tends to make the ladies cry.
  14. AlphaDogg macrumors 68040


    May 20, 2010
    Boulder, CO
    LMAO that is what everybody is thinking :rolleyes:.
  15. tunerX Suspended


    Nov 5, 2009
    When I got the 24" I was thinking that it was way too big; that was during the first couple minutes of using it. After a couple days I started to love it. The same thing happened when I switched to the 27".

    If apple made a 30" I would buy that.
  16. toolbox macrumors 68020


    Oct 6, 2007
    Australia (WA)
    LoL so do onions hahaha
  17. Will : Hi ! macrumors member

    Apr 1, 2006
    Would it really? It'll be smaller, but the 21.5" has almost as many pixels (1920x1080 vs 1920x1200). So you're not really losing much screen space, mostly just making it a bit smaller.
  18. wnorris macrumors member


    Feb 16, 2008
    Why not two smaller displays?

    Personally I prefer to have two slightly smaller displays instead of one huge (27+) display. I like the physical separation for dealing with different windows/apps.

    I have two 22 inch displays and enjoy.
  19. eladnova macrumors regular

    Aug 31, 2012
    I'm with you there. I use HyperDock and can't work without it. I'm sure there are other solutions but I'm really surprised out of the box window management is so poor on OSX.
  20. iSee macrumors 68040


    Oct 25, 2004
    I made the same change in late 2009/early 2010.

    For me, 27" is too big, but only in the sense I don't really use the entire monitor.
    I would have been perfectly happy with a 23 or 24" iMac, but it's not like the extra space makes it worse... it's just more room to stash a window or widget I'm not interested in.

    I can only speak for my late 2009 iMac's display: it's not harder on my eyes than my old Apple 23" but I do miss the 23" display and it was a higher-quality (I forget the exact name and year, but I think it was the last 23" monitor Apple made).
  21. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Apr 23, 2011
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    I have both the 21.5" and 27".

    The reason why I use my 21.5" more is because the 27" was too big for my desk (my desk isn't that big anyway), so the 27" got relegated to my bedroom and is now mounted with a VESA arm so that I can swing it out, lie down on my bed with a keyboard and mouse, and use it.

    The 21.5" is good for most tasks too. I'd say the screen size is just about the sweet spot.
  22. borgqueens macrumors member


    Aug 10, 2013
    Hi I walked from using an 13" mbp to using a 27" iMac and yes it seems big but
    it is indeed not too big for me. I was worried that it might be to big when I was gonna buy it but at 2 feet away it´s not too big at all. I personally think that it all depends on how close you intend to have your head to the display.

    So not too big if you can have it 2 feet away.
  23. MrGuder macrumors 68030

    Nov 30, 2012
    I could never figure out why apple sells a 27" standalone monitor but not a 21.5" standalone monitor.

    I currently have a dell 19" Ultra display and works great, I'd consider going 21.5" but not 27" just don't need that large of a display.
  24. CochlearArch macrumors newbie

    Jan 25, 2014
    I find that 27 is not to big at all. Gives me room to move pages around. I would like a second 27 inch and am in the process of debating wether or not the TBD is worth the effort.

    At work I use two 21 inch monitors and have gotten use to the concept of two monitors side by side. If your desk is too small get a larger desk. If the speakers are in the way either mount them on the wall or place them on the floor.

    I will never go back to a 15 inch single desktop monitor again.

Share This Page