Yeah, but I’m pretty sure it’s relatively easy for Apple to just swap out an M1 with an M2. They don’t have to change much else. If they can do it with a Mac mini…Agreed. But I think us iMac fans should probably face reality and realize that desktops a pretty small slice of Apple's whole pie. That cadence is likely to be a lot slower than laptops.
All that said, I'm here with everyone else waiting for a large and faster iMac since I spend 40 hours a week staring at the thing. Loving the M1 24" but it's not quite the replacement for the 27" I would like.
The greatest potential is in the naming scheme. They can easily add an Ultra screensize, let's say at 36"A 31" iMac would be an ideal size display for me. There is potential out there.
- iMac (24") Display
- iMac Pro (27") Display
- iMac Pro Max (31" Display)
Let's hope not. removing the 27" iMac is the worst thing Apple ever did. Dump Tim Cook today!!!
You’d think so, wouldn’t you. It’s a perfect laptop.Its a beautiful MBP, so you have to keep it for awhile, in other words not going to be obsolete for many years.
I don't understand that either. One of benefits Apple presented was that they will not be reliable on Intel for their CPUs and therefore they can release the products on their own pace. And now they do exactly the same thing as they did before. Why on hell did they release Macbook Pros, Macbook Air, Mac Minis with M2 but no iMacs?Apple should come up with a regular cadence for their Macs. I don't really care if it is 1 year or 4. That being said there should be an M2 iMac.
I agree with this. I bought 24-inch M1 iMac for my photo studio use as my primary iMac is at home and at the beginning I was really stunned as the M1 is very capable chip, almost on par with my i9-9900K. But then the RAM limitations came into work. I don't care how fast the SSD is, 16 GB RAM is not enough for work.There was a lot of YouTube video content editors that used the larger 23.5" screen to make multiple video sourced content that ran out of memory about 1/2 hour into content editing, hence the need for a 32 GB RAM 24" iMac. The M2 Pro would provide that. 16 GB Ram is just too little for that type of usage. M2 offering 24 GB Ram is marginal. This was found out back in the days people bought these for content creation when they first came out almost 2 years ago.
Yeah, it tells me that nobody learned a lesson from our recent past experience. With the exact same argument people claimed, that the missing M1 Pro chip on the first Apple Silicon Mac mini surely meant that Apple would never put an M2 Pro chip in the next Mac mini. 😙 Fool me twice!If Apple saw profit in a large screen iMac they would have made it. That they didn’t tells you something.
The M1 24” iMac represents the best M1 Mac implementation I have ever used. The speed that it can playing a rosetta2 game for Intel mac still amazes me, along with thermal design that cools the 24” iMac fairly fast back to room temp. Even running the latest MacOS 13.4 beta 1, you see the M1 starting up quickly and shutting down in barely a few seconds. So I completely agree of your acessment.The 24" M1 iMac is flawless as it is and could be sold like that for two more years if need be. So the answer to the question: Is a new iMac coming? is equal to the question: Is the M3 ready for shipment?
I think a lot of us immediately missed how the larger 27” iMac was a very budget friendly model, heavily symbolized as an exec Mac in many Asian dramas I saw. The thought that Apple gave no replacement at the time of it being yanked still is disappointing. I still feel there was some confidense issues by not providing some updates each year. Yeah a M1 Pro model would have provided enough of an upgrade to make it a real workhorse for even more years. Now we are hopeful that we see it possibly get the same update as Mac mini soon, but then we had that rumor about it being updated when the M3 is available which seems like forever to wait for instead of just getting something better into iMac fans hands.Yeah, it tells me that nobody learned a lesson from our recent past experience. With the exact same argument people claimed, that the missing M1 Pro chip on the first Apple Silicon Mac mini surely meant that Apple would never put an M2 Pro chip in the next Mac mini. 😙 Fool me twice!
I still think the old iMac looks better, honestly. Two points:So you want to compare old vs new.
View attachment 2184077
I had several of these. Well the massive black bezel surrounding the LCD panel would have allowed almost a 30" display (29.5") on that 27". The older chin vs new chin isn't really any different except accented with black. The stand for the 27" really takes up too much space comparably. Notice in this image of both side by side, that the silver model literally blends with the room look at it towards the wall behind. The black bezel reminds of a few years ago with HDTVs or earlier 4K TVs, made use of some surround frame that was dark. Lately most 4K TV are ascetically pleasing with minimal bezel or some kind of minimal frame protecting the edges. The 24" cooling is better than that square opening above where you change RAM slot configurations. The LG C2 series panel edges without any bezel is what apple should utilize.
I equate the old versus new bezel implementation as similar to earlier 4K tvs. i liked more display for a given size all-in-one than the much more pronounced black bezels. But one seemed to tolerate both equally as well.I still think the old iMac looks better, honestly. Two points:
When I’m sitting behind an iMac, I’m not bothered by the bezels not blending in with the environment. However, I would be bothered be the unsightly white frame when the display is off. And in those moments, I’m not working and actually noticing the iMac as an object.
If the white bezels are so advantageous, why doesn’t Apple ship their external displays with white bezels? Surely, the best, most expensive displays deserve white bezels if they’re better?
I just don’t like it’s got to be iMac versus Studio, both could do well if Apple wanted to grow this Marketplace.People: All I need is a 32 inch iMac ☝️🤓
Apple: *proceeds to sell a 6k 32 inch iMac starting at £3000
People: wait a second this is outrageous.
Releasing a 27/32 inch iMac at a "reasonable" price would kill the Studio Display. Why would Apple do this?
Only Apple have the actual sales figures & proper market research. You can't tell much from people posting here that they'd like a 27"/32" iMac.I just don’t like it’s got to be iMac versus Studio, both could do well if Apple wanted to grow this Marketplace.
If you're talking about bezel size alone, sure, smaller is better. Of course, they could have done the exact same thing if they revised the old design. Same for the overall thinness.I equate the old versus new bezel implementation as similar to earlier 4K tvs. i liked more display for a given size all-in-one than the much more pronounced black bezels. But one seemed to tolerate both equally as well.
Yeah, I fear the writing is on the wall for all-in-ones. But, although you'll never quite get the level of minimalism with a separate display, you can get pretty close. And it offers other advantages too, like using one system (a laptop) for home and work. And being able to connect a gaming PC to the same display as well. (Which hasn't been possible with the iMacs for a long time.) I suspect the iMac I bought in 2015 will be my first and last all-in-one. But I enjoyed the ride!Only Apple have the actual sales figures & proper market research. You can't tell much from people posting here that they'd like a 27"/32" iMac.
The 24" iMac seems like the sweet spot for an unobtrusive, mostly wire-free setup for jack-of-all-trades use. The problems with higher-end all-in-ones have been pretty well rehearsed in other threads, and a Mac Studio or M2 Pro Mac Mini plus a Studio display doesn't cost significantly more than a comparable iMac used to - even before you look at third party display options or longer-term savings from being able to upgrade displays and computers separately. Yes, the $1800 5k iMac was a bargain by Apple standards - and I suspect that it was as close as Apple gets to a "loss leader" and probably not sustainable.
I only had a 5k iMac because, at the time, it was the only viable desktop Mac and - sure enough - I've now got a 5k display and a half-decent i7 computer that would both be useful if they could be separated, but are gathering dust because they can only be used together. So, certainly from my POV, I suspect that the 5k iMacs and iMac Pros only sold in the quantities they did because of the lack of an alternative desktop Mac (the 2018 Mini being knobbled by lousy integrated graphics and the 2014 Mini being just plain knobbled).
The other thing about the Studio system is that Apple can potentially sell the Studio Display to any Mac user - including the MacBook Pro users who probably significantly outnumber desktop Mac users. You can tell that it was designed with this in mind - desktop users don't need the 90W charging capability.
Meanwhile, the overall desktop market is shrinking anyway - eaten by increasingly powerful laptops/mobile devices on one end and on-demand cloud computing at the other - and particularly with Apple Silicon Macs where MacBook Pros now offer the exact same Mx Pro/Max power as desktops (c.f. Intel Macs where there was a clear distinction between laptop-class and desktop-class processors and GPUs).