Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I kind of feel a little bit scammed because last year Apple executives in follow-up interviews said there are no plans to do a larger screen iMac and 27” iMac users should buy the Studio instead. I bought the studio and studio display but much prefer the minimalist all-in-one setup of an iMac.
I don't that you would be wrong with your thoughts, that Apple did in fact use the 27" iMac disappearance as a marketing tactic for the introduction marketing behind the Mac Studio and Studio Display which looks a awful lot like what the 27" AS Mac would have looked like. You have to be blind not to be able to discern Apples Marketing tactics. Sure later on they just coyly reintroduce a larger iMac and get then pats on the back. ;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gudi
Apple’s best selling computer is a much more likely a MacBook, not a desktop.
Gudi specifically was talking about desktop computers. In fact, it was right in the text you quoted.

Anyhow, it seems the iMac is indeed the best selling Apple desktop. I had thought the Mac mini would have good sales, but some claim the iMac outsells the Mac mini by a factor of 10.
 
When the iMac was listed as a choice at work nearly everyone switched to an iMac.

Why? No messy cables and boxes. They were a huge hit and remain a huge hit with executives. Executives like working on a big screen but don't like looking like a messy tech.
 
Pricing on something like this would be a mess.

Make it "cheap" (aka <3k) and it will be even more obvious how overpriced the Studio Display is (and the XDR).
Make it a "Pro" (aka >4k) and it will be hard sell for an non upgradable computer tied to a monitor that should last for a long time.
 
That's almost too big.
No way. 32" is pretty much the perfect screen size. I use a 4k 32" QLED TV as my monitor.

I know they won't do it, but if Apple brought back the ability to use the iMac as a monitor for another machine, I'd be likely to buy this new iMac (if the rumors are true... Gurman... ugh) to replace my TV (and get a new Apple Silicon computer out of it, obviously). But a 32" screen that can only be used with the iMac inside is kind of a waste of space when you have multiple computers...
 
Apple has become more environmentally-friendly over the years not only by how they run their business, from relying on renewable energy to using environmentally-friendly packaging, but also by how they design their products. Apple Silicon not only empowers users with greater performance and battery life, but also reduces electricity usage in every computer that uses it. If automotive emissions regulations were applied to Apple products, they would pass with flying colors because of how little electricity they use. In fact, "In 2022, all eligible Apple devices received an ENERGY STAR® rating for superior energy efficiency."

In light of Apple's pursuit of environmentally-friendly products, iMacs don't make good sense. An iMac becomes e-waste as soon as a customer is dissatisfied with its screen or performance, while a separate Mac mini and display may be replaced independently of each other.

In the past, buying a large-screen iMac was necessary if you wanted an affordable but fast Mac with a big screen. Back then, the Mac Pro was too expensive, and the Mac mini was underpowered. Today's Mac mini can now be had with an M2 Pro processor, and all you need to do is pair it with a third-party screen that's larger than the largest iMac ever sold (27 inches). Customers are spoiled for choice nowadays, and don't need the large iMac anymore.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.