Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Large monitors are not just nice for aging eyes. I bought a Philips BDM4065UC 4k 40" monitor in 2015. Ever since, I've been wondering why almost everybody settles for relatively small 27" or even 24" monitors, while so much more desktop space is available and affordable.
So the top of the monitor is two feet above the desk and the menubar only slightly lower?

That's the distance lens on my glasses, to see the menubar clearly I already have to lift my head slightly with a 24" monitor, that's one reason the desktop is on Linux, the Panel is on the bottom of the screen. App menus are still lower than they would be on a Mac and they tend to be bigger and clearer in Linux.

The laptop works quite well on the lap, the midrange lens covers almost the whole MBA screen. The laptop on a table too high, the top half of the screen is in the distance lens unless I raise my head.

Presbyopia is such a pain the..., well, neck.
 
The iMac’s back to being what the original iMac was meant to be, a colourful “home” all-in-one.

It’s not a Mac aimed at professional use - it’s to look fun in a family room / bedroom or to look nice and stylish at a reception desk in a hospitality / wellness / health orientated business.

I guess the amount of spa / hairdresser’s / beauty clinics that have one of these iMacs in the waiting room is … high.
The M1 iMac has allowed me to work professionally in publishing for home since it was released. It’s an absolutely stellar value as a desktop, and I’ll replace it when the M6 comes out IF the upgrade warrants it. It still runs like a dream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adelphos33
I bought the M1s for my brothers back in 2023 and I'm really not too terribly impressed with them. One is holding up fine, but the other seems to be crashing a lot lately. They also have a bad reputation for the ribbon cable that drives the screen MELTING.

I do adore that they come in cool colors. I find it very frustrating that you can't buy the matching peripherals separately. I also think the base model costs too much for what it is.

Design-wise: I'm not sure why people obsess over having the apple logo on the front.

Size-wise: I think 24" is fine for what it is. I have a 32" AND 57" on my desk, yet the times I've sat down to troubleshoot things for my brothers the size never really bothered me.

I briefly used a 27" iMac for work. The 3" larger screen was more pleasant to look at, I'll give you that lol. Honestly I think the current iMacs are a lot prettier than the ones they replaced. Probably the best looking iMacs since the G4, which was my favorite.
 
I'm not dissing people who want a bigger iMac, I too think it's silly Apple doesn't offer one, but for me it's the right size as it is. I already have 2x 28" 4k monitors on my desk, and unless I'm working in one specific program, they're just too big for me. I find I tend not to use the whole screen area as it is uncomfortable for me. An iMac would be perfect. 1x 4k to the side for when I do need the space, and the perfect screen size for when I don't need it.

The only question that remains to be answered should I be in the position to be making this decision for real is iMac vs Mac mini. Is the more comfortable setup worth more, or do I need an Mx Pro?

I guess the decade using an 11" MacBook Air (often connected to an external monitor) has conditioned me. I often do CAD work at my client's place on my 14" MacBook Pro, with no external monitor at all, and it works surprisingly well for me. (Sure, I'd love a 16" for that purpose but can't afford one)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CrabQueenInc
The M1 iMac has allowed me to work professionally in publishing for home since it was released. It’s an absolutely stellar value as a desktop, and I’ll replace it when the M6 comes out IF the upgrade warrants it. It still runs like a dream.
And if that works fir you, great.

But that wasn’t my point.

The original iMac was specifically released as a consumer level desktop, with a seperate tower firm factor Mac as their professional product.

Over the years the iMac morphed into a different machine - the 27” especially, ended up being the desktop equivalent of a MacBook Pro in their yearly line up, with equals ent specs.

The AS iMac went back to the original concept for the iMac, in terms and f it’s positioning, with now the higher end Mini and Studios replacing the intel iMacs and Mac Pro as the professional/workstation option.

I’m not saying the iMac isn’t a lovely machine, it is, but Apple clearly decided to correct the “positioning drift” that happened to the iMac during the intel years.

Maybe a new “iMac Pro” will arrive, but I think Apple wants to sell Mac Studios and Mac Studio Displays.
 
I'm curious as to how iMacs are actually selling these days. It seems like most people are opting for laptops, not desktops. The distinguishing feature of desktops used to be a lot more computing power than what you could get in a laptop, but that distinction has been largely eliminated (outside of the Studio).

I HATE laptops. I'd never buy one. I used to by iMacs, but I've switched to Mac mini. The iMac just doesn't appeal to me anymore.
 
The entire point is that everyone knows what the brand is without a logo. Dieter Rams knew it and Apple know it.
I won’t disagree here that the brand of the product should be recognizable without a logo on it. I recognize that other people prefer this generation of the iMac because it does not have a logo, as some posters have already mentioned.

The iMac is nearly thirty years old. I appreciate that different generations of the iMac are more or less iconic. I like that Apple has been releasing colourful computers again, but without the logo, something about the balance of the current gen's design appears unfinished or lacking to my eyes to the extent that it looks like an off-brand monitor when I happen to see it in stores.

If Apple had removed its logo from the sunflower iMac, the design would likely have remained distinctly and appreciably Apple, and not just because of the era when it was released. If Apple released the last generation of Intel iMacs without the logo, the gentle curve of its design with the flowing stand and two-tone black and silver front would also have likely remained distinctly and appreciably Apple. The current version, while pleasant, doesn't seem have any particularly distinguishing characteristics when I see it. Adding the logo back to the front would make the current generation have a more fulsome and balanced design, in my opinion—the cherry (or Apple) on top, as it were.
 
I've been waiting a long time now for this update. Two years is a long cycle. For such a long cycle I got to suspect there is a significant physical change, not just M6 and new colors.
 
Current offerings of oled on the market do indeed have some burn in issues.... These will eventually be solved entirely, in a few years.. sound fair? Computer displays are harder to crack at this then TV's and smartphones where whole displays keep changing content..
Apple already used Samsung tech to solve it. iPad Pros use a dual layer OLED to increase maximum brightness, but also leverage software that pays attention to how long each sub pixel is running. The display assembly will basically switch the pixel between one panel and another to prevent burn in. but that means you are paying for two 24” screens 💰
 
Harvest Gold and Avocado Green for that retro 1970's look? Orange Julius Orange for the 1980's feel? Where does Apple come up with these colors and do they really expect enough people to want them for it to be worth the manufacturing and inventory hassle? 🤮

That ghastly faded orange Julius orange 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeus423
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.