iMacs should be the consumer desktop, and that's it. No 'pro' option. From just an environmental stance, not just a conceptual stance, it's wrong to bundle the display with the computer long-term.
Yup. If I wanted an extra computer for general use that would plug-in and go, wouldn't need a lot of peripherals then... well, actually, I'd probably get a MacBook Air - but if it had to be a desktop, the 24" iMac would be perfect. The CPU is powerful enough to do a bit of everything, the display is pretty good and a decent size, and if I got the silver option I wouldn't have to throw up in my mouth a bit every time I looked at it. If, however, I'm spending $2000+ on a Mx Max computer and $1000+ on displays
I want to be able to pick and choose.
It's not just cost, specs and future waste, but ergonomics: the 27" iMac is already a pain when you have to reach around the back to plug things in, or move it around - any larger and it would get ridiculous. With a large screen I'm definitely going to want a more flexible stand than you get with the iMac (and Apple's adjustable stands
certainly aren't worth the price) - yes, you could get the VESA option and your mount of choice - but then you have a dozen wires for peripherals etc. dangling from your display and it rapidly becomes
much neater to have your computer in a box on the desk.
I only got an iMac in 2017 because there was no viable 'headless' Mac at the time. The 5k iMac display
was really nice and
sounded like a good deal c.f. $1200+ for an LG Ultrafine - but a "good deal" is only good if it gives you what you want, and however nice the image was, having a large display - with no external input - welded to my computer was a permanent pain in the backside. Now I've switched to a Studio and
two matching third-party displays and it is far better suited to my needs... and, maybe, in a couple of years time I'll replace the computer and keep the screens or, maybe, replace the screens and keep the computer... So much more flexible.
No, the mac studio/mac mini is not a replacement for imac.
True. For some of us it is a
vast improvement. It comes down to a whole laundry list of practical reasons why separate components are more flexible and practical vs. "it looks neat" for the iMac. Ultimately, it comes down to sales numbers - we don't have those, Apple does and
they have reacted by dropping the large-screen iMacs. If they'd been flying off the shelves, Apple could have stuck an M1 Pro into a 5k iMac chassis ages ago. Plus, Apple can sell Studio Displays, Pro XDRs and any future displays to MacBook owners, Mac Pro owners, Mac Mini owners - not just people who happen to want an iMac.
...then what about people who want a Pro XDR display to go with their Mac desktop? I think it's ludicrously expensive
but if I were being paid to stare at a screen for most of the day and it fit my needs I wouldn't rule it out (I don't see any comparable panels at lower prices - plus I could always stand it on a pile of bricks and save $1000
)... but its far too expensive to bundle
as standard with an iMac and I
certainly wouldn't want a $5000 display that died with the computer it was glued in to. We may see a 'cheaper' XDR display from Apple, but that's gonna be "cheaper than $5000", not pocket money, and
that price will probably be based on attracting sales from
all higher-end Mac owners.
Even a Mac Studio/"Mini Pro" + Studio Display setup costs about the same as a top-end iMac used to (by the time you've factored in the 32GB RAM upgrade) for a spec comparable to a $5000 iMac Pro, and that's ignoring the various
far cheaper 3rd-party display choices.
Yes, we've lost the $1800 entry-level i5 5k iMac - but I suspect the 5k panels have got just too expensive to make that viable (5k has totally failed to catch on outside of the Mac world) - plus, I wouldn't recommend a regular M1/M2 to push that many pixels, even if it "works". OTOH You can pair a M2 Mini with a pretty decent 4k screen for a lot less.
