Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
... which would push the price well north of $3,000. Still have to think we're 1.5-2 years away from a 4K iMac anywhere close to the the current $1,299/$1,799 price points Apple has stuck with for years.

I would agree...however, 4K monitor prices are getting more accessible, I hope a 4k iMac will be announced in late 2015....
 
I would agree...however, 4K monitor prices are getting more accessible, I hope a 4k iMac will be announced in late 2015....
Probably true. The Dell that everyone refers to is a TN panel. Apple has been so aggressive in marketing their nice colours and IPS panels that it would difficult to see them do TN.
 
Probably true. The Dell that everyone refers to is a TN panel. Apple has been so aggressive in marketing their nice colours and IPS panels that it would difficult to see them do TN.

Certainly not. And we all know how stubborn Apple can be with product updates if they feel an existing product is still serving the masses well and they are making good margins (see Thunderbolt Display as a good example). I think Apple has no problem keeping the iMac as is until they can sell 4K versions to a lot of people at very high margin. That's what they do.
 
this year will not be any 4K iMac, because the price will surpass Mac pro
i guess late 2015
 
Ok. So staring at my new 27-inch iMac's 2560x1440 IPS display and coming from a Retina MacBook Pro, I can say that a 4K iMac won't be nearly as dramatic a change as going from non-Retina to Retina on the MBP.

Perhaps it's the distance from the screen on an iMac and not the pure PPI math, but I don't feel like I see any pixels/choppiness like I do on a cMBP non-Retina display. We'll see what happens, but I think I'll be content with this iMac for a while even in the event of a 4K model. By the time I am ready for a new machine the 4K models should stabilize in price.
 
The development of computer monitors is going really slooooow.

Especially when you consider that Apple had a 30" 2560x1600 ACD in their lineup in the mid 2000s, and then went backwards to 2560x1440 for the next decade.

----------

Ok. So staring at my new 27-inch iMac's 2560x1440 IPS display and coming from a Retina MacBook Pro, I can say that a 4K iMac won't be nearly as dramatic a change as going from non-Retina to Retina on the MBP.

Perhaps it's the distance from the screen on an iMac and not the pure PPI math, but I don't feel like I see any pixels/choppiness like I do on a cMBP non-Retina display. We'll see what happens, but I think I'll be content with this iMac for a while even in the event of a 4K model. By the time I am ready for a new machine the 4K models should stabilize in price.

I'd be in the same boat. But people that are ready to purchase now are worried that they'll get double screwed: missing out on a new panel, and not getting Thunderbolt 2, which would at least give them the ability to add an external 4K display and run at full refresh rate.

I don't think anyone can insult the 27" iMac. I've seen hardcore PC people start to salivate when they see one.

My wife may be getting a stipend for a new laptop for a new job and I'm really hoping to steal her iMac in the process. 4K can wait for a bit.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.