I agree that 500$-600$ was a bit hyperbole but it's definitely overpriced at 1.779 EUR base) here in Belgium with only 60 Hz, extremely mediocre webcam (I would even call it bad) and no adjustable stand without paying extra for nano texture and adjustable stand (2.489 EUR)
Personally think the iMac is beter value thank the Mac Mini - unless you buy a monitor to use for the next decade.
* design is subjective but I like it a lot. Clean, 1 cable
* good screen, webcam,
* I always choose the trackpad as I think MacOS actually works well with trackpads (Windows less so for me). I like the keyboard
24" screen is big enough and if I need multi tasking I prefer two 24" screens (I have a samsung one from work for working from home) then 1 27" screen.
I agree with this to an extent, but the monitor will be outdated at some point. 60 hZ feels already outdated for that price point
People have adapted to laptops and laptop screens. And MANY are very very good in handling multitasking by developing great skills.
People being used to and good at that, will picture few advantages in jacking up screen sizes. In fact, knowing that the kids will be working on laptops all through their education and moving on to working with whatever, I`d argue getting them a normal size (27+ monitor) will be a disadvantage to them as they will work way more efficient if they stick to a form factor they will have to use anyway. Getting accustomed to a normal 27+ screen size will hurt their workflow. ONE disadvantage with the last decade and a half laptops is the wide and low screen format IF working with documents. Like kids still do at school.
Regardless, they have to adapt to a form factor which has a lot of chosen disadvantages for the benefit of portability.
A 24" monitor just provides the same disadvantage in a larger format. It has no multitasking benefits of significance, and doubling up 24"s in a dual setup is just a mishmash. The only benefit is if running 2 systems (which can be done on a single wider monitor) or to save a buck.
Moving on from the skills acquired to compensate for a small screen, there are significant advantages to decent monitor size, both for creative work with graphics, video, 3D, photo and what not, and also for "multitasking" office work. High ppi never hurts, apart from the wallet, bandwidth and demands on the graphics system. The reason for high PPI monitors being generally great is that they are positioned in the high end segment, which means that the quality extends into all the other components of the monitor as well. Higher bandwidth, better electronics, better panel tech beyond pixel density and so forth. When/if they become common, one will most likely experience a wider variation in panel/electronics which means that people will eventually be able to buy crap high ppi monitors. They will get the budget/profit treatment as every upfront technology will endure. The 27 form factor has gone through that, as have 32 and 34w.
A 27" is the minimum for 3 normally sized document pages beside each other. E.g. a Pdf, a office document and a web page, but that is really cramped. A 34wide does that job better (after all it is just a widened 27" caretaking that specifically), and vertically it matches a A4 sized page with normal fonts ++ very well. A 32 is better suited for CAD/Graphics, and ppi is of greater significance. A 32 has a lot of surplus space vertically for document/office work. It makes workspace management (like Mosaic) way more relevant.
Consumer and Business app development for iOS, watchOS and macOS.
www.lightpillar.com
If seriously exploiting the limits of multitasking, the 40w format is good for both graphics and office, but LG/Lenovo/HP/Dell haven`t put great resources into the panels, those leaves something to be desired. Got little to do with PPI, it`s more about choices like type of panel, backlighting and so on. These monitors needs a workspace management system to be exploited fully, Dell provides one, I believe Microsoft`s system went out of "beta" 2 or 3 years ago, can`t remember exactly, but it worked fine for me like Dell`s and Mosaic.
One caveat with these large monitors, because they ARE large, is the variation in distance between eyes and center/edge of the monitor, the eyes constantly/frequently having to adjust to the difference in distance rather up close. Further, for 32" and 40" you`ll start moving your head, eyes and neck in a different manner than with smaller monitors which you can position more or less fixed to a comfortable usage. The brands have experimented a bit with that, and come up with curved monitors with various radius choices. That seems to have settled into sensible "standards".
Whatever people chooses for a solution and if that is right or not, varies with preferences and what the monitors actually are used for. What`s right for me is certainly not ideal for a different user and vice versa.
What IS pretty clear is that a 24" is not anywhere near ideal for taking advantage of multitasking to the fullest extent. It IS however fine if adapted to a laptop style workflow. Where it brings nothing additional beyond a tad more real estate.
