Would you be interested in a 30" Widescreen iMac?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by ks-man, Feb 28, 2008.

?

Would you be interested in a 30" Widescreen iMac?

  1. I would want one no matter the price increase

    8 vote(s)
    11.0%
  2. I would want one as long as the premium is $500 or less

    17 vote(s)
    23.3%
  3. I would want one as long as the premium is $1000 or less

    1 vote(s)
    1.4%
  4. I'm fine with a 20" or 24" iMac

    25 vote(s)
    34.2%
  5. If I want 30"s I want a Mac Pro

    22 vote(s)
    30.1%
  1. ks-man macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    #1
    No, I don't have any info that Apple is even considering this, but it is something that I would really be interested in. I'm curious to hear if other people would also be interested in one. Who knows, perhaps the higher ups at Apple anonymously browse these boards ;)

    Also I'm curious to see what type of a premium people would be willing to pay for it.
     
  2. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #2
    So much of the cost of the system would be in the screen, a screen that you cannot keep when the rest of the machine gets old. For that reason, right now, it's a terrible idea.

    Of course, fast forward 5-10 years and the situation will be very different no doubt.
     
  3. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    #3
    Terrible is a pretty strong word. I think there are a lot of people who would get it considering the alternative if you want a 30" screen with the computer is to get a Mac Pro which is more power than most people need (and hooking up a laptop to a 30" screen still isn't as clean as an all-in-one).

    I think many people keep computers for 4+ years so an extra $1000 into the screen isn't that unreasonable spread out over time.
     
  4. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #4
    A 30" screen costs more than an iMac. Terrible is absolutely the right word to describe this idea. Almost anyone spending the kind of money you do on a 30" screen has the money and the need for a professional machine to go with it.

    edit: Your poll is ridiculous, of course anyone would like a 30" for $500, but there's no way in hell that's about to happen, or for $1000 come to that :rolleyes:
     
  5. brn2ski00 macrumors 68020

    brn2ski00

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    #5
    I'd have a tough time spending close to $3,000 for a model with a 30" screen. That's the lowest price point I would assume seeing from Apple. It would be nice though!
     
  6. takeabyteoutta macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    #6
    people try to keep computers for 4+ years, but there's no guarantee it'll last that long.

    You're much better off buying an external display or HDTV with VGA to use as a 2nd monitor. It's a cheaper and more practical solution than a 30" display to more screen real-estate.
     
  7. robanga macrumors 68000

    robanga

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Location:
    Oregon
    #7
  8. brn2ski00 macrumors 68020

    brn2ski00

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    #8
  9. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    #9
    Of course anybody would want it for $500 but read the way I phrased it, I asked if people would only want it if it was that cheap. If all the responses tend towards that then of course it isn't ready for the market.

    Also you are even more ridiculous (or naive) to think that the current screen in the iMac is free and that it is unthinkable that Apple could do it for $1000. The 30" ACD is only $900 more than the 23" one so I think it is completely possible in 6 months that Apple could do a 30" iMac for around $3000.

    Of course this option wouldn't be for everyone but considering that Apple doesn't have a mid-level computer between the iMac and the Mac Pro it is perfectly acceptable to offer a computer for more than an entry level price.

    Also to think anyone needing a 30" screen also needs a professional computer is absurd. I'd guess 75% of people use home computers for basic functions but still love the idea of more screen space and many of those people would be willing to pay a premium for that (admittedly I have no stats to back that claim up).
     
  10. robanga macrumors 68000

    robanga

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Location:
    Oregon
  11. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #11
    As I said in my first post, 30" will probably happen one day at a reasonable cost. 6 months time though? I don't think so.
     
  12. brn2ski00 macrumors 68020

    brn2ski00

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    #12
    Thanks! The Apple way in full effect :) :apple: :)
     
  13. Father Jack macrumors 68020

    Father Jack

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Location:
    Ireland
    #13
    Perhaps, if they offered it with a matte screen.

    Glossy screen .... no thank you .. :eek:
     
  14. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #14
    Much prefer a 30" display to use with my mac pro, not an iMac. ;)
     
  15. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    #15
    That I will unfortunately agree with. I would be willing to pay the full cost of the 30" screen + the full cost of the iMac if it had a clean all-in-one look to it (see my other thread).

    I do realize of course that most computer buyers are not in the same situation (hence the point of the post). I'm curious to see how much extra money people would be willing to lay out to upgrade to the 30" screen in the iMac.

    Apple has never hesitated from offering very high end options at high end prices even if the market isn't ready for it (I'm thinking the SSD drive in the MBA) so perhaps this could play out like that. A high end option for those willing to part with the money.
     
  16. dbam987 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    #16
    It doesn't sound too practical to have a 30'' screen and sit only a mere 4 feet away from it. It would be too big and probably bad for the eye's, causing a lot of headaches. Anything beyond 24'' is just too much for a desktop monitor.
     
  17. gorby macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    #17
    I would be more interested in the pricedrop that might come to the 24" version should a 30" debut (in the next generation, I don't think it will come to the Alu)

    24" is a very good size for me
     
  18. Qjuu macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    #18
    I'm using the 30'' ACD since 3 years with my PC. It's very practical, it's big :cool: and I never got headaches :p

    I would pay some price for a 30'' iMac!! This thread addresses exactly my current "switch-to-mac-problem".

    I really like "nice and minimalist" - so an iMac is perfect for me. But I use a 30'' display since 3 years. A 24'' iMac would be a downgrade for me. And the Mac Pro on the other side is way to much for me and not as minimalistic.

    So: 30'' iMac ftw :D
     
  19. Father Jack macrumors 68020

    Father Jack

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Location:
    Ireland
    #19
    I've been using a 30" monitor for a year now without any sort of eye problems.
     
  20. Leon Kowalski macrumors 6502a

    Leon Kowalski

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    Gondwanaland Reunification Front HQ
    #20
    Hmm, what's wrong with this picture?

    - NO video inputs

    - NO BluRay support

    - Wimpy graphics card

    - NO high-bandwidth inputs of any kind

    - 30" ultra high-resolution 2560 x 1600 display

    ..."terrible" doesn't even begin to describe it,

    LK


    POLL: Would you be interested in a Yugo with wheelie bars?

    .
     
  21. Qjuu macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    #21
    - NO video inputs
    -> like the 30'' ACD

    - NO BluRay support
    -> like every other Mac (but ok, could not be upgraded)

    - Wimpy graphics card
    -> should be changed with next iMac update, hopefully!

    - NO high-bandwidth inputs of any kind
    -> current iMac already does have FW800, 802.11n and Gigabit Ethernet

    - 30" ultra high-resolution 2560 x 1600 display
    -> indeed, NICE :D

    ..."terrible" doesn't even begin to describe it,
    -> mhm....

    And what are 'wheelie bars'??! I'm no native speaker and didn't find a translation :eek:
     
  22. ks-man thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    #22
    I wonder if we ran a poll about the rumored ultra portable mac (now known to be the MBA) how many people would have been willing to pay $1000 for the 64GB SSD.

    I'm guessing a smaller number would have done that vs. paying the same premium for a 30" iMac over a 24" iMac.
     
  23. Leon Kowalski macrumors 6502a

    Leon Kowalski

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    Gondwanaland Reunification Front HQ
    #23
    Wow! Does Apple really sell a monitor with NO video inputs?
    Sounds like a good way to separate the men from the fanboys!

    But what about high bandwidth? All of an iMac's inputs combined
    (Ethernet + 802.11n + FW800 + FW400 + 3 x USB + BlueTooth)
    don't have nearly enough bandwidth to supply a 5.9 Gb/s video
    signal to a 2560 x 1600 x 60 Hz x 24-bit display.

    It can't be translated -- it's a 'Murcan thang.

    LK


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    LK
     
  24. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #24
    For me, I'd don't need or want anything larger than 24".
     
  25. Qjuu macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    #25
    You know what I mean.... :rolleyes:

    I think we have a different point of view. For me, an 30'' iMac is just an iMac with a very big screen - nothing more. If I want a high end computer with high bandwidth inputs, I'd buy a Mac Pro. The availability of an 30'' iMac wouldn't make the Mac Pro obsolete. Of course, the screen of such an big iMac is equally expensive as all other components together, but why not? It's just a big screen with 2560x1600 and _I_ would pay for it.

    *lol.....thx! I learn so much here :D
     

Share This Page