Did they just discontinue iMac 27"?

[deeddawg]

Whatever. I just mentioned the 27" size, not the resolution when I replied to bushman4's post:

Did they just discontinue iMac 27"?

Studio is double the price of the 27” iMac and for the casual user is overkill Hopefully Apple hasn’t forgot about the casual users By only selling a 24” iMac Hopefully we’ll see a 27” iMac at the WWDC

forums.macrumors.com

Inherent to the qualities of the 27" iMac is that its display is/was 5K.

Thus my comment asking where to find the equivalent. Fact is there really isn't.

 

[opeter]

Inherent to the qualities of the 27" iMac is that its display is/was 5K.

Thus my comment asking where to find the equivalent. Fact is there really isn't.

Fine. Case closed.

 

[acrakes]

This.

I get the appeal of an all in one, but the 27" iMac was a consumer device. Is there any reason people are comparing the cost of a Mac Studio + 27" Studio Display instead of a Mac Mini + 27" Studio Display?

The M1 chip in the base model mac mini is already far more powerful than most of the processor options which came in the 27" intel iMac.

Yeah, just noticed this. But the M1 Mac Mini only configures up to 16GB of RAM, the current high-end Intel option (base price $1099) lets you go up to 32 or 64 RAM for another $600 or 1k. Right now the M1 is capped at 16GB for hardware reasons, M1 Pro at 32, and M1 Pro Max at 64. Only issue for my personal use case is max RAM in the 24" iMac or the Mac Mini vs. Mac Studio.

 

[dieselm]

Yeah, just noticed this. But the M1 Mac Mini only configures up to 16GB of RAM, the current high-end Intel option (base price $1099) lets you go up to 32 or 64 RAM for another $600 or 1k. Right now the M1 is capped at 16GB for hardware reasons, M1 Pro at 32, and M1 Pro Max at 64. Only issue for my personal use case is max RAM in the 24" iMac or the Mac Mini vs. Mac Studio.

that's probably why it's still on sale.

there still isn't a good answer if you want 64gb of memory, but don't need multi-core, high gpu perf.

 

[subjonas]

They can always introduce a larger iMac at a later date & I am sure they will. It's clearly not part of the initial 2 year plan, that's all.

That would basically mean Apple temporarily ditched the larger iMac just to be able to say they succeeded in meeting their 2 year promise. If true, that’s pretty weak of them. But I’m doubtful that’s true.

I think Intel Mac mini will be replaced by M1 Pro/Max Mac mini. Simple to update. But Mac Studio starts from M1 Max with 32gb so not sure about it. Why not add M1 Pro on Mac Studio to replace Intel Mac mini?

It would be weird for the M Max to be available in both the Mac Mini and Mac Studio, especially since I assume the Mini would be cheaper. It does seems strange that there is no M Pro desktop option, so I think it’s coming and if so I think the chip would make more sense in the Mini than the Studio, and that is indeed the rumor.

 

[subjonas]

The two 5K displays listed are the discontinued $1300 LG and the unavailable in the US and the reportedly-discontinued in UK/EU Iiyama. Others are wide 1440 displays or the 8K Dell display ... and it's $4000.

Thus - if you want 5K, for reasons already stated in other posts, you can't "always buy a 3rd party 27" or bigger screen"

I agree. I’ve been looking for something comparable to the new Studio display for years, and there’s just nothing competitive on the market.

Inherent to the qualities of the 27" iMac is that its display is/was 5K.

Thus my comment asking where to find the equivalent. Fact is there really isn't.

I may not have caught the beginning of this dialog, so I’m not sure this is relevant, but wouldn't the fact that a comparable 5k monitor can’t be found for a lower price sort of prove that the Studio Display is priced reasonably?

The 27” 5k iMac was indeed a great value since it was a great monitor with a computer included. I’m actually perplexed how/why Apple ever offered it at that price considering they had practically no competition near that. So while it is a very unfortunate loss in value for consumers, I kind of see the logic in that aspect of the discontinuation. I’m more sympathetic to people who want to have an AIO Mac bigger or more powerful than the M1 24” and now cannot. But I feel 27” is too close. If Apple does make a larger iMac again someday, I’d expect it to be 29” or higher. Though that probably wouldn’t be cheap. I assume if Apple sees a big enough market for that, they’ll make it eventually. But from the looks of their statements, not too soon. There may be a better likelihood of an M Pro 24” iMac though.

 

[deeddawg]

I may not have caught the beginning of this dialog, so I’m not sure this is relevant, but wouldn't the fact that a comparable 5k monitor can’t be found for a lower price sort of prove that the Studio Display is priced reasonably?

The LG 5K was priced at $1300, and the Studio Display is $300 more. It also provides more in terms of speakers, camera, brightness, etc.

"Reasonable" is one of those squishy subjective words, what's reasonable to one person isn't reasonable to another. Particularly if comparing apples to oranges as many comments have done - though in fairness many people have no need/interest/understanding in the differences between the Studio Display and a $300 4K monitor in the 27-28" size range which they feel does a "good enough" job at what they need.

To your point though - Apple will have priced the Studio Display at the level where they anticipate their desired sales volume. Some will find that price "reasonable" and some will not. We see that clearly in the various posts by both those who immediately placed their orders and those who've expressed the opinion that it costs too much.

 

[the8thark]

We all still need to consider that there is the counter rumour stating the 27 iMac is not RIP and just in hiatus till 2023 when it will make a comeback.

Rumor - iMac Pro coming in 2023

https://www.macworld.com/article/349270/2022-imac-pro-design-processor-display-price-release.html Also thanks to dfine1966 for sharing the article. The main points from the article are March 11: An unverified Twitter account for analyst Ming-Chi Kuo states that an iMac Pro won’t ship until...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[pshufd]

We all still need to consider that there is the counter rumour stating the 27 iMac is not RIP and just in hiatus till 2023 when it will make a comeback.

Rumor - iMac Pro coming in 2023

https://www.macworld.com/article/349270/2022-imac-pro-design-processor-display-price-release.html Also thanks to dfine1966 for sharing the article. The main points from the article are March 11: An unverified Twitter account for analyst Ming-Chi Kuo states that an iMac Pro won’t ship until...

forums.macrumors.com

I suspect Apple has a bunch of ideas or even functioning systems with various configuration and that they can just pick from them when they want to do a launch which is making it tough on the rumor mill. I would like to see the 27 iMac come back because it's a great consumer budget model. But we all have to do what we can in the absence of the 27 today.

 

[pshufd]

I just hooked up my M1 mini to my Late 2009 iMac 27 in Target Display Mode and it's great as a monitor with speakers. The speakers are certainly much better than the speaker in the mini. The only slight negative is that the remote control only controls the volume and not Stop/Play/Prev/Next. But the picture and sound from this ancient desktop is fine for my usage. And I could hook it up to a Mac Studio down the road.

I could run the Late 2009 iMac as a standalone computer display charts but I've done experiments with this in the past and the thermals are unattractive. It has the Core 2 Duo CPU and the system gets really hot when running my workloads on it. Thermals seem fine running it in Target Display Mode.

So if you have an old 2009 or 2010 iMac 27, it may enjoy a second life as a monitor (though no 5k).

 

[Argon_]

I suspect Apple has a bunch of ideas or even functioning systems with various configuration and that they can just pick from them when they want to do a launch which is making it tough on the rumor mill. I would like to see the 27 iMac come back because it's a great consumer budget model. But we all have to do what we can in the absence of the 27 today.

If they stuffed a Pro chip into the 24, it could presumably fill the higher power iMac niche.

 

[pshufd]

If they stuffed a Pro chip into the 24, it could presumably fill the higher power iMac niche.

I actually don't need the Pro chip; the M1 would be fine. I just want the larger display with good speakers and lots of ports. The Mac Studio + Studio Display is really nice but none of the variants are consumer class.

 

[subjonas]

The LG 5K was priced at $1300, and the Studio Display is $300 more. It also provides more in terms of speakers, camera, brightness, etc.

"Reasonable" is one of those squishy subjective words, what's reasonable to one person isn't reasonable to another. Particularly if comparing apples to oranges as many comments have done - though in fairness many people have no need/interest/understanding in the differences between the Studio Display and a $300 4K monitor in the 27-28" size range which they feel does a "good enough" job at what they need.

To your point though - Apple will have priced the Studio Display at the level where they anticipate their desired sales volume. Some will find that price "reasonable" and some will not. We see that clearly in the various posts by both those who immediately placed their orders and those who've expressed the opinion that it costs too much.

Priced “competitively” I should have said. Although not a lot of competition looks like.

 

[the8thark]

There is the other issue.
M1 at this point is 2 years old. Sure an M1 Pro desktop would be very nice. But for many people in this prosumer segment, better single core performance (assumedly of the M2) would be better. 8-12 cores of that would be very nice. The only issue then would be RAM. The prosumer would appreciate a 32GB/64GB BTO option.

Actually a M2 desktop (just base model) if it has the option for more RAM would suit many prosumer needs.

 

[opeter]

I have a strange feeling, that the base M2 SoC will have similar limitations to the M1...

 

[Argon_]

I actually don't need the Pro chip; the M1 would be fine. I just want the larger display with good speakers and lots of ports. The Mac Studio + Studio Display is really nice but none of the variants are consumer class.

Then a Mini + Studio Display?

 

[pshufd]

Then a Mini + Studio Display?

This is what I'm running right now.

 

[Argon_]

This is what I'm running right now.

View attachment 1973259

Interesting. I assume three independent computers, no TDM based on the number of inputs.

 

[pshufd]

Interesting. I assume three independent computers, no TDM based on the number of inputs.

The left iMac is a Late 2009 running TDM off an M1 mini between it and the 4k monitor. The middle is a Late 2014 and the right is a 2010. I could run my application directly on the Late 2009 iMac but it gets pretty hot when I do that so I just run it in TDM mode. I use Synergy so that I can control all five screens with the keyboard and mouse in the middle. The two left screens and the screen on the right are just for viewing market and portfolio data so screens are more important then processing power.

 

[jdb8167]

There is the other issue.
M1 at this point is 2 years old.

 

[Argon_]

The left iMac is a Late 2009 running TDM off an M1 mini between it and the 4k monitor. The middle is a Late 2014 and the right is a 2010. I could run my application directly on the Late 2009 iMac but it gets pretty hot when I do that so I just run it in TDM mode. I use Synergy so that I can control all five screens with the keyboard and mouse in the middle. The two left screens and the screen on the right are just for viewing market and portfolio data so screens are more important then processing power.

So the 27" panel is a deal maker/breaker because you've essentially married yourself to that screen size? Why not a BTO Mini and a Studio Display then?

 

[pshufd]

So the 27" panel is a deal maker/breaker because you've essentially married yourself to that screen size? Why not a BTO Mini and a Studio Display then?

I have a BTO mini driving an iMac in TDM. Why would I need a Studio Display?

 

[Argon_]

I have a BTO mini driving an iMac in TDM. Why would I need a Studio Display?

Resolution, perhaps. I thought your earlier post referenced wanting to buy an iMac replacement.

 

[pshufd]

Resolution, perhaps. I thought your earlier post referenced wanting to buy an iMac replacement.

I would like an iMac replacement someday. I need one 4k monitor and that's the one on the left. The middle iMac is 5k but I run it at QHD. So 5k is nice but it isn't a requirement, as long as I have one 4k monitor. The 5k monitor could be used in this way. One thing that I've found is that most of my peers use dual 27-inch monitors. Some use 32 inch displays but I'm not sure of the resolution on those.

The QHD displays have one advantage over Retina displays in that I don't have to rescale when posting images. On Retina displays, screen capture results in capture at Retina resolution so your image file is much larger and it shows up in one of my forums as four times as large so I have to shrink them. Running unscaled saves me that step.

 

[jdb8167]

The QHD displays have one advantage over Retina displays in that I don't have to rescale when posting images. On Retina displays, screen capture results in capture at Retina resolution so your image file is much larger and it shows up in one of my forums as four times as large so I have to shrink them. Running unscaled saves me that step.

That sounds like the forum software is ignoring the image DPI. When I screenshot in HiDPI macOS sets the image DPI to 144 DPI. When I screenshot in low-resolution 2560x1440 macOS uses 72 DPI.

I think it should be pretty easy to automate scaling any 144 DPI image to 72 DPI with Folder Actions.