Did they just discontinue iMac 27"?

[pshufd]

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.

That's what it is doing. The software is from the 1990s but nobody is going to change it now.

I can just shrink the image in the browser by 50% but I don't have to bother with a QHD monitor. I do wish that macOS would have a parameter to set the DPI of screen shots as current resolution. I run one of my 4k monitors at native resolution but 5k would make things too small. I can just use this solution for the time being. Of course iMacs of this vintage can die at any time but there's typically a stead stream of 2009 and 2010 models from $100 to $300.

 

[the8thark]

View attachment 1973267 View attachment 1973268

Close enough to two years. It was calendar year 2020 and we are in calendar year 2022 now.
M2 talk is occurring everywhere.

 

[subjonas]

Close enough to two years. It was calendar year 2020 and we are in calendar year 2022 now.

That’s terrible logic. So you’re saying December 31, 2020 to January 1, 2022 is basically two years even though it’s one day over a year?

The fact is, 482 days is closer to one year than two years.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it is a pet peeve of mine when people use logic/word games to try to falsely strengthen their point. Accept the strength of your point with accurate information, don’t try to fluff it up to more than what it is. But in this case, it was more than harmless fluffing up. People are willing to accept approximation and even some exaggeration, but when you’re willfully off by 51%, that’s well into falsification territory.

 

[the8thark]

That’s terrible logic. So you’re saying December 31, 2020 to January 1, 2022 is basically two years even though it’s one day over a year?

The fact is, 482 days is closer to one year than two years.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it is a pet peeve of mine when people use logic/word games to try to falsely strengthen their point. Accept the strength of your point with accurate information, don’t try to fluff it up to more than what it is. But in this case, it was more than harmless fluffing up. People are willing to accept approximation and even some exaggeration, but when you’re willfully off by 51%, that’s well into falsification territory.

I am not off by 51%. However we all have our own differing opinions on this.
The important thing is M1 has been out long enough that the M2 rumours are coming in. A lot of people are saying wait for M2, if you want a base model Mac.

 

[subjonas]

I am not off by 51%. However we all have our own differing opinions on this.
The important thing is M1 has been out long enough that the M2 rumours are coming in. A lot of people are saying wait for M2, if you want a base model Mac.

Your claim was it was two years, which is 730 days. It was actually 482 days (according to the other user and not challenged by you so I’m assuming it’s right—please correct if it’s wrong). That’s off by 248 days. 248 / 482 = 0.51. So “two years” is 51% inflated. Is there any error in this math?

Again, I’m not talking about your main point. You may be totally right, I have no idea. I’m only saying don’t inflate data by 51% on a public forum.

 

[Shivetya]

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

If my 2019 could do this I might have been tempted to buy a Mac Studio day one just to play with it.

 

[catean]

.

Lets use the US prices (on the site, ie pre tax) as a comparison.
Top 24 inch iMac - 1700
Lowest Max Mini - 2000, plus screen 1600

So that is 1700 for the 24 inch option and 3600 for the (lowest) 27 inch option. Also losing the all in one aspect of it (which some might prefer though).

Mac Mini starts at 699$ not 2000$.

 

[the8thark]

@catean
The typo is fixed.

 

[4743913]

if there wasn't going to be a 27" iMac in the future, Apple would not list the iMac 24" on the Apple Store. It would just be called the iMac.

27" is coming.

 

[SalisburySam]

if there wasn't going to be a 27" iMac in the future, Apple would not list the iMac 24" on the Apple Store. It would just be called the iMac.

27" is coming.

I agree that at least SOMETHING is coming, and hopefully a 27”. Not seen any evidence that there will be a 27” though and Apple could do anything…or nothing.

 

[Abazigal]

if there wasn't going to be a 27" iMac in the future, Apple would not list the iMac 24" on the Apple Store. It would just be called the iMac.

27" is coming.

I feel if there was going to be an updated 27” iMac, Apple would not have made the first iMac 24”, which is too close to 27”. It’s likely that Apple knew they weren’t going to refresh the 27” model, and so settled on a new screen size they felt would appeal to users of both the previous 21” and 27” models.

 

[pshufd]

If my 2019 could do this I might have been tempted to buy a Mac Studio day one just to play with it.

I have an experiment to try hooking up a 5k iMac to an M1 device to set up a network bridge to try out screen sharing. My home network is only GB and screen sharing works on a QHD display but sometimes lags. It would be interesting to see if 20 GB (Thunderbolt 2) would work really well with screen sharing at 5k.

I think that Apple should bring back TDM for 5k iMacs as it would be a good way to sell more Mac Studios.

 

[aranhamo76]

I'm sorry - General users claiming they need more than 8GB of RAM are typically talking out of their backsides from professional practice. I manage an IT estate of a few hundred desktop and laptop machines and we rarely see any machine utilisation spike over 4-5GB RAM utilisation in a Higher Education situation, where more taxing software is common place.

The earlier comment is correct - if you cannot afford nor justify the price of a product, that product is not for you.

Also comparing an iMac from 2011 to an iMac from last year is like trying to compare the technical equivalencies between an air cooled VW Bug engine to a hybrid F1 engine in the amount of physical performance similarities.

Any of your professionals ever play RAM hogging games, while simultaneously watching YouTube videos and surfing the web and video chatting on social media like my teenagers regularly do? Our current iMac has 16GB of RAM and frequently bogs down and I have to kill applications to reclaim RAM. My development machine has 64GB of RAM because at 32GB my previous machine was unusable with several IDEs open along with the normal mail and browser, etc. The IT department where I work is constantly under-provisioning our machines, because they think no one should ever need 256GB of storage when we have OneDrive or 16GB of RAM because they think we should only be using one application at a time.

 

[pshufd]

Any of your professionals ever play RAM hogging games, while simultaneously watching YouTube videos and surfing the web and video chatting on social media like my teenagers regularly do? Our current iMac has 16GB of RAM and frequently bogs down and I have to kill applications to reclaim RAM. My development machine has 64GB of RAM because at 32GB my previous machine was unusable with several IDEs open along with the normal mail and browser, etc. The IT department where I work is constantly under-provisioning our machines, because they think no one should ever need 256GB of storage when we have OneDrive or 16GB of RAM because they think we should only be using one application at a time.

The work systems at my previous job had 1.4 TB of RAM, 400+ cores and hundreds of TB of storage. Not a typical job for the vast majority of course. A director friend of mine at a major semiconductor company said that he outfits his engineers with similar hardware. I have to think that there's a reason why the Mac Pro is configurable with 1.5 TB of RAM. I have seen a few YouTubers with these setups and it seems a lot for video production but maybe what they're doing is a lot more complicated than the average YouTuber.

The thing about the 27 inch iMacs is that RAM is so cheap. A-Tech 2x16 GB is $134 at Amazon. I do run Windows VMs on my iMacs and 32 GB means that I have plenty of memory for macOS and the virtual machine.

I bought my own hardware for work as the workplace-provided system (2015 MacBook Pro 13, all decked out) ran hot and noisy.

 

[aranhamo76]

Also comparing an iMac from 2011 to an iMac from last year is like trying to compare the technical equivalencies between an air cooled VW Bug engine to a hybrid F1 engine in the amount of physical performance similarities.

RAM and storage are pretty important to computer performance, often MORE important than CPU performance. And Apple’s current iMacs have the same max RAM as iMacs from 11 years ago, and LESS max storage. That’s relevant.

 

[usagora]

Your claim was it was two years, which is 730 days. It was actually 482 days (according to the other user and not challenged by you so I’m assuming it’s right—please correct if it’s wrong). That’s off by 248 days. 248 / 482 = 0.51. So “two years” is 51% inflated. Is there any error in this math?

Again, I’m not talking about your main point. You may be totally right, I have no idea. I’m only saying don’t inflate data by 51% on a public forum.

How about this: it's currently into its 2nd year of life

 

[subjonas]

if there wasn't going to be a 27" iMac in the future, Apple would not list the iMac 24" on the Apple Store. It would just be called the iMac.

27" is coming.

Well the 27” overlapped with the 24” and the 21” and 27” are still fresh in people’s memory, so it just may be that Apple isn’t in a hurry to rename the 24”. Maybe in the future.

But if they do eventually come out with a larger iMac, I’m thinking it will be at least 29” since 27 is so close to 24.

How about this: it's currently into its 2nd year of life

Yup, that’s a factual statement.

 

[satcomer]

I' still think the Mac Studio with the giant chips is the new Mac Pro today! So get yourself a Studio Display and Mac Studio and go great work on it! Some believe it can be faster than the current Pro in certain tasks!

 

[GiantKiwi]

RAM and storage are pretty important to computer performance, often MORE important than CPU performance. And Apple’s current iMacs have the same max RAM as iMacs from 11 years ago, and LESS max storage. That’s relevant.

Except the relative bandwidth in both RAM and storage is something that you are failing to understand. The amount is ultimately irrelevant when comparing them. A 2011 iMac is using DDR3 1333MHz, which has a maximum capability of 1.6GB/s bandwidth, LPDDR4 at 4266MHz has a maximum capability of 32GB/s - so it is empirically and noticeably faster at the same amount.

You are trying to argue a point that is positively dumb.

 

[coolerkid]

I thought Apple's long-term goal was to bringing all the benefits of iOS devices to the Mac, and that should include making it an all-in-one closed system where a consumer doesn't have to worry so much about what's inside, they just pick the monitor size, the pro or entry model, and then take it home and plug it in. I thought longer term there would be selling mostly iMacs, more screen sizes, and less headless systems. The 24" iMac kinda sucks in my opinion. I think they really botched that design. The 27" was the perfect computer and looked amazing, all they had to do was make a new one with the M chip and a similar form factor to the Studio display, and it would be a killer product. Would be really disappointed if Apple discontinues the 27" iMac

 

[ryanmp]

I finally went to check out the new Mac Studio and Studio display, what a huge disappointment.

I’m still struggling to understand what Apple was thinking discontinuing the 27inch.

The Studio Display is great, but was just thinking how amazing it would be if it had the full system inside.

I guess a few more years with my current 27inch iMac in the hope they come to their senses and release a new one….

 

[pshufd]

I was at Costco yesterday and they had the 6-core 27 inch iMacs for $1,749 - so you can still buy them at some retailers new. Costco provides a two-year warranty which is better than Apple's. It is nice to be able to upgrade the RAM but the M1 CPU has a significant CPU performance advantage over the 6-core i5 10th gen Intel CPU. I definitely wouldn't pay retail for a 2020 iMac. I think that you can find these used for about $1,250.

I think that Apple has executed a good strategy on Apple Silicon:

1) Put out low-end products to sell a ton of them so that software companies port and they generate a lot of revenue for products where battery life is important.
2) Add the iMac 24 for those that want the value that the iMac has traditionally provided
3) Launch the MacBook Pros for power users that also want great battery life. If you want more power or more RAM, you have to buy these models. Build up an inventory of Ultra chips while making the M1 Max chips.

The idea is that Apple Silicon is very efficient and so MacBooks have the biggest amount of leverage. I think that most people don't mind a lot of power consumption unless the noise is really annoying.

4) Launch the Mac Studio. Again, if you want more power or RAM, this is your choice but you sold a lot of expensive MacBook Pros to people who wanted the power and had no option at the time.
5) Launch the Mac Pro.
6) Maybe revisit the 27 inch iMac.

It seems like it has been a good strategy for executing on Apple Silicon with market expansion and profit in mind.

 

[Shivetya]

I think that Apple has executed a good strategy on Apple Silicon:

1) Put out low-end products to sell a ton of them so that software companies port and they generate a lot of revenue for products where battery life is important.

They were very silent on new software companies coming to Apple Silicon. They only mentioned iOS apps able to be used on AS... we may be headed back to the days of PowerPC unless Apple puts forth effort to get more companies onboard.

 

[acrakes]

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.

I have bad open tab and multitasking habits for ordinary stuff.. I've got a 2015 27" configured with 48GB aftermarket.. for awhile I'd hover around like 32-33 GB usage.. lately down to about 12. Not sure what's OS optimization and what's my own system/software..

 

[anthony13]

oddly I was at the apple store yesterday and while I was there saw 3 separate people purchase a 27" iMac.