Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
Serious question, who’s using these things? I can’t find any business online that uses MacOS as its primary ecosystem let alone one that would need this much computing power. Most corporations that do require this type of computing use Windows.

Apple always shows us music artist, photographers, designers, etc using $10K setup but why on earth would any of these people need this? And if you’re an indie developer or solo artist you probably can’t afford it.

Apple’s hardware is at the point they need to focus on software that can actually take advantage of their devices.

I'm planning on using one of these things. I'm a contractor in the design/UX space. I can't justify Mac Pro / XDR Display prices, but for me this is perfect. From where I'm standing it absolutely fills a gap where I sit. Sure, it could have been met by a well specced iMac 27", and whilst this will be more than I maybe need, it will get me an awesome machine that I can expect to easily last 6-8 years.

Early indications are they are proving pretty popular - delivery for the 64GB models has slipped to the second half of May already.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
The new interconnect standard is completely unsuitable for high performance memory, at least as it stands now. It's not even up to the performance of the AMD Infinity Fabric. It's really meant for gluing together various bits and co-processors. "Someone" needs to better inform themselves.

I understand that the M1 Ultra ends up with a 1024-bit wide interface to memory. That's pretty impressive.
Thanks for the details. I don't follow Intel and AMD enough to know a lot about it. I just watched videos and read articles and they stated "Why its not using the Universal Chiplet Interconnect Express UCIe is frustrating". And "Apple just doesn't like to follow standards".
 

ADGrant

macrumors 68000
Mar 26, 2018
1,689
1,059
The Studio Display is fine for what it is, but it's more than it needs to be. I'd rather have it be $1,199 and drop the speakers (or at least not make them be as high end with Spatial Audio etc) and built in camera. Are they nice? Yes. But what I care about is the screen itself and $1599 is out of range for me. $999 or so and I'd have been in. Ah well...

The LG Ultrafine is $1300 and that sounds more like what you want. Have the speakers, camera and microphones is great for someone who wants the iMac experience with a Mac Studio or Mini. Its also nice if you want to connect a MacBook in clamshell mode.
 

ADGrant

macrumors 68000
Mar 26, 2018
1,689
1,059
And using your Mac at the native resolution is a different thing. I’m using my Mac mini with the 27” 4K LG monitor and macOS is making some mumbo jumbo with the scalling and as a result it renders much higher resolution than it needs to to properly render the UI. You don’t have this problem in Windows because it handles this in a much better way. And that’s why even a decade old PC is much smoother. macOS is just not good with external monitors, especially if you don’t use a specific kind of monitors. I can’t understand why is it such a big problem for Apple to improve this. They just don’t want to I think.
If you replaced your 27" 4K monitor with the new 5k Studio display you could use "native" resolution too and solve your issues.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
Well I was going to purchase a new imac 27 this year.

Given apple has dumped this product (with zero communication to customers) I guess thats not going to happen.

I am sure as **** not spending twice the money for a Studio set up.

Mac minis are unreliable and I wont be buying another ...every one I have had have problems....Problems starting up the attached screen and keeping keyboard and mouse attached. Just annoying every day.

I started using mac back in the days of windows vista (truely rubbish)...but now W10 is vastly better and reliable. My W10 pcs with fabulous 32 inch screens never miss a beat.

Guess Apple is telling me I am not their type of client and I should *** off.
I have never had any issues with my Mac minis and I use windows based monitors/keyboards/mice and other things. Only Apple product in the chain is the computer itself. I have two gaming monitors 144Hz, Logitech gaming keyboard/mouse, OWC Thunderbolt dock and more connected to it.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
I used to defend Apple too but it´s getting harder and harder to do that. What affordable display shall a consumer buy for the Mac mini? And for the enterprise market, they will not stop comparing to PC-crap. The lower price of the Studio Mac compared to Mac Pro is still a high price.
There are much better displays out there that are in the $400 range if you are fine with 1080p or 1440p resolution. I personally prefer high refresh rates so I have two gaming monitors connected to my Mac mini for even half the price of the new Studio Display. So a Mac Mini + a standard PC monitor is a nice combo.
 

AppleB

macrumors 65816
Oct 18, 2011
1,156
1,380
There’s always this option. Don’t buy one if you don’t need one. I’m not upset or disappointed just because it’s outside of my price range.
I’m looking forward to seeing it in action in music production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN

ADGrant

macrumors 68000
Mar 26, 2018
1,689
1,059
To be fair, I missed them saying that.

I guess it might be quite interesting to know the demographic of 27” iMac owners. It wouldn’t surprise me if the demographic of “consumers with a 27” iMac” is actually pretty small. I had one for my work, and of the few people I knew who have ever had one purely for home/family use had the smaller one.

I appreciate that is purely anecdotal though. But again, it wouldn’t surprise me if Apple had data on what the typical 27” iMac user wanted. And it likely is something a bit more Pro, but not a Mac Pro price point. They even tried it with the iMac Pro, but this is maybe going that but further.
Who would qualify as a "consumer with a 27" iMac"? Someone who owns a 27" iMac they occasionally or regularly use to work from home on? A hobbyist photographer? An indie software developer?

The smaller iMacs were ideal for family computers that kids could share to do homework but with all the covid driven remote learning, a shared home computer seems an archaic idea now.
 

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
The most disappointing is the end of the larger iMac—I have a 2019 and would have considered an upgrade to the M1 if they made a 32" version. I use an Apple for work, but it's mostly non-graphics-intensive work—the iMac was the perfect solution.

Now it's just like a PC—you have to buy the computer and monitor separately—and if you want an Apple, it's going to be at least 150% of the price increase. If you want similar specs with a Mac 27" monitor, you'll have a 6k rather than 5k one, but it'll cost more than double what the iMac did.

I don't know enough about Apple's business to know if this will hurt them—but how many $2000 (including $400 stand!) 27" displays are they going to sell? Non-professional Apple users will just buy Mac Minis and 3rd-party monitors. And people will presumably upgrade less frequently—I'm still using my 4-year-old 3rd-gen iPad Pro 12.9"

I had an Apple II Plus as a child, and stayed with Apple through the late 1990s, when the price differential became so steep that I began building my own overclocked PCs. I tried some MS-compatible tablets until eventually the far-superior iPad brought me back to Apple.

But with these kind of insane prices I think I may soon consider going back to PCs—Apple is not only incredibly expensive now, but "It Just Works" has become a bit of a joke. The iPhone is still the sine qua non of smartphones, but it's over $1000 now.

What's the buy-in for someone switching to Apple now, who wants my basic setup? $3000+ for a Mac Mini and Sudio Monitor, $2500 for the iPhone and 12.9 iPad Pro, and $500 for the Watch—then throw in an Apple TV and a couple needed accessories and it's close to $7,000 before tax. That's pretty insane.

There's maybe some truth in some of that, but I think part of the issue is that these M1 chips do seem to have genuinely been a massive step up in performance. So arguably people who maybe needed a mid to high end spec could likely now get away with a low to mid range specced machine.

The iPhone isn't "over $1,000". iPhones range in price from $429 to over $1,000.

As for how many of these displays they'll sell... who knows. I've just ordered one though, and delivery has slipped to the second half of April already. So presumably quite a few people.
 

seek3r

macrumors 68030
Aug 16, 2010
2,561
3,772
I am traveling so I didn’t get to watch the event video but just read the Macrumors live blog (thank you for that) and seen the announcement.

Has Apple lost their damn mind???

So the price of entry for an M1 Ultra chip is $3799 for 512GB SSD drive or $3999 for 1TB

FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS AND YOU GIVE ME A 1TB DRIVE!!! This is 2022 and your high end Mac debuts with a 1TB drive. Are you kidding me???

That is not even counting how overpriced it us to start with … HOLY BATBUCKS

Maxed out build is $7999 !!!

and let’s talk about the dispay you will need … not a 32” … not a 30” but a 27” 5K display for $1600 !!!

Want to adjust the height on that display then add $400 for A STAND. A FOUR HUNDRED DOLLAR MONITOR STAND.

And now I am reading 27” iMac is discontinued.

There is not an instrument made that can measure how disappointing today’s event was for me. My feeling are literally hurt. I feel like an idiot for being an Apple guy for the last 17 years.

The rest of that crap they announced in fancy new colors was total crap too.

Anyone else this upset?

I actually thought this was the most reasonable pricing Apple's had on a pro/prosumer desktop machine in a long time, re:the studio and display. It's functionally the replacement in the lineup for where the 2010 Mac Pro sat.

And you certainly don't need the display, which is actually reasonably priced for what it is, to use the studio, it'll hook up to any 32" display you want to buy. I have a 32" UHD LG that it will drive just fine if I pick one up (waiting to see what the eventual higher end mac mini shapes up to be before deciding)
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
Who would qualify as a "consumer with a 27" iMac"? Someone who owns a 27" iMac they occasionally or regularly use to work from home on? A hobbyist photographer? An indie software developer?

The smaller iMacs were ideal for family computers that kids could share to do homework but with all the covid driven remote learning, a shared home computer seems an archaic idea now.

I've been a web designer / developer who has babbled a little in video editing, and recently switched to UX so using software like Figma / XD more now. I've changed slightly from being a freelancer to a contractor. Its pretty decent money, with lots of work just now, so whilst I still can't justify Mac Pro prices, I can justify a Mac Studio set up to replace my 2015 27" iMac. I'd be pretty confident it will last me eight years plus.
 

ADGrant

macrumors 68000
Mar 26, 2018
1,689
1,059
Except I really just wwanted the screen. I don't buy a monitor for the speakers and, while the camera is nice to have, it also locks me into a 12mp camera.
If someone is replacing a 27" iMac, they probably don't have a separate webcam or speakers. Having everything integrated will make their lives easier. I have a 2020 iMac which I do not plan to replace right now but when I do, I don't want to bother with external speakers, an external mic or a webcam (I think 12mp will be fine).

If they had this monitor when I bought my iMac (and a decent Mac mini/studio) I would probably not have bought the iMac (thought the user upgradeable RAM is nice).

If you just want the screen, there are many available from third parties.
 

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
Agree it's not really surprising, Apple will charge absolutely as much as they possibly can for any given product (doubtless backed up by huge amounts of market research) and seemingly with less and less holistic thought put into the product offerings as a whole. What did raise a bit of an eyebrow for me is that the Mac Studio + Studio Display is seemingly positioned as a replacement for the 27" iMac, which, however you cut it was a drastically less expensive computer. The Apple Silicon products really seem to accelerate a trend of squeezing out the middle. You're either getting an entry level vanilla M1 product, with very limited actual choices for these machines, or paying a small fortune to get into the higher end stuff.

I'd say that that the entry level M1 machines are far more capable entry level machines than were previously available.

And I'd say that even at Mac Studio prices, it still falls in the middle ground between entry level machines, and whatever ridiculous spec the new Mac Pro tops out at. The maxed out Mac Studio comes in at £7,999. The current Mac Pro at a comparable spec is what - around 2x that?
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
I got a Mini on launch day. And so I have been here to see the whole thing. The people who have trouble are the ones who can’t understand that it’s not the old Mac but a entire new one. I tell people to check their experience and expectations at the door. Because it’s not like what you have used in the past. Apple is right. It’s better. And I am not a fan boy. If it was not better then I would say so.
I agree with this. I had a 2019 i9 iMac with 128GB of RAM and 2TB SSD with the Vega 48 GPU. Totaling around $4,500 for the base 8GB and upgraded with OWC memory after. The $1,200 M1 Mac mini with 16GB of RAM killed my 2019 i9 in my workflow. On paper, it shouldn't but in reality it certainly did.
 

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
They are doing this for the brand. The product - Mac studio is niche product. I can name none other computer with that price range and same goes with the monitor. Knowing Apple’s products makes the brand as something luxury.

Crazy, but very clever.

Or they've done it for pro users after so many people saying (often on MR) they weren't doing enough for pro users. Sometimes its like they can't win.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
Pretty sure no asked for the high end Mac mini to start $1999.
Uh that is already the case. And the base Mac studio beats the crap out of this config.

MacMini-HighEnd.png
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
I think it's a matter of preference. I personally really dislike the Windows approach to DPI scaling: it works fine for newer apps that are written to support it, but for a wide range of utilities, older apps, windowed games, etc. you get an unpleasant experience with all sorts of blurry windows and scaling issues. The macOS approach of "always 2x scaling" feels a lot less clunky to me in practice.
Oh I agree with this. Windows is TERRIBLE with this DPI issue. I got rid of my 27" 4K monitor due to how Windows handled DPI scaling.
 

johngordon

macrumors 68000
Apr 19, 2004
1,734
961
I do think apple will make a bigger size iMac for consumers and not just keep that size screens for just pros and I would like to see the air dropped from MacBook Air and jus call in MacBook and offer it in the same size as the pro laptops and let this how need a pro machine get and let us consumer have the same size laptops offers to us consumers as the pros are getting

It all seems a bit ambiguous - apparently Apple have confirmed that the 27" iMac is 'end of life'. But that could be in reference to that design. So the old design 21.5" reached end of life when the new ones came out. So who knows - maybe something will appear at some point.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
Yeah, that's what I was talking about regarding growing pains: from my understanding, the issue is that there are a lot of subtle ways monitors deviate from the specific HDMI/DisplayPort spec and that the M1 has trouble dealing with that, given it's the first time Apple's been responsible for that piece of the puzzle themselves.

I haven't tested my 14" MBP much with external monitors (my few brief experiences have been fine), but have people reported improvement with the M1 Pro/Max chips? I'd imagine that the display management hardware would have changed from the base M1 given their major differences in multi-monitor support.
I have personally never experienced issues with multiple monitors on any of my M1. I no longer have an M1 Macbook Air, but my base M1 Mac mini with the 16GB RAM option, and two LG monitors (gaming monitors) run just fine, even with the high refresh rates!
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
8,142
7,120
I think what they meant is that many people would like to be able to get the 16Gb M1-Pro, which would be a lot cheaper, in a Mac mini or Mac Studio.
They said "High end Mac mini" They should clarify because to me what I sent is the highest end Mac mini but I would not classify it as "high end" Intel graphics are HORRIBLE!
 

BigSplash

macrumors member
Jun 4, 2009
40
23
Durham, NC
The question remains - what is taking so long to release the 27" iMac? I assume it has to do with supply chain and more specifically, the 27" mini LED screen that is expected to be part of the new 27" iMac with Apple silicon.
Taking a chainsaw to the 27" iMac simplifies their supply chain logistics.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.