I love the 27" iMac. It should not come back.

[mecloud]

I'm still having a hard time deciding what to do for my wife when her 2020 i7 5K iMac (maxed with 128GB RAM) finally dies. It's been a real workhorse but also randomly reboots once or twice a day when she's working it hard. I haven't been able to figure out a common cause, the crash logs tell a different story each time about what was in memory/what it was doing when it crashed, so it doesn't seem to be one particular program.

She's started using her 16" MBP M1 Pro more and more, so I think the eventual solution would be to get her a dock and a Studio Display or maybe the LG to save some money. Someone still needs to come out with a more affordable plain 5K monitor with no webcam, speakers, or other misc junk to drive up the price.

It’s possible that dust is causing issues. Those later-generation Intel iMacs ran really hot under load, and IMO the ventilation was never optimal for “heavy workload” type uses.

The original 1998 iMac was, in the parlance of that time, more or less a “thin client” type computer. I think Apple has gone back to that approach to the iMac, and Apple going back to the color schemes tells me as much.

 

[nathansz]

I'm still having a hard time deciding what to do for my wife when her 2020 i7 5K iMac (maxed with 128GB RAM) finally dies. It's been a real workhorse but also randomly reboots once or twice a day when she's working it hard. I haven't been able to figure out a common cause, the crash logs tell a different story each time about what was in memory/what it was doing when it crashed, so it doesn't seem to be one particular program.

She's started using her 16" MBP M1 Pro more and more, so I think the eventual solution would be to get her a dock and a Studio Display or maybe the LG to save some money. Someone still needs to come out with a more affordable plain 5K monitor with no webcam, speakers, or other misc junk to drive up the price.

a 2020 iMac is not going to die anytime soon

Should be physically good for another 10 years at least

If you can’t troubleshoot the software issue have you tried reinstalling the os?

 

[nathansz]

It’s possible that dust is causing issues.

Seems unlikely that dust is causing constant reboots (probably kernel panics) almost certainly a software issue of some kind.

Unless it’s reading extremely high cpu temps, which would be simple enough to rule out

more or less a “thin client” type computer. I think Apple has gone back to that approach to the iMac

Very well said. Absolutely agree

 

[Warped9]

I often get people coming into the store looking for a given particular thing. When they can’t find it on their own they ask for help and begin describing what they’re looking for in ever more specific detail, even after I’ve already informed them I understand what they’re looking for, but we don’t have it.

Enough of them start getting frustrated and keep trying to describe what they’re after in different ways as if they think that will get them a different response, no matter how often I tell them I understand, we don’t carry it anymore or we have never had it.

Many of them finally resort to the same exclamation, “Well, you used to have it!”

Yeah, we used to have it, but not anymore and not for years.

Some of them even get upset as if they think I’m stupid and simply don’t understand what they want. This happened again recently with two different customers this past week.

Sometimes I want to tell them, “Yes, sir/madam, we do indeed have it in the back room, but our manager told me not to let you have it because they know you’re a pain.”

 

[Arak]

Try to spot the mess of cables!

Everyone is free to accept your solution as satisfying. We don't as in our eyes it is moving the cable-mass under carpet. In our environment cable-mess is accepted neither on desk, no behind, nor below it, not under carpet. We don't accept it in our environment as in our eyes by this the bug didn't get fixed, it got just worked around. Our environment accepts workarounds only if not other ways are not feasible.

 

[Zest28]

You’re pointing out people’s obsession with the 27" while you’re obsessing about the 24” model being perfect and one size fits all. Maybe perfect for you but not for others.

In my opinion and from reading comments I find that people in general want choice something like 24” and 27” to choose from. They don’t ask Apple to discontinue the 24 and replace it with 27 the way OP is hoping 27” iMac would never come back. I’m sure a 27” iMac would be cheaper and less cumbersome than combining Studio Display and a Mac Mini on a desk.

People want choice.

Apple has all the sales data, so Apple knows exactly what people want. The 21.5" and 27" iMac simply didn't sell that well and Apple simplified into 1 model, which is the 24" iMac.

Apple introduced a new size for the MacBook Air, because the MacBook Air is Apple their best selling Mac. So there you have it.

And no, a 27" iMac is more cumbersome than the Apple Studio Display + MacBook Air / MacBook Pro / Mac Mini / Mac Studio / Mac Pro. Having a high-end display tied to a computer that you have to sell in a 1-2 year time window is a huge risk for Apple.

The Apple Studio Display, you can sell it for every Mac computer (including their laptop range). It's much less risk for Apple.

 

[nathansz]

Apple has all the sales data, so Apple knows exactly what people want. The 21.5" and 27" iMac simply didn't sell that well and Apple simplified into 1 model, which is the 24" iMac.

You are assuming that companies prioritize what sells the most by volume rather than what is most profitable.

The are not interested in what people want, but rather what makes them the most profit.

 

[Zest28]

You are assuming that companies prioritize what sells the most by volume rather than what is most profitable.

The are not interested in what people want, but rather what makes them the most profit.

That is not true. People asked for the 15" MacBook Air, and given that the 13" MacBook Air is selling so well, Apple decided to introduce a 15" MacBook Air.

If the iMac was selling as good like the MacBook Air, Apple would have likely introduced a 32" iMac on the side even.

 

[nathansz]

That is not true. People asked for the 15" MacBook Air, and given that the 13" MacBook Air is selling so well, Apple decided to introduce a 15" MacBook Air.

If the iMac was selling as good like the MacBook Air, Apple would have likely introduced a 32" iMac on the side even.

That’s all just speculation

 

[Zest28]

That’s all just speculation

The iPhone mini got killed due to poor sales. We have seen Apple do this. It's not speculation that Apple does look at the number of sales to discontinue a product.

 

[nathansz]

The iPhone mini got killed due to poor sales. We have seen Apple do this. It's not speculation that Apple does look at the number of sales to discontinue a product.

Poor sales can be a factor obviously, but it’s a little more nuanced than just volume of sales.

For example: if Apple believed that they could sell 13” MacBooks airs for a higher margin than 15” MacBook airs, and that x% of people will just buy a 13” if there is no 15” and that would lead to more profit than potential 15”, then there is no 15” MacBook Air

 

[bobcomer]

I don't regret getting my 2015 iMac in the least. I do regret Apple getting rid of and not having target display mode work. Then again, even if Apple eh could make it work how many people think Apple would make it work, lol.

I don't regret buying my 2020 27" iMac at all, it's still the best screen I have. It's not my main machine anymore, a Windows machine is, and I have a Mac Mini Pro too, then the iMac, but I use them all for different things.

 

[Zest28]

Poor sales can be a factor obviously, but it’s a little more nuanced than just volume of sales.

For example: if Apple believed that they could sell 13” MacBooks airs for a higher margin than 15” MacBook airs, and that x% of people will just buy a 13” if there is no 15” and that would lead to more profit than potential 15”, then there is no 15” MacBook Air

Apple is still selling the 3-year old 13" M1 MacBook Air. And this is despite newer 13" M2 MacBook Air and 15" M2 MacBook Air being sold aswell.

The 3-year 13" M1 2020 MacBook Air is enough proof that if there are enough sales, products remain to be sold.

 

[bobcomer]

The M3 iMac is better than many give it credit for. The base M3 with 16GB and it outperforms the best 2020 Intel iMac available as well as the M2 MacBook Pro.

Except that the screen is smaller and you can't get more than 24G of RAM, even if you need it. The intel iMac still beats it in those categories.

 

[Warped9]

Except that the screen is smaller and you can't get more than 24G of RAM, even if you need it. The intel iMac still beats it in those categories.

If you’re hung up on meaningless numbers. In overall performance the M3 iMac wins. In regard to display size, again, only if you’re hung up on it.

 

[bobcomer]

It’s possible that dust is causing issues. Those later-generation Intel iMacs ran really hot under load, and IMO the ventilation was never optimal for “heavy workload” type uses.

His iMac has an i7, and 27" iMacs with i7's don't really have a heat problem like the i9 ones do. I can run multiple VM's on my 2020 27" i7 iMac and I never even hear the fan, nor does it ever crash. Maybe if its got the fans blocked heat would be a problem...

 

[bobcomer]

The Apple Studio Display, you can sell it for every Mac computer (including their laptop range). It's much less risk for Apple.

And some wont buy it because it's not worth the cost to them. (like me, no monitor is worth that cost to me) So it's not all roses for Apple.

 

[bobcomer]

If you’re hung up on meaningless numbers.

It's not meaningless to me, I really do need more RAM for the work I do. I'd probably buy the new iMac if I could get it with at the least 32G, but it would be better with 64. The smallest machine I have is 32G and my iMac has 128G -- and I use it for that...

In overall performance the M3 iMac wins.

Not for me, RAM is a huge bottleneck.

In regard to display size, again, only if you’re hung up on it.

Actually I like 24" better than 27" believe it or not -- but others don't like it and I see their point. I don't do video stuff, so my screen needs are pretty basic.

 

[Student of Life]

Apple has all the sales data, so Apple knows exactly what people want. The 21.5" and 27" iMac simply didn't sell that well and Apple simplified into 1 model, which is the 24" iMac.

Apple introduced a new size for the MacBook Air, because the MacBook Air is Apple their best selling Mac. So there you have it.

And no, a 27" iMac is more cumbersome than the Apple Studio Display + MacBook Air / MacBook Pro / Mac Mini / Mac Studio / Mac Pro. Having a high-end display tied to a computer that you have to sell in a 1-2 year time window is a huge risk for Apple.

The Apple Studio Display, you can sell it for every Mac computer (including their laptop range). It's much less risk for Apple.

I dont know where to begin.

Let’s start out with the statement “high end display”. The Apple Studio Display has the same display that came with the 2014 IMac. The only difference is 100 nits which might just be a software implementation. In 2023 if one says high-end display at the bare bottom standards one would expect at least 120+ fps, you would expect HDR. This is after all something high-end. Its not. It’s just a 5k display, nothing wow or amazing over it. The simple notion that Apple is selling 2014 screen display as high end in 2023 is on the comical side.

Second, who sells an iMac after one or two years? iMac last a long time. On avg at least for me they have had over an 8 year lifespan. If one is selling an IMac after a year or two, they clearly got the wrong machine and need something stronger.

 

[IngerMan]

I went from 2007 20" iMac to a 2015 27". The experience of the fusion drive ruined it for me on the 2015 and I sold it after less than 4 years of use for a 2018mm. I still use the MM but my new favorite device is the iMac M3, 2nd to the 2007 20" C2D

 

[Bregalad]

For years we were told (or imagined we were being told) that Apple was paying an "Intel tax" and that moving to their own chips would provide greater value. The first M1 machines were aggressively priced. The MacBook line got faster and less expensive at the same time. So it was entirely reasonable to think that taking the $1000 Intel computer out of the $2000 iMac would yield a $1799 iMac with the same large screen and new high performance Apple silicon.

Instead Apple decided that the screen by itself should be $1699. That product and pricing is at the core of almost every complaint about the post-2020 lineup.

There isn't anything in the current Mac lineup offering remotely similar value to the 27" iMac. Even if you keep the Studio display for 10 years it's still dramatically more expensive to go Mini plus display than it was to buy 27" iMac.

At this point I'm so disappointed that I really don't know what to do. Mac Mini plus 4K display fits my budget, but I'd lose productivity moving to a smaller screen. Mini plus two 4K displays would improve productivity, but would leave no room for my printer or scanner. Luckily I don't have to make that choice this year.

 

[nateo200]

They just need to make one 25.5" iMac and call it a day. Compromise! /s. Jokes aside I don't see the point of making the iMac beefy. Just give it decent specs and call it a day. If you want performance you probably want more versatility and customization that having a dedicated seperate display and tower/box gives you.

 

[0339327]

?

Apple Mac revenue by quarter 2006-2024 | Statista

In the fourth quarter of Apple's 2024 fiscal year, sales of Apple Mac computers generated around 7.7billion U.S.

www.statista.com

I wasn’t referring to revenue.

I stated explicitly regarding Mac sales numbers.

 

[tothemoonsands]

Everyone is free to accept your solution as satisfying. We don't as in our eyes it is moving the cable-mass under carpet. In our environment cable-mess is accepted neither on desk, no behind, nor below it, not under carpet. We don't accept it in our environment as in our eyes by this the bug didn't get fixed, it got just worked around. Our environment accepts workarounds only if not other ways are not feasible.

I understand what you are saying, but cables are a fact of any electronic device. If you don’t want any cables, use a MacBook Pro.

For example, the intel iMac I replaced had many cables. Power cable (white stood out more than the Studio Display black braided), Ethernet, USB for keyboard/trackpad charging, USB for Bose speakers since the iMac speakers aren’t great, and more cables for various accessories.

By using a thunderbolt hub, you can reduce cables. And this applies to the new Studio Display setup as it does the old iMac.

Ultimately my point is: cables are a fact of life, even with iMac, unless you are not using ANY peripherals, and even then you’ve got a power cable. The paradigm has shifted, and it is better for the environment and one’s wallet. Displays do not share the same upgrade cycle as computers.

If you take the time to figure out how to manage cables, then it’s simply not an issue. Just takes some creativity and adaptability.

 

[Bregalad]

Ultimately my point is: cables are a fact of life, even with iMac, unless you are not using ANY peripherals, and even then you’ve got a power cable. The paradigm has simply shifted, and it is better for the environment and one’s wallet. Displays do not share the same upgrade cycle as computers.

The poster you replied to who refuses to have cables in their environment must be a corporate worker who isn't allowed personal devices and connects to servers and printers wirelessly. Personally I have power, Ethernet, headphones, 2x USB C, 3x USB 3.1 attached to my iMac. There are a myriad of other USB cables nearby that I swap around on the 4th port (USB 2, mini, micro, 3.0, micro 3.0, Lightning)

Displays should last far longer than the computer they are attached to. Should.

I have a spreadsheet showing the specifications of all 12 Macs that I've owned. One of the columns shows physical size, type and maximum resolution of the display or displays that I used with it. I was shocked to discover that there were 12 different displays listed.

So while the upgrade cycles rarely matched (except in the case of iMacs), I've owned exactly the same number of displays and Macs.

I don't expect that to change. Because the Studio Display is so expensive, my next Mac is likely to be a Mini connected to a pair of 4K displays. If that comes true I'll actually have purchased more displays than Macs and they'll need to survive 3 generations of Mac to finally tip the scale the other way.