iMac 27”

[zarmanto]

I suggest get a 2020 iMac or possibly a 2019 iMac. Previous models had various issues. The 2020 is the ultimate refinement of the 27" iMac.
...
Add your own RAM, preferably 32GB, it is cheap.

... we decided to go for the fully loaded 2020 iMac ...
... The RAM (memory) can always be upgraded separately later. ...

Recognizing that the 2020 does have one peculiar issue of its own, (as noted by wilberforce and others previously) in that the speed of the RAM can be adversely affected if you install dissimilar DIMMs. For contrast: my own 2019 iMac still has the original two 4GB DIMMs that it came with installed alongside two 16GB DIMMs that I purchased aftermarket, for a total of 40GB -- and I did exactly the same thing previously in a 2012 iMac; in both cases, the computers took full advantage of that RAM with no issues.

However, if you do that with a 2020 iMac, performance can apparently be degraded. The preferred approach when upgrading the 2020 is to remove the OEM RAM and install four identical DIMMs.

 

[pshufd]

Microcenter has the 2020 iMac 27 new in stock for $999.99. It comes with a 1 year warranty. I'm not sure whether it's AppleCare or not. The only caveat is that you have to buy it at the store.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Much good advice in this thread. Building on Fishrrmans in #13, I also strongly suggest going the separates route. It's basically over for Intel Macs. I don't expect more than maybe one more round of macOS updates- if that- and then it will be left behind... much like PowerPC in the prior Mac transition. Once Apple bails on Intel, usefulness will fall off quickly... even in the 2020.

To Fisherman's #1 & #2 suggestions, I'll add #3: Samsung Viewfinity S9 currently priced about about 35% BELOW ASD and up to as much as about 50% when you choose a stand option with ASD. Like ASD it is also 5K retina and also 27". Unlike ASD, it has a superior (and removable) camera and more ports (including TWO video import ports). Pair that $999 price with a good Mac mini and you can basically pay about the same as the old "Starting at..." price for an iMac 27" for brand new tech... likely to be good for upwards of 6-7 years before being vintaged and then maybe another 2 or so after that.

Just in case this turns out to NOT be your "last desktop", embracing separates makes your NEXT purchase not be like the current one: where you have to toss a perfectly good monitor, etc because the tech guts became obsolete. Instead, add a 2030 or so Mac Mini and squeeze a few more years out of the monitor with your next, NEXT desktop.

And if the needs are basic (browsing, email, office apps, etc), you could re-create the 27" experience with some minimal spending in a basic Mini + pretty good 4K monitor at 27" or larger, probably spending less than $1K for the whole setup. If you still want an Apple iMac "bigger" in a few years and one actually shows up, you won't have much in this stopgap purchase and can probably resell both to recoup some of the money spent too.

 

[HDFan]

Core i9 processor is for future-proofing,

It's basically over for Intel Macs.

future-proofing ?

 

[Andrey84]

future-proofing ?

By my rough estimation at least 70% of all Macs used by people right now are Intel-based. I don't think people suddenly rushed and sold all their Macs to go for Apple Silicon.
Users on these forums are very advanced and hardware-aware, which creates a certain narrative. The reality is different, though.

The 2020 iMac has been sold until March 2022, so there is a legal obligation on Apple to fully support it until 2027.
Future-proofing is meant for 5-7 years, not for 10+ years, of course.

OP deliberately said she is 65 y.o., doesn't want a smaller screen, doesn't want to spend too much money.
Do you think buying an Apple Silicon system with a new external monitor for at least $1,000 more in total is a sound advice, considering these requirements?

 

[Nguyen Duc Hieu]

We are rowing in the same Navy. I'm shopping for what may be my last computer (at least desktop), I don't want to be on a train where I buy a new computer every few years. My current Macs are old (as am I), and I just want a machine that will last me 10+ years.

I'm just sort of doubting now that the current hardware offerings are going to have the longevity of those from the 2000's.

I'm not expecting a radical increase in hardware failure rates (and fears of SSD wear are overstated, IMO.)

The problem is now one of software planned obsolescence.

All major players are pushing towards eternal subscription models for software. As was noted in another thread, just yesterday I discovered Prime Video refuses to play on my old iMac (regardless of browser.) Other software has long moved away from purchase possibilities (and Adobe is full on with the subscription model now.)

And while pairing a Mac Mini to a non-Apple display seems like a money saver, the never-ending threads of monitor-flicker problems, monitor USB hub problems, etc. tells me that is a path I may not want to follow.

I may just buy a 24" iMac and live with the screen size. 24" isn't bad for me, but I'd prefer a different aspect ratio than 16:9 as I do a lot of document work. 16:10 is much better IMO, and 4:3 better yet for some uses. But third party monitors in those aspect ratios tend to be 1080p at best, something that current macOS does not really appreciate.

How about 3:2 aspect ratio?
28 in
4.5k resolution with USB-C port.
Nearly a perfect match for an iPad M1.

 

[zarmanto]

... Do you think buying an Apple Silicon system with a new external monitor for at least $1,000 more in total is a sound advice, considering these requirements?

While I agree with the rest of your post in principle, I would quibble with this concluding question as a somewhat misleading comparison. As I stated in my earlier comment (and as others have echoed to some degree in their comments), Suzzzabelle wouldn't necessarily need to spend "at least $1,000 more" in order to meet her needs with a Silicon Mac. Here are some examples (with real numbers), for comparison purposes:

• 2020 27" 5K iMac w/3.6GHz i9 on eBay (one recently completed auction) - $1,164.99

vs.

• M2 Mac Mini on Apple.com - $599
• 27" 4K Dell Monitor on Amazon.com - $329.99
• Total: $928.99

That particular eBay listing included a keyboard and mouse, but the Mini/4K Monitor combo saves her a few dollars which she could either spend on a new keyboard and mouse or pocket, opting to use her existing keyboard and mouse. And according to various reports, (one example) even that lowly M2 Mini compares extremely favorably against the processors that Apple used in their last generation of IntelMacs, especially in single-threaded operations.

So, I would opine that choosing between Intel and Silicon is by no means as straightforward a decision as your question seems to suggest.

That said: Suzzzabelle made it quite clear in her responses that she's actually less concerned about the price, and that what she's really hoping for is the rumored 32+" iMac that may or may not come out next year. Only time will tell if that desire can be fulfilled.

 

[Andrey84]

While I agree with the rest of your post in principle, I would quibble with this concluding question as a somewhat misleading comparison. As I stated in my earlier comment (and as others have echoed to some degree in their comments), Suzzzabelle wouldn't necessarily need to spend "at least $1,000 more" in order to meet her needs with a Silicon Mac. Here are some examples (with real numbers), for comparison purposes:

• 2020 27" 5K iMac w/3.6GHz i9 on eBay (one recently completed auction) - $1,164.99

vs.

• M2 Mac Mini on Apple.com - $599
• 27" 4K Dell Monitor on Amazon.com - $329.99
• Total: $928.99

That particular eBay listing included a keyboard and mouse, but the Mini/4K Monitor combo saves her a few dollars which she could either spend on a new keyboard and mouse or pocket, opting to use her existing keyboard and mouse. And according to various reports, (one example) even that lowly M2 Mini compares extremely favorably against the processors that Apple used in their last generation of IntelMacs, especially in single-threaded operations.

So, I would opine that choosing between Intel and Silicon is by no means as straightforward a decision as your question seems to suggest.

That said: Suzzzabelle made it quite clear in her responses that she's actually less concerned about the price, and that what she's really hoping for is the rumored 32+" iMac that may or may not come out next year. Only time will tell if that desire can be fulfilled.

That's cheaper, yes. I didn't realize it's that cheap.

It's a massive downgrade of the monitor. With a 4K monitor you will have everything slightly off and grainy, as Mac OS only likes certain resolutions, and you will lose 20% of the real estate. However, coming from a 2013 non-retina iMac, it might actually be fine.

$599 is the 8/256 version, which I cannot recommend to anyone looking to keep the computer for more than 5 years.

Apart from that, @Suzzzabelle, you should go for this setup above, really. Just get 16GB of unified memory and a larger SSD, if the latter is needed (you can always but a cheap external drive later), for the M2 Mac Mini.

M2 Mac Mini + an external monitor is not just a temporary solution, but something that will last for 10 years.

I can guarantee there is no new iMac coming in 2025, or ever. We waited for the design refresh every year since 2019, when the 2014 design became 5 years old. The refresh never came. With the release of Mac Studio + Studio display, it's clear that there will be no new large iMac.

 

[zarmanto]

It's a massive downgrade of the monitor. With a 4K monitor you will have everything slightly off and grainy, as Mac OS only likes certain resolutions...

I agree with the RAM suggestion; that's a perfectly reasonable splurge, particularly since you can't upgrade RAM in Apple's current product lineup, post purchase.

But I'm going to once again quibble with your characterization of the 4K monitor herein: I have the predecessor to the monitor that I linked above, sitting literally right next to my 2019 5K iMac. To my eyes, that 4K display is actually extremely good and certainly meets my own needs quite decently. I would even go so far as to suggest that most people probably wouldn't notice the difference between the two -- unless they happen to work in computer graphics for a living. (As you alluded earlier, much of the MacRumors crowd consists of a somewhat self-selected group of like-minded Apple aficionados, and likely includes a slightly higher percentage of just such individuals.)

 

[picpicmac]

Nearly a perfect match for an iPad M1.

Yes... but I have Mac software that I want to use... and they can't be used on an iPad.

There are people who have transitioned from Macs to all-iPad systems, with a monitor (ASD) added for some uses. But their uses tend to be iPad-ily friendly, like video editing.

I use software that are definitely made for a keyboard/mouse paradigm, and are not fully functional on an iPad.

 

[picpicmac]

I have the predecessor to the monitor that I linked above, sitting literally right next to my 2019 5K iMac.

Do you have that monitor attached to a Mini? And if so, do you have any flicker problems? In the various flicker threads on the internet (including here), Dell monitors have been in the flicker-camp for the Apple Silicon Macs.

(As you alluded earlier, much of the MacRumors crowd consists of a somewhat self-selected group of like-minded Apple aficionados, and likely includes a slightly higher percentage of just such individuals.)

See my signature line .

 

[zarmanto]

Do you have that monitor attached to a Mini? And if so, do you have any flicker problems? In the various flicker threads on the internet (including here), Dell monitors have been in the flicker-camp for the Apple Silicon Macs.

No; actually, I have it KVMed to the 5K iMac and to a Windows gaming laptop which flanks it on the other side -- when that laptop isn't off with me wherever I've gone. To me, the most pertinent comparison has always been how it performs when connected to that iMac; I'm afraid I don't yet have any Silicon Macs with which to evaluate your assertion.

MacRumors forum posters are abnormal.

Hey! I resemble that remark!

 

[pshufd]

While I agree with the rest of your post in principle, I would quibble with this concluding question as a somewhat misleading comparison. As I stated in my earlier comment (and as others have echoed to some degree in their comments), Suzzzabelle wouldn't necessarily need to spend "at least $1,000 more" in order to meet her needs with a Silicon Mac. Here are some examples (with real numbers), for comparison purposes:

• 2020 27" 5K iMac w/3.6GHz i9 on eBay (one recently completed auction) - $1,164.99

vs.

• M2 Mac Mini on Apple.com - $599
• 27" 4K Dell Monitor on Amazon.com - $329.99
• Total: $928.99

That particular eBay listing included a keyboard and mouse, but the Mini/4K Monitor combo saves her a few dollars which she could either spend on a new keyboard and mouse or pocket, opting to use her existing keyboard and mouse. And according to various reports, (one example) even that lowly M2 Mini compares extremely favorably against the processors that Apple used in their last generation of IntelMacs, especially in single-threaded operations.

So, I would opine that choosing between Intel and Silicon is by no means as straightforward a decision as your question seems to suggest.

That said: Suzzzabelle made it quite clear in her responses that she's actually less concerned about the price, and that what she's really hoping for is the rumored 32+" iMac that may or may not come out next year. Only time will tell if that desire can be fulfilled.

At least get the Dell Ultrasharp 27 inch 4k. Even then it's not 5k.

I'm not a fan of their consumer monitors.

 

[pshufd]

I agree with the RAM suggestion; that's a perfectly reasonable splurge, particularly since you can't upgrade RAM in Apple's current product lineup, post purchase.

But I'm going to once again quibble with your characterization of the 4K monitor herein: I have the predecessor to the monitor that I linked above, sitting literally right next to my 2019 5K iMac. To my eyes, that 4K display is actually extremely good and certainly meets my own needs quite decently. I would even go so far as to suggest that most people probably wouldn't notice the difference between the two -- unless they happen to work in computer graphics for a living. (As you alluded earlier, much of the MacRumors crowd consists of a somewhat self-selected group of like-minded Apple aficionados, and likely includes a slightly higher percentage of just such individuals.)

I run the 4k 27 inch monitors at native resolution and at that level of detail, there is a difference between 4k and 5k besides just the aspect ratio.