I currently have an early 2019 27” fusion mic and have a new iMac on order - but with a delay in delivering has given me time to think more.
As with most of this thread, I am concerned about dropping from 27” to 24” and have been looking at other options. I get keen on 3rd party (to Apple) monitor and then read a review to find I'm not going to like it. I have a list. Consensus seems to be the Studio Display is the best option. But expensive. This isn’t the bit that gives me a doubt.
I don't understand why Apple limit the CPU to the M4, albeit two options. Why not a pro choice? Why do Apple want to force me into moving from iMac to mac Mini if I think I'd benefit from a bit more cpu power? If a laptop can take an M4 pro / ultra why not an iMac?
Given a choice I'd love an iMac with M4 pro and a 27" screen. Why does it have to be so difficult else so expensive?
Apple has clearly went in this direction with its Macs - base, “prosumer”, pro
With laptops, the base is the MacBook Air, with the MacBook pro filling the prosumer and pro gaps
With desktops - Apple is saying the iMac is the base, the Mac Mini can fit the base, to prosumer gaps, Mac Studio is prosumer to pro, and Mac Pro is Pro. There are a lot of options
Relative to pre Apple silicon, remember that the Mac Studio and Mac Mini are effectively new products. Apple has replaced the 27” IMac and the iMac Pro with Mac Minis and Mac Studios.
Is this the right choice? I was surprised Apple updated the iMac colors, updated the camera, added a nano texture option to the 24” iMac. It seems to me the product must be selling well enough for Apple to keep iterating and updating. They also have made what appears to be an excellent new Mac Mini. So given that - is a 27” IMac with an m4 Pro option really necessary?