Why do you need to disable 10Gb Ethernet? It ought to just throttle down to whatever your network supports without you needing to disable higher speeds, no?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Who else is holding out for a new 27 inch iMac?
- Thread starter Black Diesel
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, except for the "I have money burning a hole in my pocket" part, we are all waiting for the large iMac. 😆
I think I have met the end of the line with my late 24" iMac i5. Crashing and slowdown even with replacing the Fusion Drive with SSD has me ready to upgrade now. For me, the new Mac Mini m2 Pro + studio display is as close to an iMac it looks like we will get for some time to come (if ever). Especially with Apple comparing the new Mac Mini to the 27" iMacs on their site.
The new Mac mini M2 pro allows you to use HDMI 2.1 and get up to 240hz at 4k on a single monitor. That is significantly better than the 60hz we’re used to with iMacs.
So you could get the M2 pro and pair it with several great, new OLED monitors, which look amazing. Or even use an LG C2 42-inch which is 4k and 120hz. And many new OLED and QD-OLED monitors are coming. Or, get a mini-LED if you prefer, pricey but some good choices there too.
The mini is so small, you could Velcro the thing to your monitor and call it an all-in-one, or put it anywhere and not have to care about it.
Given this significantly increased performance and flexibility, do some of you no longer care about waiting for the 27-inch iMac?
So you could get the M2 pro and pair it with several great, new OLED monitors, which look amazing. Or even use an LG C2 42-inch which is 4k and 120hz. And many new OLED and QD-OLED monitors are coming. Or, get a mini-LED if you prefer, pricey but some good choices there too.
The mini is so small, you could Velcro the thing to your monitor and call it an all-in-one, or put it anywhere and not have to care about it.
Given this significantly increased performance and flexibility, do some of you no longer care about waiting for the 27-inch iMac?
I've been using a 27" iMac, 2011 Quad-Core, i7, 32GB RAM,2TB SSD,Last DVD/CD Drive Model, Refurbished for Apple in 2013. Although I have been happy with the overall speed, I had graphics Card issues, and haven't been able to upgrade past El Capitan, sometimes not being able to even open popular webpages. Apple has hung us out to Dryad we still don't know if Apple is going to bring the 27" 5K iMac back, and I don't want Separates, preferring the 5K Nano-Textured 27" 5K Screen, instead of the 24" M-Series iMac. I just Jumped off the Cliff, and bought a 5K, Nano-Texture Screen, 16GB XT Graphics card, 8 TB SSD,Upgradeable RAM, 3.6 Ghz i9, 10-Core Intel Processor, and I Love it! The Screen is Accurate, Low-Glare and Superb, the Speed is awesome, and for 3 years I'll have Apple Care Plus, so I no longer have to worry about what Apple is going to do, and i won't be forced to buy what I don't want. I have been patient, Apple disregarded the Graphics-Issues on it's former Top-of-the-Line 17" Mac Book Pros, 27" iMacs with Retina Displays, and now won't even tell its Customers if the iMac 27" its even going to be replaced. i solved My Own problem, and if I wasn't loyal, I would have jumped to another Computer maker.
Thats great.
Horses for courses as they say.
If the screen size and all-in-one form factor are critical things for you then you've done the best you can - holding out for a non existent M based larger screen iMac is not the way to go anymore - its been 2 years after all.
My only concern, and it's the reason why I personally "lowered" myself (but haven't looked back!) to the 24" iMac is that we are already seeing multiple functional features introduced in MacOS that are M only, and intel machines are being left behind. This is only going to get worse.... and intel based machines have a much shorter lifespan going forward than M ones do.
IMac Pro 27” is a product many can appreciate both at work and home. Gurman and others have made reference to this. Hopefully Tim Cook is on board.
iMac 27” is perfect for graphics, gaming , work and play. For Apple not to reinstate a 27”iMac Pro would be a major mistake for earnings, customer satisfaction. And Apple
iMac 27” is perfect for graphics, gaming , work and play. For Apple not to reinstate a 27”iMac Pro would be a major mistake for earnings, customer satisfaction. And Apple
No offence but I keep not really appreciating all the fuss thats continually being made about an extra 3" of screen.
I do understand that some people insist on the bigger/biggest screen experience for their desktop computing however apple and 3rd parties already provide solutions for that.
The problem is that, IF apple decide to do a bigger all-in-one machine - and thats a big IF as arguably the power of the minis and the studios in conjunction with the studio display (or 3rd party cheaper option) already cover those 'big screen' needs.
However, as I suspect some of the "big screen" guys are NOT the potential same audience as needing the power of the Studio... they really arent - they, for whatever their reasons, insist on a few more inches of screen - they probably just want to see more of their desktop wallpaper surrounding the already impractically too large safari window...
The issue will be... this imaginary 'big screen iMac' is going to be significantly more expensive with its own thermal challenges given the insistence it would-be the same thickness as the 24 inch model and will not be priced for, or aimed at, the domestic market. It's going to be priced in the thousands and will be out of the price bracket of most of the people who originally purchased a 27" iMac years ago. Back then it was £12-1400 for a 21" and £16-1800 for the 27". Remember this was a significant size difference (21 to 27) and not all that much more money but similar specs and processors etc - it really did just come down to a screen size pref AND the 21" was significantly "small". I can see why the 27 was the popular choice and I myself had 3 of them.
However, a "large screen" iMac now would be north of £2,000 guaranteed - and with power and processors that personally I, as a "non pro" simply would never need or get use out of so the extra money would be just for another 3" of screen which, frankly, is not worth worrying about or waiting years for them to release.
Good post! 👍
Like yourself I was looking forward to a new 27" around the time Apple Silicon was launched. Decided to sit tight and not get the new 24" M1 iMac, especially as I truly preferred the sound of the 2020 Intel 27" when comparing side by side in-store. And the last thing I was prepared to do was pay full retail for the 2020 model, so waited several months for a private sale of a 2020 'as new' 27" and found one at a superb bargain price.
Best decision ever! Unjustifiably it's quite unloved by many, but for the uninformed, in reality it's a wonderful, much underestimated iMac, and that superb screen and sound from the speakers never ceases to amaze me and gives great pleasure for my workflow.
With this Mac in daily use, I certainly won't rush into the purchase of a renewed M? Silicon 27" (or larger) iMac Pro as soon as one is announced, but wait for the reviews, and if complimentary, many months later seek out an 'as-new' example at a less than eye-watering price. I'm probably in the minority, but can never understand those who want and order the newest products even before they've hit the stores.
Fwiw, many years ago my father said, "If you purchase an item on credit, in reality you can't afford it" I've never forgotten that, and with the exception of a property purchase, never bought any consumer item on credit. I must have saved thousands of pounds/francs/euros over the years by saving up weekly for a well-researched product and then paying in cash!
Last edited:
I'm very happy with the 24" iMac. At the same time I would like, well, more of it. I can get my work done on this, but I would love to be able to spread out a bit and have room for all the Creative Cloud control palettes AND see a lot of the document I'm working on. I'm also not quite ready to cram a second display onto my desk next to the iMac to get more room.
I would be very interested in a 27" iMac, though I do worry about the rumors it'll be a "pro" machine. The speed of the 24" is absolutely fine for me, but I just want more screen real estate. So, I'm hoping for a 27" 5K iMac with some reasonably priced configuration options.
If I can get an M2 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD I'll be quite happy with those specs. If one came out that only had a high-end display and Pro/Max/Extreme processors and cost $3K or higher, I'd be less happy.
This is exactly what I wanted to do when my 2014 iMac started getting old but instead of buying the newer 2020 iMac in March 22, I waited to see what was included in the keynote. Needless to say that’s when they pulled them from the Apple Store in favour of the studio and studio display so I lost out. Would’ve gone fully maxed out which would’ve seen me ok for years to come. I did try a couple of refurbished UNITS but they had a number of issues so I eventually but the bullet and settled for a Studio Max and ASD. I wish I could turn back time 😏
That extra 3" is negligible really in real usage - have you considered utilising multiple desktop spaces instead?
I went through this with the MacBook line - spending more on the bigger screen versions until I realised that using spaces was easier, and more efficient, and quite comfortable on the smallest screen. I have a space for safari, another for messaging, another for email, another for another multi-tabbed firefox....
Using the mac and a trackpad its so easy to switch rapidly between spaces and I just dont need the bigger screens anymore.
As mentioned earlier, simply observing Apple over the last few years it seems inevitable that IF they decide to do a 27" iMac - remembering that the difference between the old 21" and the old 27" was significant... yet the difference between the new 24" and a 27" is almost unnoticeable when you get used to it..... - it will certainly have the "pro" moniker and a price match and specs to match.
The reality right now.. and for the last 2 years (you have really been missing out if you are hanging on for something they havent and probably wont release!) is that 24" M1 iMac is a great machine and more than powerful enough for most people out there - and sure enough there will be an M2 version to replace the M1 and so on... but I dont see that 24" screen getting bigger for the "domestic" machine.
The difference is ~6 inches and $500. There's no reason to change the pricing or sizing.
30" for $1,799
30" for $1,799
You are kidding yourself if you think that apple will release a 30" screen iMac and charge an extra $500 for it.
Given their other 2 panels they sell are a 27" and a 32" monitor... the fictional "iMac Pro" would likely be one of those two sizes.
But $1,799..... I'll believe it when I see it!
1. My usage is quite "real" I assure you, and I could use more space. I owned a 27" iMac before this one, so I know quite well what each size is like to work with.
2. What is this "3 inches" figure you keep trotting out? The display area of the 24" screen is about 237 square inches, and the display are of the 27" screen is about 310 square inches. That's a 30% larger area -- and a difference of about 73 square inches. (For reference, that's about 80% of the area of a full sheet of letter sized paper.) Hardly negligable, is it?
And have you considered that swiping from one virtual desktop to the next constantly isn't at all a substitute for arranging things as needed on one screen?
Work however you want, my brother, but please spare everyone the lecture on what we "need" according to you.
Last edited:
The very first 14" CRT iMac (1998) cost $1,299 and the 24" M1 iMac (2021) is $1,299. Apple's pricing was incredibly consistent over two plus decades. Try to name an Apple Silicon Mac, who hasn't kept it's Intel counterpart price?
I’m starting to fear that it will be a very long time before a larger iMac returns. They seem to have repositioned the machine to take on a role similar to the original 1998 iMacs, not intended to be a major powerhouse pro machine like the iMac became during the Intel era.
The 27” was a great machine and one of my favorite computers ever, even keeping in mind the constraints in upgradability. I don’t quite understand why they outright killed it, as a staple product of theirs for a decade or more. Sure, the Mac Studio can fulfill the same role with a good screen, but some people want a desktop version of a high-end MBP, which is inherently an all-in-one device in its own right.
The 27” was a great machine and one of my favorite computers ever, even keeping in mind the constraints in upgradability. I don’t quite understand why they outright killed it, as a staple product of theirs for a decade or more. Sure, the Mac Studio can fulfill the same role with a good screen, but some people want a desktop version of a high-end MBP, which is inherently an all-in-one device in its own right.
Good advice, sorta. The problem is that when you pay in Cash you are subsidizing those who pay with a credit card. They are paying the same price, but with the fees that the seller pays the actual price that the seller gets is discounted by some percentage. Calculate how much you have spent in cash on purchases and calculate ~3% (?) of it. That's how much money you have lost.
The best policy is to charge the purchase to get the benefits the card offers. This can be be just a small percentage of the purchase, or can be in the thousands of dollars (a $10k first class overseas airline trip, in my case). Modifying your fathers advice you do need to have the money in hand so that you pay it off in full when the bill comes in. This can be up to 60 days later during which you could be collecting interest for the money in your account.
Totally agree. They released at least a couple Macs with M1 processors without redesigning them (Mac Mini, MacBook Air), and it really seems like that 5K iMac would have been a great candidate for that.
I'm not sure if you mean actual cash, or you just mean not pay any borrowing costs. Because paying with actual cash is a money loser. Better to pay by credit card, then immediately pay off, so you get the credit card points/cash.
Absolutely not! The big-black-bezels iMac screams for a redesign, with modern display technology that will last for the next decade. Nobody wants to pay $2000-$3000 anymore for 27-inch of empty trash. Even the M1 Mac mini is mostly air inside. This tiny logic board in the shell of a large iMac would look ridiculous.