Just wanted to point out that while any setup can obviously be changed, it is an assumption to say that it can be improved in any meaningful way. Sure, it’s completely possible that there is some good (and realistic) improvement or solution someone hasn’t thought of, but to assume that is the case without knowing the complete situation, that is by definition an assumption. And I am making an assumption too that by “improve” we are all talking about the same thing—meaningful improvements—because if not, then by definition that’s not much help.
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.
Will there ever be a new large iMac (Pro)?
- Thread starter krazzix
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ok, lets be crazy here for a second and go wild. Light works the way it does and has rules - its that simple.
Lets just say that I work in a room that has windows on ALL SIDES and reflection is crazy and I want to change/improve the screen and get rid off the reflections etc. MIND you, I'm only talking about the screen situation. Not the other factors (for now).
How do I solve this in a crazy way? I get those expandable boards/blockers and I put them around the screen/table/my chair. Right there and then I have perfect lighting conditions for my screen and my eyes and I can play with it the way I want.
Now, the problem is that maybe my room looks bad or its not practical or I just can't deal with this every time I go to "work". Fair enough and thats totally valid BUT it doesn't invalidate the fact that ANY lighting conditions can be changed. Its not assumption its pure physics.
Its only the balance between nice looking setup and ergonomics. Some environment are super challenging and some are super easy but the light follows the same rules.
Lets just say that I work in a room that has windows on ALL SIDES and reflection is crazy and I want to change/improve the screen and get rid off the reflections etc. MIND you, I'm only talking about the screen situation. Not the other factors (for now).
How do I solve this in a crazy way? I get those expandable boards/blockers and I put them around the screen/table/my chair. Right there and then I have perfect lighting conditions for my screen and my eyes and I can play with it the way I want.
Now, the problem is that maybe my room looks bad or its not practical or I just can't deal with this every time I go to "work". Fair enough and thats totally valid BUT it doesn't invalidate the fact that ANY lighting conditions can be changed. Its not assumption its pure physics.
Its only the balance between nice looking setup and ergonomics. Some environment are super challenging and some are super easy but the light follows the same rules.
Sure, we should all agree on the physics and basic logic. I thought when you said “any setup” we were taking the whole situation into consideration, including other needs besides reflectivity. But if not, then all is in agreement.
I'm utterly confused as to when we will see the iMac Pro this year. Ross Young is saying not this spring. So forget next month's event if true. He says panel shipments in June. So WWDC? With units shipping this summer as he recently suggested? Fall seems late and crowded.
Most likely WWDC is my guess. I would love to see it next month so I can decide between mini and iMac but I doubt we get both.
So my bet is on WWDC
So my bet is on WWDC
I think WWDC too.Most likely WWDC is my guess. I would love to see it next month so I can decide between mini and iMac but I doubt we get both.
So my bet is on WWDC
I really think we might get a display or two at the March event. It would make sense with the new Mac Mini Pro coming.
Oh, I would LOVE that. Apple display is what I really want. However, I doubt we will see it this early. The design language of the display would probably be similar to the new iMac and I don't see Apple releasing the display first.
However, you have no idea how much I would love to be wrong on this one. Mac Mini Pro + Apple display = dream
However, you have no idea how much I would love to be wrong on this one. Mac Mini Pro + Apple display = dream
I also think that we will see the iMac Pro at WWDC. That would also make sense because they could introduce the Jade 2C-Die SoC together with its use in the Mac Pro. I also think displays would go along great together with the iMac at WWDC.
I don't think we will see the displays in spring yet.
I suppose the spring event will consist of:
- iPhone SE
- Mac mini with M1 Pro/Max
- iPad Air
No additional Macs no displays.
I don't think we will see the displays in spring yet.
I suppose the spring event will consist of:
- iPhone SE
- Mac mini with M1 Pro/Max
- iPad Air
No additional Macs no displays.
Yes at this point I expect the iMac Pro and Mac Pro to be launched together at WWDC with iMac Pro maybe being available for order after the keynote.
Some have suggested Apple could launch a 27" iMac "non-Pro" at the 8 March event, but I personally am skeptical because it would have to be pretty de-contented compared to what the "iMac Pro" would have and that is going to confuse the hell out of the customer base and probably anger a lot of folks who would mistakenly presume that this base model was all there was going to be for the 27" form factor, not realizing a more powerful "iMac Pro" would be coming three months later.
Better to just wait three more months and launch the entire 27" product line in whatever forms it ends up as at WWDC.
Yes WWDC does make sense to me. I think they were going to do it in March but like Ross Young said it was delayed. So that delay will be WWDC. Fall just seems late to me plus the September event is always focused on the iPhone.Oh, I would LOVE that. Apple display is what I really want. However, I doubt we will see it this early. The design language of the display would probably be similar to the new iMac and I don't see Apple releasing the display first.
However, you have no idea how much I would love to be wrong on this one. Mac Mini Pro + Apple display = dream
I am skeptical too. I can only imagine a (non-Pro) 27" iMac in the future if the iMac Pro is going to be very expensive to start. Say $3,000. Even at $2,500 you can semi-justify the price increase from the standard ($1,800) 27" iMac starting point only because of what the iMac Pro will entail. However it still stinks if consumers who want a new 27" iMac have to shell out at least $2,500. It also would be very clunky to introduce a (non-Pro) 27" iMac in March and then the iMac Pro in June. Makes far more sense to unveil both at the same time, if there are two different models coming.
I only would entertain the idea of a new Apple display for myself if it had a nano-texture option. I am confident we will see new displays by WWDC at the latest.
If it's a legit iMac Pro replacement, wouldn't the maxed out model be some where around 5 to 6K? I can't remember exactly where the previous one landed. I mean I'm probably going to max it out as well sans SSD, so I'm hoping from somewhere around 4 to 5K for myself.
It's an interesting question to ponder about whether there would be a non-pro 27" model. Considering the potential discrepancy in price from the base 24 to the base 27 pro I suppose that could be a thing.
It's an interesting question to ponder about whether there would be a non-pro 27" model. Considering the potential discrepancy in price from the base 24 to the base 27 pro I suppose that could be a thing.
Probably - figure upwards of $700 for an M1 Max 10/32 (and maybe upwards of double that for a "Max-Duo"), $400 to go to 64GB (on top of the Max upgrade price), $2400 for 8TB and $300 for Nano texture glass. That is $3800 over whatever the base model will cost.
You can spend up to $8600 to configure the current 27" iMac (Core-i9 / 128GB / 8TB SSD / 5700XT / Nano glass / 10GB Ethernet).
The 2019 refresh iMac Pro maxed out at $15,699.
I don't see why Apple should release a fast computer (Mac Mini M1 max) without offerinig their buyers an adequate but affordable monitor.
I also do not understand why Apple did not yet release a new iMac 27 5k M1(pro/max) version, with standard screen (not mini LED), it just takes too long for such an important computer. If I could hook a MacBook pro M1pro/max to my older iMac as an external monitor, no problem, that would be ideal, but obviously that is not possible.
I also hope that Apple come to their minds and release a large iMac that continues the clear and beautiful design language. The iMac 24" M1 just doesn't look good to me. The glossy front surface, the lack of an Apple symbol, too thin to even hold a USB plug - why? - it all doesn't look right to me.
I also do not understand why Apple did not yet release a new iMac 27 5k M1(pro/max) version, with standard screen (not mini LED), it just takes too long for such an important computer. If I could hook a MacBook pro M1pro/max to my older iMac as an external monitor, no problem, that would be ideal, but obviously that is not possible.
I also hope that Apple come to their minds and release a large iMac that continues the clear and beautiful design language. The iMac 24" M1 just doesn't look good to me. The glossy front surface, the lack of an Apple symbol, too thin to even hold a USB plug - why? - it all doesn't look right to me.
Apple monitors were a cut above the realistically priced competition at the time. That will be much harder now as there are a lot of very good options in the price range Apple would charge. However, they all seem to go for similar specs. 16:9 and 4K are common. Apple could serve the underserved higher resolutions, keeping the iMac 27" pixel density at that size or larger. It would be nice to see some squarer aspect ratios, such as the 16:10 of the MacBooks. Huawei do a very nice 28" 3:2 monitor, but the resolution isn't high enough for match an iMac.
We probably would have the new larger iMacs already if it wasn't for the worldwide component shortages. I doubt it is a wait for the miniLED screen, although I would rather the iMac didn't have one anyway.
Its been a real shame Apple haven't had a branded screen for so long now. I do wonder if they just think that LG are their partner and they do them "well enough" so that's done them. By all accounts they are working on a new monitor, but seems like its about 5 years too late!
I saw a Tim Cook tweet about how users are enjoying the new MBPs and they had someone running three large screens, all non-Apple ones, so I'm sure they're aware of how it looks.
I really don't know what the 27" iMac is going to be. I'd kind of like to see a 27" version of the 24" and then maybe a 30-32" iMac Pro with a mini-LED screen and all the chip & RAM options, but who knows what they'll do.
I'll be a bit disappointed if the new iMac Pro is only a 27" screen though. Seems strange after they increased the size of the 21.5".
That is 14,745 pixels per zone, which is my problem with it. When doing graphics, things such as gradients could be messed up where they cross zones, but I won't know exactly where the zone borders are.
Max Tech on YouTube is really trying to push this idea of a (non-Pro) iMac coming next month.
I just think that makes no sense UNLESS the iMac Pro starts at say $3,000. Otherwise you release a (non-Pro) iMac at ~$2,000 next month and then an iMac Pro at $2,500 in June? No way. $500 isn't chump change but you are just gonna anger a lot of buyers of the (non-Pro) iMac in that scenario.
I believe Ross Young is absolutely correct with the iMac Pro coming at WWDC. So that means we either get that model as the only 27" iMac model, starting at ~$2,500. OR, we do get that (non-Pro) iMac either in March or WWDC at ~$2,000 and then the iMac Pro starting at ~$3,000. I don't think any other scenario for the model makes sense.
I just think that makes no sense UNLESS the iMac Pro starts at say $3,000. Otherwise you release a (non-Pro) iMac at ~$2,000 next month and then an iMac Pro at $2,500 in June? No way. $500 isn't chump change but you are just gonna anger a lot of buyers of the (non-Pro) iMac in that scenario.
I believe Ross Young is absolutely correct with the iMac Pro coming at WWDC. So that means we either get that model as the only 27" iMac model, starting at ~$2,500. OR, we do get that (non-Pro) iMac either in March or WWDC at ~$2,000 and then the iMac Pro starting at ~$3,000. I don't think any other scenario for the model makes sense.
I don't believe that there will be a non pro 27" iMac. We are getting an iMac Pro sometime this year and of course the price will be higher than the price of the 24" iMac. I guess it will start around 2700$ for the base model..Of course this is just a speculation, but it seems to me a logical one.
Yeah, I saw their latest video. But I think another scenario he proposed there makes more sense to match those model numbers. One is the M2 MacBook Pro and the other two are the Mac minis. It makes sense to put the entry level Mac mini also in the newer chassis and to put the M2 in it while they're releasing it also in the MacBook Pro.
But I'm not really sure about the M2 at all. Somehow it doesn't really make sense to me to see it so early while Apple has still to release several M1 models. Otherwise it is completely normal to have your top line of chips lacking behind a bit. Intel does the same with its Xeons.
Anyway it still doesn't make sense to me to see an 27" iMac now and a more Pro one in June. I'm waiting for an 27" iMac with pro specs and I would be confused: Should I buy it? Is this the "real" iMac Pro? Should I wait? What if I wait and there wont be an iMac Pro at WWDC should I wait even longer...bssss!?!? It would be confusing.
That's what I was wondering, if they see the M1/M2 as a "non-Pro" chip, they could keep those in the normal iMac and then there's a Pro line with the MBP SOCs.
Will they just make the Pro and Max chips available in both sizes of iMacs?
I guess it maybe depends on who normally buys the 27" model of iMac? I don't know what the split is between the two sizes of iMacs in terms of sales, so who knows. There does seem to be a few different potential combinations of internals, screen tech etc.
I do think they'll get the M2 out there as soon as they can though - now that they control everything, its easy enough for them to put new chips in to machines when they're ready and why make an M1 and an M2 at the same time, just switch over to the new one when its ready.
Will they just make the Pro and Max chips available in both sizes of iMacs?
I guess it maybe depends on who normally buys the 27" model of iMac? I don't know what the split is between the two sizes of iMacs in terms of sales, so who knows. There does seem to be a few different potential combinations of internals, screen tech etc.
I do think they'll get the M2 out there as soon as they can though - now that they control everything, its easy enough for them to put new chips in to machines when they're ready and why make an M1 and an M2 at the same time, just switch over to the new one when its ready.
Yeah it's very inelegant to do that. Might as well unveil the (non-Pro) iMac alongside the iMac Pro in June if that were the case. No reason to rush it out 3 months earlier and create confusion among your audience.
My guess is that there are 3 Macs coming in March: two Mac Mini's (M2 update and the new Mac Mini Pro model) and an M2 13" MBP. I also believe we will see new displays at the March event. Ties in perfectly with the new Mac Mini's.
iMac Pro will be the star of WWDC.
I think you are right. Only the display part I'm not so sure about. If a display announcement was imminent wouldn't Ross Young have heard of it while tracking the iMac with the same panel?