4 ms·

I was hoping there would finally be an Apple Silicon 27" iMac. The last 27" model was in 2020, Intel, not sold on Apple's front-page anymore (but you can get C

I was hoping there would finally be an Apple Silicon 27" iMac. The last 27" model was in 2020, Intel, not sold on Apple's front-page anymore (but you can get Certified Refurbished).

AceJohnny2 3y ago
For how predominant the 27" iMacs seemed to be around me, I wonder if they've fallen by the wayside in Apple's product-share, and are replaced by Minis/Studios with a Studio Display?
- seec 3y ago
  I am fairly sure they sold them by the palet but it was most likely one of the lowest margin products they had if not the absolute lowest. They could not raise the price for historical reasons, so uncle Scrooge asked to sell small iMacs or Studio Displays that cost more than the base iMac used to cost, for a fat 50% margin.
jltsiren 3y ago
I think the larger iMac died, because Apple made different choices with displays than the rest of the market. Apple chose pixel density, while everyone else prioritized physical size and/or refresh rate. A 27" display used to be large, but then 32" displays and ultrawides became affordable. Now they can't get displays that simultaneously meet their requirements, are cheap enough for an iMac, and are competitive with what everyone else is offering.
- plorkyeran 3y ago
  5k 27" panels have only gotten cheaper since the first 5k 27" imac came out.
xuki 3y ago
Doesn't look like they're going to put out a 27-inch iMac any time soon, John Ternus said in the presentation the 24-inch iMac is a replacement for both 21-inch and 27-inch iMac https://youtu.be/ctkW3V0Mh-k?t=1582 https://youtu.be/ctkW3V0Mh-k?t=1582.
- tonyedgecombe 3y ago
  They would say that if that's all they have in the range right now. I think you can take that with a pinch of salt.
brundolf 3y ago
I think the Mac Studio replaced it, which makes sense- its target market is more likely to want to bring their own display
- yreg 3y ago
  > its target market is more likely I dont know about this part. Whoever wanted to BYOD has been using MacBook Pros. Vast majority of 27" iMac users seems to want to get another large iMac. And there aren't even great monitor choices. Studio display costs as much as a low end iMac used to cost. Samsung Ultrafine is horrible (if its even still produced). And other 3rd party monitors usually don't have 5k at 27".
  - macintux 3y ago
    > And there aren't even great monitor choices. Studio display costs as much as a low end iMac used to cost. Samsung Ultrafine is horrible (if its even still produced). And other 3rd party monitors usually don't have 5k at 27". I recall when the first modern iMac came out with a...25" display, I think? The joke at the time was that it was a monitor, and the computer came for free, because no one else was making a monitor of that size and quality, and the price seemed about right for a standalone display.
    - yreg 3y ago
      Well that joke has held, I have a 2019 one and a 5k monitor that nice was probably worth close to the price of the machine. I was sad that the target display mode went away, because I presumed that I would like to keep using the screen for longer than the computer.
      - AceJohnny2 3y ago
        RIP Target Display Mode. The hilarious thing is that the Studio Display is basically just a stealth Target Display Mode device, considering how it's running a trimmed down OS on a phone chip.

I was hoping there would finally be an Apple Silicon 27" iMac. The last 27" model was in 2020, Intel, not sold on Apple's front-page anymore (but you can get Certified Refurbished).

AceJohnny2 3y ago

For how predominant the 27" iMacs seemed to be around me, I wonder if they've fallen by the wayside in Apple's product-share, and are replaced by Minis/Studios with a Studio Display?

seec 3y ago
I am fairly sure they sold them by the palet but it was most likely one of the lowest margin products they had if not the absolute lowest. They could not raise the price for historical reasons, so uncle Scrooge asked to sell small iMacs or Studio Displays that cost more than the base iMac used to cost, for a fat 50% margin.

jltsiren 3y ago

I think the larger iMac died, because Apple made different choices with displays than the rest of the market. Apple chose pixel density, while everyone else prioritized physical size and/or refresh rate. A 27" display used to be large, but then 32" displays and ultrawides became affordable. Now they can't get displays that simultaneously meet their requirements, are cheap enough for an iMac, and are competitive with what everyone else is offering.

plorkyeran 3y ago
5k 27" panels have only gotten cheaper since the first 5k 27" imac came out.

xuki 3y ago

Doesn't look like they're going to put out a 27-inch iMac any time soon, John Ternus said in the presentation the 24-inch iMac is a replacement for both 21-inch and 27-inch iMac https://youtu.be/ctkW3V0Mh-k?t=1582 https://youtu.be/ctkW3V0Mh-k?t=1582.

tonyedgecombe 3y ago
They would say that if that's all they have in the range right now. I think you can take that with a pinch of salt.

brundolf 3y ago

I think the Mac Studio replaced it, which makes sense- its target market is more likely to want to bring their own display

yreg 3y ago
> its target market is more likely I dont know about this part. Whoever wanted to BYOD has been using MacBook Pros. Vast majority of 27" iMac users seems to want to get another large iMac. And there aren't even great monitor choices. Studio display costs as much as a low end iMac used to cost. Samsung Ultrafine is horrible (if its even still produced). And other 3rd party monitors usually don't have 5k at 27".
- macintux 3y ago
  > And there aren't even great monitor choices. Studio display costs as much as a low end iMac used to cost. Samsung Ultrafine is horrible (if its even still produced). And other 3rd party monitors usually don't have 5k at 27". I recall when the first modern iMac came out with a...25" display, I think? The joke at the time was that it was a monitor, and the computer came for free, because no one else was making a monitor of that size and quality, and the price seemed about right for a standalone display.
  - yreg 3y ago
    Well that joke has held, I have a 2019 one and a 5k monitor that nice was probably worth close to the price of the machine. I was sad that the target display mode went away, because I presumed that I would like to keep using the screen for longer than the computer.
    - AceJohnny2 3y ago
      RIP Target Display Mode. The hilarious thing is that the Studio Display is basically just a stealth Target Display Mode device, considering how it's running a trimmed down OS on a phone chip.