Apple Scraps Plans for 27-inch iMac 33
Apple has confirmed it has no plans to release a 27-inch iMac, ending speculation about a larger successor to its flagship desktop computer. The tech giant will instead focus on its 24-inch M3 iMac and Mac Studio offerings.
This is news? (Score:5, Insightful)
So we're discussing an article from a year ago... why?
Re:This is news? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
iMacs are crap because they are unupgradable. You have to throw away a pretty good display
I won't even consider buying an iMac until they bring back Target Display mode. With them now having Thunderbolt 4 ports there's no excuse for not doing it.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Maybe because there are no updates to the plan as the M4 came out? 24" is too small, and quite frankly, I splurged and got a pair of XDRs which I love from 2019. 6K. Still relevant. Probably keeping them another 4 to 5 years. I can change the PC under them without insane costs. iMacs are crap because they are unupgradable. You have to throw away a pretty good display, especially when you make the bone-headed mistake of buying one from the Apple Store where they only carry 8GB ram models.
Out of curiosity -do you think that an iMac is stuck with the RAM it came with? 8GB isn't anywhere near enough, but adding RAM is hella simpler than on most Windows machines. You don't even need to open it up.
Re: This is news? (Score:1)
Just RAM your dick into it? That actually explains some of the odd behaviors of iFans.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because there are no updates to the plan as the M4 came out? 24" is too small, and quite frankly, I splurged and got a pair of XDRs which I love from 2019. 6K. Still relevant. Probably keeping them another 4 to 5 years. I can change the PC under them without insane costs. iMacs are crap because they are unupgradable. You have to throw away a pretty good display, especially when you make the bone-headed mistake of buying one from the Apple Store where they only carry 8GB ram models.
Out of curiosity -do you think that an iMac is stuck with the RAM it came with? 8GB isn't anywhere near enough, but adding RAM is hella simpler than on most Windows machines. You don't even need to open it up.
Unfortunately, I believe all Mx-equipped iMacs have soldered RAM; with no cool RAM-Door anymore...
Re: (Score:2)
The ironic thing is that in the past, iMacs had a display passthrough mode. It would be nice if one could use iMacs with this, so they can be used by another PC as monitors. Maybe even expose the GPU, so it can be used as an eGPU as well.
Re:This is news? (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe because there are no updates to the plan as the M4 came out? 24" is too small, and quite frankly, I splurged and got a pair of XDRs which I love from 2019. 6K. Still relevant. Probably keeping them another 4 to 5 years. I can change the PC under them without insane costs. iMacs are crap because they are unupgradable. You have to throw away a pretty good display, especially when you make the bone-headed mistake of buying one from the Apple Store where they only carry 8GB ram models.
Get one of the new M4 Mac minis and whatever (less expensive) Monitor(s) your heart desires. The combination will be cheaper and less expensive (and probably with a 32" display!). You can have up to three monitors these days, IIRC.
IMHO, I think Apple couldn't find a supplier for a decent 27" panel at the right cost to make it make sense, and a 32" iMac, based on the (already expensive) Studio Display, would have been waaay too pricey to sell enough units, even to Apple Fans.
Re: (Score:2)
. . .more versatile and less expensive, is what I meant.
Re: (Score:2)
Stay tuned for reposts! ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the "editors" are worse than lazy (Score:2)
This is normal and obviously approved of by Slashdot's owners.
Well... (Score:2)
Buy a Mac mini and attach it to a 27" display? Or a 32" one?
Apple probably knows that whoever wants a big display isn't exactly keen on buying an expensive display with a Mac in it. The 24 inch iMac is nice for simple office things and if you don't want to bother with cables. But as soon as cables aren't your main concern selecting your own display isn't that big of a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Expensive display?? You can get a 32" monitor for under $200!
For what Apple charges, iMacs should come with 32" monitors.
They couldn't come with the equivalent of Apple's 32" Monitor: The Apple Studio Display.
So, Apple would have to have a base-model 32" iMac that started at $2500; or have a 27" iMac with yesterday's Panel in it. And they knew that would be an embarrassment next to their new-bright and vivid Displays.
So, pair a nice new M4 Mac mini with the Display of your choice, and there ya go!
https://arstechnica.com/apple/... [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I just did that.
Sitting here typing this out on a 2017 iMac 5K 27" that's now dog slow and stopped getting new MacOS versions last year.
I write Apps for a living. My running copy of Xcode is now a few versions away from the current as it stopped getting updates earlier this year.
If It hadn't been an iMac I'd have ditched it for a M Mini already.
Sitting behind me right now is a Studio Display I bought awaiting a Mac Mini M4 that I ordered which, according to DHL tracking, is with my postman now.
Yes, there's
Re: (Score:1)
Just feels like such a waste of a really good 27" 5K screen all because the Intel i7 is now dated.
The screens aren't changing much.
You knew that and you still bought an iMac. You only have yourself to blame.
Next hint: don't vendor lock-in yourself into the Apple ecosystem. You can't say that we didn't warn you this time.
Just make a VESA mount for the new Mini. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple should just built a mounting bracket for the new Mini that attaches with screws into a pair of 75mm or 100mm VESA mount holes and lets the device hang off the back of a monitor. Building the computer into the monitor didn't really make sense when Apple first started doing it in 1984, and it sure as heck never made sense once LCD panels gave you displays that are usable for decades. The only situation where that even remotely makes sense is with laptops/tablets, and only because it's too hard to make something that is modular and still portable.
The iMac, as a desktop computer built into a display, is and always has been a steaming pile of e-waste waiting to happen. You throw away a perfectly good monitor after three to six years just because the brain can't run recent versions of the OS, has inadequate storage, etc.
There was only a brief period when Apple wasn't horrible in this area, back when they supported Target Display Mode, for turning an iMac into an overpriced display. Unfortunately, this is not supported in current hardware. Yes, Apple supports an "extended display" mode, which kind of works, but has limitations that preclude the most obvious use of a used iMac. First, because it involves shoving compressed video over a network, it is not as good as having a hard-cabled second display. Second, because it is not a physical display, as far as I know, an extended display can't be your only display, which precludes, for example, replacing an iMac with a Mac Studio using the iMac as a display, both because it can't be used in that way and because you'd never be able to set it up in the first place without a physical monitor.
So for folks who actually care about the environment and reducing e-waste, there's really no place for the iMac in their world. Buy a third-party monitor and combine it a Mac Mini or Mac Studio. If Apple embraced that future and dumped the iMac line outright, replacing it with a simpler way of mounting the Mini to the back of a display, they'd make a lot of people very happy.
Mac VESA mounts already abound. (Score:2)
No one needs an "Apple" mount to hang a Mac off an aftermarket monitor since non-Apple mounts exist in considerable variety.
Re: (Score:3)
No one needs an "Apple" mount to hang a Mac off an aftermarket monitor since non-Apple mounts exist in considerable variety.
The new Mini is a totally new size and shape from previous models, so no, they don't.
And trust me as somebody who has tried to do stuff like this with previous Mac Mini models in the past, it's not as easy as it sounds. I ended up building a frame for the top and bottom of the hardware, with screws to pull them together and hold the Mini as a sandwich. It's not elegant, but it works. To do it well, though, would require help from Apple, who could do sensible things like putting threaded mounting holes in
Re: (Score:2)
Apple should just built a mounting bracket for the new Mini that attaches with screws into a pair of 75mm or 100mm VESA mount holes and lets the device hang off the back of a monitor. Building the computer into the monitor didn't really make sense when Apple first started doing it in 1984, and it sure as heck never made sense once LCD panels gave you displays that are usable for decades. The only situation where that even remotely makes sense is with laptops/tablets, and only because it's too hard to make something that is modular and still portable.
The iMac, as a desktop computer built into a display, is and always has been a steaming pile of e-waste waiting to happen. You throw away a perfectly good monitor after three to six years just because the brain can't run recent versions of the OS, has inadequate storage, etc.
There was only a brief period when Apple wasn't horrible in this area, back when they supported Target Display Mode, for turning an iMac into an overpriced display. Unfortunately, this is not supported in current hardware. Yes, Apple supports an "extended display" mode, which kind of works, but has limitations that preclude the most obvious use of a used iMac. First, because it involves shoving compressed video over a network, it is not as good as having a hard-cabled second display. Second, because it is not a physical display, as far as I know, an extended display can't be your only display, which precludes, for example, replacing an iMac with a Mac Studio using the iMac as a display, both because it can't be used in that way and because you'd never be able to set it up in the first place without a physical monitor.
So for folks who actually care about the environment and reducing e-waste, there's really no place for the iMac in their world. Buy a third-party monitor and combine it a Mac Mini or Mac Studio. If Apple embraced that future and dumped the iMac line outright, replacing it with a simpler way of mounting the Mini to the back of a display, they'd make a lot of people very happy.
There are several for the outgoing 2010-2023 Form Factor.
No doubt these same people are retooling...
https://nicolenelsonofficial.c... [nicolenelsonofficial.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The iMac Monitors can be used as standard normal monitors for everything.
If you throw them away, then you are simply ignorant.
What you think the "display adapter" sockets are for on an iMac?
Apple has downgraded the iMac (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Given the original bondi blue iMac was an appliance computer ... nothing's really changed?
After all, all you needed to do was plug in the keyboard and mouse, power, and a modem or ethernet cable, and you were on the internet.
It's also a nice computer to use for say, a receptionist as it's fairly clean looking so a reception desk can look relatively clean.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the original bondi blue iMac was an appliance computer ... nothing's really changed?
After all, all you needed to do was plug in the keyboard and mouse, power, and a modem or ethernet cable, and you were on the internet.
It's also a nice computer to use for say, a receptionist as it's fairly clean looking so a reception desk can look relatively clean.
There is no Step 3!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=... [youtube.com]
One of the many reasons not to bundle (Score:2)
If you want flexibility in things like screen sizes, it's a good idea not to buy an all-in-one system. Separate components let you pick exactly what works for you.
How âbout you just sell that 24â 217 dpi (Score:2)
I love the display on my imac. Loooovvveee it. Two side by side would be amazing. There is no external display available for love or money in that size and dpi.
They never had (Score:2)
When Apple replaced the smaller and the larger iMacs with a model that had a size right in-between the two, don't you think it was obvious that they never intended to make a larger model?
Why? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)