Will there ever be a new large iMac (Pro)?

[Juuro]

If its better to have a separated machine + monitor, why the same people who complained about waiting for waiting a new 27' iMac and now suddenly happy with the Studio didn't bought a Mini + monitor already?

Some did for sure. But the Mac mini was always less powerful than the iMac. Yes you could get an i7 in a Mac mini but could not have a decent GPU. The Mac mini with 3.2 Ghz 6-core i7 is $1399. The last iMac with 3.8 Ghz 8-core i7 and a Radeon Pro 5500 XT with 8 GB VRAM was $2299. Both 8 GB of RAM. So the iMac a little bit better deal. For $900 you got a 5K display and good graphics.

Now that deal is gone. We have the Mac Studio now which base price is at $3896 with Studio Display, Magic Mouse and Magic Keyboard. And yes thats much more than the $2299. But for people (like me) who would have went with a maxed out iMac that is a great offering. For me the Studio set up has even a benefit the iMac didn't have (since a long time ago): I can use that display also with my work MacBook Pro. So for me the Studio is great, even better than the iMac.

Teh only thing I see is that there is now a gap between the $1000 Mac mini and the $2000 Mac Studio. I would have expected that they replace the Intel Mac mini with a M1 Pro Mac mini to fill that gap. I suppose they will do that eventually.

The new monitor is essentially the screen of a 27" iMac and they sell it almost the price of a basic iMac but without the computer parts and the base studio Mac is overkill for most people while the Mac mini isn't good enough for some people as well.

The 27" 5K LG UltraFine was $1299. Compared to that you get with the Studio Display:

• great speakers
• a webcam
• the A13 which enables spatial audio and center stage
• much better build quality and design (aluminium vs. plastic)
• Apple support

Everyone can decide for themselves if that worth $300.

 

[svish]

Looks like a future iMac with a 27” or bigger screen will only be a ‘Pro’ Machine. This will be very expensive and might not be released anytime soon.

 

[jukkhop]

An AIO has form factor benefits by being clean and simplistic. In terms of "security of supply", a separate computer and monitor has the edge since both components can be replaced separately. The modular approach is also more environment friendly, assuming a single monitor has a longer lifespan than a single computer. However Apple's computers tend to age well and some people keep their iMacs for 10 years or longer, and at that point you're probably going to want a new screen as well.

Any new Mac is of course exciting and I suspect for some the Mac Studio will be an impulse buy. And that's perfectly fine.

In my case, as someone who mainly uses the 27" iMac, the Mac Studio as a computer is overkill. If I went modular, I would choose either the current Mac Mini or wait for the upcoming Mac Mini Pro. However I am in no hurry to upgrade, so I'll wait to see what the iMac Pro will look like and only then make my decisions.

 

[Alwis]

Well, I do think, that having a separate display and a small desktop, like the Studio, is better. But I agree, the pricing is a bit over the top.

But at the end of the day I will buy it... I like macOS more than Linux, not to mention Windows, I use my iMac on a daily basis so I am willing to spend a bit more

 

[Freida]

Its simple, Mac Mini with M1 isn't powerful enough to replace the 27" iMac.
Also, if you search the history you will see a lot of us considering Mac Mini with M1 Pro/Max + display if Apple releases an affordable one instead of 27" iMac.
That just happened and a lot of us are happy about this direction as now you can upgrade just the box and don't need to upgrade whole AiO system = cheaper.

People waited for 27" iMac simply because Mini was not powerful enough, Mac Pro is too expensive and MBP is a notebook with compromises.
This 'combo' fills the gap and for those that don't buy the screen they get cheaper upgrade than if they were getting 27" iMac. Everyone wins.

Is it clear, now?

Its funny to read all those comments all of a sudden saying in an iMac thread that a separate machine + an overpriced monitor is a better deal. It seems many people just accept all the product Apple throw at them. If its better to have a separated machine + monitor, why the same people who complained about waiting for waiting a new 27' iMac and now suddenly happy with the Studio didn't bought a Mini + monitor already? The point of the iMac is to have an all in one device. It always worked well and it reach a good number of costumer needs.

The new monitor is essentially the screen of a 27" iMac and they sell it almost the price of a basic iMac but without the computer parts and the base studio Mac is overkill for most people while the Mac mini isn't good enough for some people as well.

I really think Apple drop the ball here. Happy for those that likes it, but the real reason Apple do this is to hope 27' iMac costumers will jump into this new proposition instead and spend way much money than they should if the 27' iMac was still there.

 

[zhuskers1]

Is there a new 27" iMac in the works?

 

[zhuskers1]

Looks like a future iMac with a 27” or bigger screen will only be a ‘Pro’ Machine. This will be very expensive and might not be released anytime soon.

That will stink!! Seems like the world "Pro" equates to higher Margins for Apple. I hope Apple recognizes the loyal 27" iMac users and offers them an appropriate cost effective updated solution

 

[CWallace]

Its funny to read all those comments all of a sudden saying in an iMac thread that a separate machine + an overpriced monitor is a better deal.

My presumption was that an Apple silicon 27" iMac 5K with an M1 Pro 8/14, 16GB of RAM and 512GB of storage might have had a $2500 price point. If we add the M1 Max 10/24 and 32GB of RAM the base Mac Studio has, that would add $900 to that $2500 price point for $3400 - $200 cheaper.

If its better to have a separated machine + monitor, why the same people who complained about waiting for waiting a new 27' iMac and now suddenly happy with the Studio didn't bought a Mini + monitor already?

I think an M1 would surprise a lot of folks who are using older iMacs (2015-2019), but I get that many just look at the benchmarks and presume M1 is "weak" compared to the i7/i9 and AMD 580-series. And some folks need more than 16GB of RAM, which is not an option on M1.

And until yesterday, the only other 5K displays on the market were from iiyama and LG and both fall short in image quality to the iMac display due to Apple's additional calibration.

The point of the iMac is to have an all in one device. It always worked well and it reach a good number of (customer) needs.

I prefer AIOs, but I will note that discrete components have advantages. The Mac Studio has much better cooling so no risks of thermal throttling like we might have seen in the iMac (and might be why Apple went this route) and now you can keep your display across multiple compute units rather than having to replace the entire machine.

The new monitor is essentially the screen of a 27" iMac and they sell it almost the price of a basic iMac but without the computer parts and the base studio Mac is overkill for most people while the Mac mini isn't good enough for some people as well.

I really think Apple drop the ball here. Happy for those that likes it, but the real reason Apple do this is to hope 27' iMac costumers will jump into this new proposition instead and spend way much money than they should if the 27' iMac was still there.

I do wish there was a Mac desktop model with the M1 Pro line because I agree with you that the M1 Max is really aimed at prosumers and professionals whereas the M1 Pro is more an "enthusiast/prosumer" SoC and would meet the needs of many people at a lower cost that Max and not all those folks need more than 16GB.

I hope that when the Mac mini is updated with the new form factor, in addition to M2 they also offer an M1 Pro BTO option with 16 and 32GB options. Paired with the Apple Studio Display, we would then get out Apple silicon iMac 27".

 

[MayaUser]

Is there a new 27" iMac in the works?

an 27" imac probably not...an 27" or higher display imac pro ...thats another question
Gurman says the mac pro and imac pro still on track

 

[blairh]

Its funny to read all those comments all of a sudden saying in an iMac thread that a separate machine + an overpriced monitor is a better deal. It seems many people just accept all the product Apple throw at them. If its better to have a separated machine + monitor, why the same people who complained about waiting for waiting a new 27' iMac and now suddenly happy with the Studio didn't bought a Mini + monitor already? The point of the iMac is to have an all in one device. It always worked well and it reach a good number of costumer needs.

The new monitor is essentially the screen of a 27" iMac and they sell it almost the price of a basic iMac but without the computer parts and the base studio Mac is overkill for most people while the Mac mini isn't good enough for some people as well.

I really think Apple drop the ball here. Happy for those that likes it, but the real reason Apple do this is to hope 27' iMac costumers will jump into this new proposition instead and spend way much money than they should if the 27' iMac was still there.

I don't think it's a better deal. But this new display was not a reality until just now.

Having used both an iMac and a Mini/display, I personally prefer the Mini/display setup.

With no solid proof of an affordable Apple display coming, I was banking on a new 27" iMac Pro that would essentially replace the 27" iMac. We clearly aren't getting that. The future iMac Pro will be a pricey machine that won't be aimed at my casual computing needs.

I do think it stinks that Apple has not offered a 30" iMac to replace the 27" model. The 24" iMac is a nice machine as long as you are cool with white bezels.

With respect to the Studio Display, in addition to the improvements that @Juuro listed over the 27" LG UFD, it's also brighter at 600 nits, which I appreciate. When you consider the current monitor market I don't think the ASD is overpriced by all that much. Perhaps in an absolute best case scenario it would have started at $1,300.

 

[blairh]

I think we will see a 30" iMac in October. M2 chip or similar. Alongside the 24" iMac update. I feel 27" at this point is too close in size to 24". Same colors as the 24" iMac. Probably starting at ~$2,000.

 

[subjonas]

I do wish there was a Mac desktop model with the M1 Pro line because I agree with you that the M1 Max is really aimed at prosumers and professionals whereas the M1 Pro is more an "enthusiast/prosumer" SoC and would meet the needs of many people at a lower cost that Max and not all those folks need more than 16GB.

I hope that when the Mac mini is updated with the new form factor, in addition to M2 they also offer an M1 Pro BTO option with 16 and 32GB options. Paired with the Apple Studio Display, we would then get out Apple silicon iMac 27".

It is a bit strange that the M1 Pro is the only chip excluded from the Mac desktop lineup. That leaves not only a performance gap but also a price gap (around 1000 USD between the Mac Mini and Max Mac Studio). So I would expect a Mac Mini with Pro chip in the future to fill that. And at that point perhaps the Intel Mac Mini will be discontinued, unless it is still needed for company servers or something like that.

Kind of a side note, but I believe I heard the M1 Mac Mini outperforms all but the highest specced Intel 27” iMac. If so, then relative to other AS Macs we may still be missing the performance tier that the Intel 27” iMac filled in the previous Intel lineup, but comparing performance and screen size directly to the previous 27” Intel iMac, we already have a non-AIO replacement in the M1 Mini + Studio Display.

(Edited for clarity)

 

[CWallace]

It is a bit strange that the M1 Pro is the only chip excluded from the Mac desktop lineup. That leaves not only a performance gap but also a price gap (around 1000 USD between the Mac Mini and Max Mac Studio). So I would expect a Mac Mini with Pro chip in the future to fill that. And at that point perhaps the Intel Mac Mini will be discontinued, unless it is still needed for company servers or something like that.

I wonder if Apple sees the M1 Pro as a "prosumer laptop" SoC because it is not as full-featured as the M1 Max, but what it does trade away in capability and performance, it gains back in extended battery life. And compared to an M1, it is still a fairly more powerful SoC.

I also wonder if just the M1 Pro's pricing structure (as seen in the 14/16 MacBook Pro) hurt it's chances in the Mac Studio. Assuming Apple started with the 10C/16G M1 Pro and 16GB, that would be $600 cheaper than the 10C/24G M1 Max. So that would put the Mac Studio base price at $1399. A Mac mini upgraded to 16GB RAM and 512GB storage is $1099. At only a $300 price difference, who realistically would buy an M1 Mac mini over an M1 Pro Mac Studio? Especially when you add in the memory and connectivity improvements? And if the Mac mini sees any type of price increase when it goes to the new enclosure (plus any "M2 premium"), we might see a Mac mini at effective price-parity with the Mac Studio.

So by keeping the Mac Studio at "minimum Max", they provide more than enough of a pricing and performance buffer to keep the Mac mini relevant while also providing some incentive to move to the Mac Studio (32GB, more ports, more performance, etc.).

 

[subjonas]

I wonder if Apple sees the M1 Pro as a "laptop" SoC because it is not as full-featured as the M1 Max, but what it does trade away in capability and performance, it gains back in extended battery life. And compared to an M1, it is still a fairly more powerful SoC.

But wouldn’t that also be true of an M1 Pro to M1 comparison? Isn’t the trade off linear down the line? Or does the Pro offer better battery life than the base M1?

I also wonder if just the M1 Pro's pricing structure (as seen in the 14/16 MacBook Pro) hurt it's chances in the Mac Studio. Assuming Apple started with the 10C/16G M1 Pro and 16GB, that would be $600 cheaper than the 10C/24G M1 Max. So that would put the Mac Studio base price at $1399. A Mac mini upgraded to 16GB RAM and 512GB storage is $1099. At only a $300 price difference, who realistically would buy an M1 Mac mini over an M1 Pro Mac Studio? Especially when you add in the memory and connectivity improvements? And if the Mac mini sees any type of price increase when it goes to the new enclosure (plus any "M2 premium"), we might see a Mac mini at effective price-parity with the Mac Studio.

So by keeping the Mac Studio at "minimum Max", they provide more than enough of a pricing and performance buffer to keep the Mac mini relevant while also providing some incentive to move to the Mac Studio (32GB, more ports, more performance, etc.).

Sounds like that could be true, but I was more thinking the Pro chip would better suited for a higher performance Mini rather than a lower base Studio. Probably with more ports than the current M1 Mini. Not sure what the pricing would look like though.

 

[CWallace]

But wouldn’t that also be true of an M1 Pro to M1 comparison? Isn’t the trade off linear down the line? Or does the Pro offer better battery life than the base M1?

I probably should have said "laptop prosumer" SoC as the M1 is a more "consumer" SoC (though there are certainly many prosumer/professional tasks it is more than capable of performing). Yes, it certainly offers great battery life, but we also see it used in the Mac mini and iMac 24" which do not have batteries.

Sounds like that could be true, but I was more thinking the Pro chip would better suited for a higher performance Mini rather than a lower base Studio. Probably with more ports than the current M1 Mini.

Which is why I am hoping that the Mac mini Refresh will offer an M1 Pro and 32GB BTO option. Ming-Chi Kuo today said he expects that refresh to stay on M1 (everyone else seems to believe it will get the M2), so adding the M1 Pro (whether the base SoC is M1 or M2) would allow it to bridge to the Mac Studio better.

As for price, I would expect a $200 upgrade for the M1 Pro and $400 for 32GB so that would put a 32GB/512GB M1 Pro Mac mini at $1500 - $500 below the Mac Studio.

 

[subjonas]

I probably should have said "laptop prosumer" SoC as the M1 is a more "consumer" SoC (though there are certainly many prosumer/professional tasks it is more than capable of performing). Yes, it certainly offers great battery life, but we also see it used in the Mac mini and iMac 24" which do not have batteries.



Which is why I am hoping that the Mac mini Refresh will offer an M1 Pro and 32GB BTO option. Ming-Chi Kuo today said he expects that refresh to stay on M1 (everyone else seems to believe it will get the M2), so adding the M1 Pro (whether the base SoC is M1 or M2) would allow it to bridge to the Mac Studio better.

As for price, I would expect a $200 upgrade for the M1 Pro and $400 for 32GB so that would put a 32GB/512GB M1 Pro Mac mini at $1500 - $500 below the Mac Studio.

Looks like Mac Mini M2 and M2 Pro is going to happen, according to the newest article.

Updated Mac Mini Still Coming With M2 and M2 Pro Chips

Prior to yesterday's spring event, rumors suggested that Apple might unveil a new Mac mini, but instead we got the all-new Mac Studio, which is...

www.macrumors.com

 

[ADGrant]

I think we will see a 30" iMac in October. M2 chip or similar. Alongside the 24" iMac update. I feel 27" at this point is too close in size to 24". Same colors as the 24" iMac. Probably starting at ~$2,000.

I will be very surprised if we see a 30" iMac in October. A 30" Studio 6k monitor maybe.

 

[CWallace]

I will be very surprised if we see a 30" iMac in October. A 30" Studio 6k monitor maybe.

We have been told and Apple and LG are working on standalone displays in the following sizes:

• 24"
• 27"
• 32"

The 27" model likely dropped yesterday as the Apple Studio Display.

I do not know if the 24" display will actually see the light as an Apple display as arguably it should have dropped alongside the Apple Studio display yesterday. So perhaps it will be an LG display.

As for the 32", it logically makes sense to be the replacement for the Pro Display XDR. Latest rumors say it could be 7K as opposed to 6K and have an A13, which we know would be used for Spatial Audio, Ask Siri and CenterStage like on the Apple Studio Display.

 

[ADGrant]

We have been told and Apple and LG are working on standalone displays in the following sizes:

• 24"
• 27"
• 32"

The 27" model likely dropped yesterday as the Apple Studio Display.

I do not know if the 24" display will actually see the light as an Apple display as arguably it should have dropped alongside the Apple Studio display yesterday. So perhaps it will be an LG display.

As for the 32", it logically makes sense to be the replacement for the Pro Display XDR. Latest rumors say it could be 7K as opposed to 6K and have an A13, which we know would be used for Spatial Audio, Ask Siri and CenterStage like on the Apple Studio Display.

LG already has a 24" display for Apple Macs. I am guessing that the new Apple 24" display will be announced with the next Mac mini.

 

[CWallace]

LG already has a 24" display for Apple Macs. I am guessing that the new Apple 24" display will be announced with the next Mac mini.

Yes, but it is a 4K non-Retina panel. This new 24" display is said to be a 4.5K Retina panel as used in the iMac 24".

 

[bushman4]

Looks as though Apple has forgotten about the casual iMac user. The 24” and the Mac Studio are for people at either end of the spectrum how about the customers that desire a 5K display in the middle that want a 27” display All in one

 

[subjonas]

Looks as though Apple has forgotten about the casual iMac user. The 24” and the Mac Studio are for people at either end of the spectrum how about the customers that desire a 5K display in the middle that want a 27” display All in one

Yeah it seems Apple grouped all 21” and some 27” iMac users together with the 24” iMac, and the remaining 27” users (those who prefer not to downsize) were given the Studio Display modular option. I can only assume it was a decision based on market research and the numbers game.
I think many specific target groups have been “abandoned” by Apple at some point or another and left with one or two less than satisfactory choices. I’m not an iMac user but I’ve been there with at least one other product and it can be frustrating when one has particular preferences or needs that doesn’t agree with Apple’s (or any company’s) offerings.

 

[blairh]

Woaaaaahhhhh ?

Turns out the iMac Pro that Ross has been reporting about all this time was actually just a display. Wow.

 

[iPadified]

Looks like Mac Mini M2 and M2 Pro is going to happen, according to the newest article.

Updated Mac Mini Still Coming With M2 and M2 Pro Chips

Prior to yesterday's spring event, rumors suggested that Apple might unveil a new Mac mini, but instead we got the all-new Mac Studio, which is...

www.macrumors.com

...which then closes the gap between the M1 24 inch and the Mac mini/studio + display price and performance wise. Although I love the iMac (have one 27 2020 at home), there are some benefit with stand alone/laptop plus external monitor. Sending that 27 5k display to garbage just because the OS is not support is going to hurt.

 

[CWallace]

Turns out the iMac Pro that Ross has been reporting about all this time was actually just a display. Wow.

Which is ironic, because his first Tweet about claimed it was a display and then he updated it to say he was wrong and it would be an iMac. So he was wrong about being wrong.

I didn't think Apple was this dumb, but I guess I was wrong.

I wonder how many Apple Studio Display cancellations the Apple Store is recording this morning.