Originally Posted by wizard69
Again I really do wish you would explain your problem here.
Because your assertion of fact is wrong and is simply your opinion.
The problem isn't that external monitors don't work, it is rather that you would have to be an idiot to hook one up to an iMac to use in place of the internal monitor.
Why? There are many folks with a dual monitor setup with an iMac. Are they all idiots?
The primary use case for "replacing" the iMac
monitor is a higher quality pro monitor.
Again I really wish you would explain your problem here. The problem with hooking up any of those monitors is that you still have the massive iMac to deal with. I'm beginning to think your problem is you can't think past common desktop usage.
It's a desktop machine. Not a POS device or embedded computer. The 27" iMac is not "massive" and the 21" even smaller.
This argument is becoming a waste of time, walk into a lab, a manufacturing floor or any other non traditional desktop and try to figure out how you would even implement a massive IMac type machine. For many applications the iMac is a joke.
I work in a lab. We have iMacs in our labs. We have iMacs in our clean rooms (manufacturing floor equiv).
Also, in what context is the 21" iMac "massive"? How many factory floors need a high powered machine ON the floor?
I'm not sure if you are in denial here or just being argumentative or simply don't have wide exposure to the way computers are used in non traditional desktop environments.
For many of these applications the supplier provides the support machine (manufacturing floor). For really tight spaces the mini will work but the footprint of a mini+21" monitor is no smaller than a 21" iMac.
There's no denial, I'm simply calling you on your bullshit. You don't AIOs. We get it. But the examples you provide are laughable.
It doesn't really matter; the iMac is a no show for these sorts of applications because the monitor is simply too big and attaching a second monitor to an iMac would get you laughed out of the facility.
These are tiny tiny percentages of the use cases for a desktop. First 99% of these use cases required windows or Linux because of the applications and no Mac is well suited. For the remaining tiny fraction very few of these use cases require the power of the 27"' iMac AND do not have the space for a 27" monitor AND for which the iMac display is unsuited.
Which just demonstrates how ridiculous your position is.
My position is simple: you assert opinion as fact and support it with really rare edge cases as if they were common.
Given I work in some of those edge cases I know your assertion is bullshit. The iMac is fine in our labs and production facilities when any Mac is viable due to software. In the cases where it is not the Mini or MBP works.
You have to come up with a scenario where the iMac clearly doesn't work as a desktop machine as opposed to an embedded computer for process control or a headless server.