Originally Posted by SolipsismX
They don't market it the same way, but they also don't market their Mac Pros the same was as their more consumer-focused products. They also have a long history of letting their displays languish at higher prices than would be expected. It's like they have it at the bottom item of each meeting and only get to it once every couple years.
Note that they used to have a 30" ACD and have never had a 30" iMac. I think they also have used multiple panels that were very different from their iMac line over the years. But that does bring up an interesting point. When will Apple finally make the move to make their iMacs "Retina" which would be a unique retinafying
compared to all their other doubling resolution solutions as it would be exactly 1.5x the resolution if they go 4K in the 27" iMac.
I'm aware they never had a 30", but the older displays were definitely marketed to a different audience. Part of that was the price points chose the buyers to a degree. You should also remember that the imac covered a different audience at the time. It is suitable for a far greater range of tasks today where performance requirements have been outpaced by hardware improvements in some areas. Anyway during the era of the 30" display, it wasn't the only one. They had something like a 20", 23" later replaced by a 24", and a 30" display. They folded all of them into a 27" cinema display. It appeared to me as if they were trying to to maintain a profitable item through consolidation there. I did take note of the resolution disparity. My thoughts were that they would would start from something that could be doubled, not necessarily what we have today. There are 1080 27" displays. I've never looked at one close up, but I suspect it would be a doubling of that or a small change in dimensions, much like what brought about the current 27" panels. Take 25.5" panel (often marketed as 26" during its respective time example). Widen from 16:10 to 16:9. There's your 27" :). I mean that I could see a small shift one way or the other, and there is a current basis for doubling, even if it's not one that Apple currently uses. If you have more familiarity with them than me, you can let me know if they look horribly out of scale. I'm just saying the doubling doesn't necessarily have to be in relation to what they have now. There's always some kind of range.
Would they go 4K in the 24" iMac, too or use something that is also 1.5x the resolution. They already have the Scaling option in Display Settings to go halfway between 2x so I'm guessing that would be the new native for these machines. But when would Apple offer it? Seems like it will be a long wait if we are waiting for quality panels in that size at the current price points. We still don't have the MBA as Retina but I'm guessing that will happen with the next update.
It's possible that prices will come down faster than I thought. I didn't mention this one previously due to its oddball nature, but Dell is bringing out a 28" around $1000. That goes against the trend of bigger= more expensive, so I'm not sure what to say there. Bigger is typically more difficult to manufacture without defects, and they do incur a bigger loss on any of A- grade and below. If they hadn't redesigned the imac recently, it might have looked like an option. There are also signs that they are running into cost barriers relative to their desired margins. As for the mba, I think the 13" rmbp covers that well enough that people have an option in a very light/compact machine at that kind of resolution. The rmbp display is a considerable step up in terms of viewing angles too.