New & colorful 27-inch iMac starts production, reportedly won't have mini LED

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited December 2021
A new report says that suppliers have begun producing Apple's updated 27-inch iMac, and that it will not feature a mini LED screen -- but will come in many colors.

The new 27-inch iMac is said to feature the same, or similar, thin design as the 24-inch model
The new 27-inch iMac is said to feature the same, or similar, thin design as the 24-inch model


Previous reports have claimed that mini LED will be used in the 27-inch iMac -- or possibly a separate iMac Pro -- releasing in early 2022. Now unspecified sources in the supply chain have told Digitimes that the iMac won't have this newer screen technology.

The Digitimes report is sketchy, but does also claim that the new 27-inch iMac has been redesigned in a similar way to the 24-inch iMac. Specifically, the sources say it has a thinner exterior design, and that it is expected to come in multiple colors, possibly the same ones as the 24-inch model.

Although it Wednesday's report says that the new iMac Pro won't feature mini LED, these supply chain sources report that the display will be brighter. "LED chips used in its display are up 30-40% from the previous models," says the publication.

Digitimes has a strong reputation for data from within Apple's supply chain. However it has a substantially poorer one for the conclusions it draws from the information it receives.

If Wednesday's report is accurate, it will be the first one since rumors started about a new iMac Pro with Apple Silicon that adds colors, and takes away the mini LED display for the product. While it is difficult to assess Apple's plans from supply chain rumors, it appears that the publication has conflated multiple products, as it has done in the past.

Ross Young, of Display Supply Chain Consultants, believes that DigiTimes is incorrect in its assumption that the iMac Pro won't have a mini LED backlight.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    Really…27”? 
    9secondkox2baconstang
  • Reply 2 of 31
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    patchythepirate
  • Reply 3 of 31
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,886member
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    I think the point is that with the screen size unchanged, it is now pretty close to the lower end 24" which increased from 21.5".  I myself had hoped that it would have been bumped up to 30".
    edited December 2021 9secondkox2watto_cobraDetnatorbaconstangurahara
  • Reply 4 of 31
    Really…27”? 
    I'm fine with that.  I don't need or even want anything bigger.  I'll be happy to replace my existing 27" Intel iMac.
    patchythepiratewilliamlondontokyojimu9secondkox2appleinsideruserwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 31
    tundraboy said:
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    I think the point is that with the screen size unchanged, it is now pretty close to the lower end 24" which increased from 21.5".  I myself had hoped that it would have been bumped up to 30".
    The 21.5" was just grossly undersized and long overdue to be upped to 24" (the minimum size for monitors for the past 5 years). This also better aligns with the 24/27" LG Ultrafine monitors that Apple themselves have sold for the past 5 years. I can see as an opportunity for a 32" iMac (Pro) being offered in the future though.
    9secondkox2lkruppwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 31
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,351moderator
    Really…27”? 
    27" is fine for size, that's still a big display, especially if it still has some bezels like the 24" but I hope it has the XDR display style because the old-style panels don't display black levels all that well. Here is the XDR next to the iMac, size is ok but the blacks on the other displays are much better and they can display HDR content properly. If they don't put an HDR display in the 27", people would be better buying a MBP with a 3rd party HDR display.


    shareef777scstrrfJWSCpatchythepiratebadmonkcrowleythtwilliamlondonroundaboutnow9secondkox2
  • Reply 7 of 31
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    Marvin said:
    Really…27”? 
    27" is fine for size, that's still a big display, especially if it still has some bezels like the 24" but I hope it has the XDR display style because the old-style panels don't display black levels all that well. Here is the XDR next to the iMac, size is ok but the blacks on the other displays are much better and they can display HDR content properly. If they don't put an HDR display in the 27", people would be better buying a MBP with a 3rd party HDR display.


    Soooo…. This is the consumer version or it won’t have that many colors.  Guess I was right yesterday.

    Maybe Apple will kept the M1?  After all, the only significant improvement with the A15 was power efficiency, but unlike A14, M1 often paired with a fan.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 31
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,528member
    tundraboy said:
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    I think the point is that with the screen size unchanged, it is now pretty close to the lower end 24" which increased from 21.5".  I myself had hoped that it would have been bumped up to 30".
    The 21.5" was just grossly undersized and long overdue to be upped to 24" (the minimum size for monitors for the past 5 years). This also better aligns with the 24/27" LG Ultrafine monitors that Apple themselves have sold for the past 5 years. I can see as an opportunity for a 32" iMac (Pro) being offered in the future though.
    The 21.5 was mostly sold to,schools, where is was large enough. But increasingly is was sold as an inexpensive business machine. With the M1 those sales seems to have increased. I imagine the 24 is part of that sales increase. My friend just bought one as a replacement for his old 27, on my advice, and is very happy with the size. He’s an aluminum color computer person, and I told him to look at them in the store before buying. He bought the red one.

    id like to see this a bit bigger than 27. 32 is much too big, really. Only a few people will want something that large. I don’t think they understand just how large that would be. 28-29 would be fine. But it looks as though that’s not going to happen.
    baconstangpatchythepirate9secondkox2watto_cobrah2p
  • Reply 9 of 31
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,528member
    Marvin said:
    Really…27”? 
    27" is fine for size, that's still a big display, especially if it still has some bezels like the 24" but I hope it has the XDR display style because the old-style panels don't display black levels all that well. Here is the XDR next to the iMac, size is ok but the blacks on the other displays are much better and they can display HDR content properly. If they don't put an HDR display in the 27", people would be better buying a MBP with a 3rd party HDR display.


    When the 27 iMac first came out, it was often described as a $2,500 monitor with a free computer attached. That was true for the less expensive models. But we have to think about what external monitors are really available, and at what prices. As far as I know, there are no reasonably priced monitors of 5K, PCI-3 and true HDR capabilities at anywhere near the price of what the current iMac 27 monitor would go for it it were a separate display. A lot claim true HDR, but they are not. In that area,

    Apple’s XDR display is one of the less expensive models. I keep thinking that the iPad 12.9 display is much simpler than the older XDR, but does the same thing—but better. I can’t believe that Apple isn’t redesigning the XDR to better match the iPad and new 16 Macbook Pro displays. I’ve got both, and their displays age better than anything else I’ve seen under several thousand bucks. But how would they scale up to 27-32?  If Apple came out with a 27-29 miniled display for $3,000, I would buy it. Even $3,500 wouldn’t be expensive, considering. 

    So which third party true HDR (over 1,000 nits max) display, that’s actually available now, because speculating on anything is hopeless, would you recommend, that’s not in the price range of the XDR?
    scstrrfpatchythepiratewatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 31
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,528member
    DuhSesame said:
    Marvin said:
    Really…27”? 
    27" is fine for size, that's still a big display, especially if it still has some bezels like the 24" but I hope it has the XDR display style because the old-style panels don't display black levels all that well. Here is the XDR next to the iMac, size is ok but the blacks on the other displays are much better and they can display HDR content properly. If they don't put an HDR display in the 27", people would be better buying a MBP with a 3rd party HDR display.


    Soooo…. This is the consumer version or it won’t have that many colors.  Guess I was right yesterday.

    Maybe Apple will kept the M1?  After all, the only significant improvement with the A15 was power efficiency, but unlike A14, M1 often paired with a fan.
    According to Anandtech’s deep dive, and some of Apple’s own specs, they undersold the A15’s performance. It’s not just an A14 with efficiency improvements. People think that the yon;y thing that matters are the CPU and GPU cores, which is no longer true.
    scstrrfpatchythepirate9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 31
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    melgross said:
    DuhSesame said:
    Marvin said:
    Really…27”? 
    27" is fine for size, that's still a big display, especially if it still has some bezels like the 24" but I hope it has the XDR display style because the old-style panels don't display black levels all that well. Here is the XDR next to the iMac, size is ok but the blacks on the other displays are much better and they can display HDR content properly. If they don't put an HDR display in the 27", people would be better buying a MBP with a 3rd party HDR display.


    Soooo…. This is the consumer version or it won’t have that many colors.  Guess I was right yesterday.

    Maybe Apple will kept the M1?  After all, the only significant improvement with the A15 was power efficiency, but unlike A14, M1 often paired with a fan.
    According to Anandtech’s deep dive, and some of Apple’s own specs, they undersold the A15’s performance. It’s not just an A14 with efficiency improvements. People think that the yon;y thing that matters are the CPU and GPU cores, which is no longer true.
    Well, HSA is great, but we don't have that much application yet to take advantage of.  That's fine, I'm not saying A15/M2 is a gimmick, it'll benefit those without a fan, the M1/M2 is a class of its own.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 31
    I'll take the word of Ross Young over Digitimes when it comes to Apple rumors every time. My conclusion from the recent rumors is that the iMac Pro will have a 27", mini-LED, 254 ppi, ProMotion display. How sweet would that be!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 31
    I’m pumped! I’ll be repeatedly refreshing Apple’s store page on announcement day. 

    I don’t get why most ppl would want anything bigger than 27”. You know you’re siting right in front of it, right?? I have an older 21” and even that is plenty big for everything I need. 
    9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 31
    Sounds like we will have two regular iMacs at 24 and 27 inches with everyday screens and rainbow bright colors and then an iMac Pro or “Pro Max” with a 32 inch mini led screen and - hopefully more professional, elegant colors. 


    lkruppwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 31
    I’m pumped! I’ll be repeatedly refreshing Apple’s store page on announcement day. 

    I don’t get why most ppl would want anything bigger than 27”. You know you’re siting right in front of it, right?? I have an older 21” and even that is plenty big for everything I need. 
    As a 27” iMac 5k owner, Ive had this since 2016. 
    It now feels small. I use it far more often than my MBP simply because of screen size and clarity. 

    It felt huge when I first bought it. Like an exotic item from the future. 

    As a multimedia designer, the 27 inch screen is nice to see the fine details as I create. 

    But that was jumping up from a a laptop screen. 

    Now, having much more experience with intricate design and hardware, the 27 inch screen feels cramped. 

    The 27 inch size was exotic 6 years ago. Now it’s just ok. 

    Apple coming out with a long awaited redesign is great. But it will be so disappointing to be stuck at 27”. 

    It’s fine for a lot of people. But it’s not special anymore. And it’s not big anymore. 

    For those who want it, 27” will be great. 

    But a great many folks want more. Thankfully, it seems Apple will be giving us a 32 option also. 

    Heck, Apple used to sell a 30” Cinema Display forever ago. It’s 2022! Time to move up. 
    edited December 2021 shareef777patchythepiratewatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 31
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,351moderator
    melgross said:
    When the 27 iMac first came out, it was often described as a $2,500 monitor with a free computer attached. That was true for the less expensive models. But we have to think about what external monitors are really available, and at what prices. As far as I know, there are no reasonably priced monitors of 5K, PCI-3 and true HDR capabilities at anywhere near the price of what the current iMac 27 monitor would go for it it were a separate display. A lot claim true HDR, but they are not. In that area,

    Apple’s XDR display is one of the less expensive models. I keep thinking that the iPad 12.9 display is much simpler than the older XDR, but does the same thing—but better. I can’t believe that Apple isn’t redesigning the XDR to better match the iPad and new 16 Macbook Pro displays. I’ve got both, and their displays age better than anything else I’ve seen under several thousand bucks. But how would they scale up to 27-32?  If Apple came out with a 27-29 miniled display for $3,000, I would buy it. Even $3,500 wouldn’t be expensive, considering. 

    So which third party true HDR (over 1,000 nits max) display, that’s actually available now, because speculating on anything is hopeless, would you recommend, that’s not in the price range of the XDR?
    It's true the 3rd party display options aren't great either, very few go above 4k. The following are listed as 1,000 nits HDR:

    https://www.newegg.com/asus-pa32uc-32-uhd/p/0JC-001P-00AF6
    https://www.amazon.com/Swift-PG27UQ-G-SYNC-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B07F1VGGLK
    https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Predator-X27-bmiphzx-Monitor/dp/B07CWDBL39?th=1
    https://www.amazon.com/Acer-BM270-LED-LCD-Monitor/dp/B07F8114JT
    https://www.amazon.com/Philips-436M6VBPAB-DisplayHDR1000-MultiView-DisplayPort/dp/B07D5S3QCS

    Some are quite expensive at ~$2k and they all have bad designs. One option some people have tried is using an OLED TV as a monitor. They are 45"+ but start at around $1000:



    The quality is nice but it would need to be sat further away to be usable for a computer screen.





    It's strange that LG sells 32" 4k OLED monitors for $4000 but 48" OLED TVs for $1000, maybe it's just down to the size of the target market:

    https://www.amazon.com/LG-32EP950-B-Ultrafine-Display-DCI-P3/dp/B097NYL7XS/
    https://www.bestbuy.com/site/lg-48-class-c1-series-oled-4k-uhd-smart-webos-tv/6453311.p?skuId=6453311

    If they sold a 32" OLED TV, that would be ideal. Of course there's the burn-in issue with OLED.

    It seems likely that they should be able to scale up the tech from the 16" XDR display to 27"-32". It's only 4x the size but I definitely think they'll be able to reduce the price on the 32" XDR display while increasing the dimming zones. 32" with 2500+ dimming zones under $3k would be competitive with other monitors. I assume they'll call the 27" iMac the iMac Pro as it will have M1 Pro/Max so it would make sense to have XDR to match the Macbook Pro and iPad Pro lineup.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 31
    Marvin said:
    melgross said:
    When the 27 iMac first came out, it was often described as a $2,500 monitor with a free computer attached. That was true for the less expensive models. But we have to think about what external monitors are really available, and at what prices. As far as I know, there are no reasonably priced monitors of 5K, PCI-3 and true HDR capabilities at anywhere near the price of what the current iMac 27 monitor would go for it it were a separate display. A lot claim true HDR, but they are not. In that area,

    Apple’s XDR display is one of the less expensive models. I keep thinking that the iPad 12.9 display is much simpler than the older XDR, but does the same thing—but better. I can’t believe that Apple isn’t redesigning the XDR to better match the iPad and new 16 Macbook Pro displays. I’ve got both, and their displays age better than anything else I’ve seen under several thousand bucks. But how would they scale up to 27-32?  If Apple came out with a 27-29 miniled display for $3,000, I would buy it. Even $3,500 wouldn’t be expensive, considering. 

    So which third party true HDR (over 1,000 nits max) display, that’s actually available now, because speculating on anything is hopeless, would you recommend, that’s not in the price range of the XDR?
    It's true the 3rd party display options aren't great either, very few go above 4k. The following are listed as 1,000 nits HDR:

    https://www.newegg.com/asus-pa32uc-32-uhd/p/0JC-001P-00AF6
    https://www.amazon.com/Swift-PG27UQ-G-SYNC-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B07F1VGGLK
    https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Predator-X27-bmiphzx-Monitor/dp/B07CWDBL39?th=1
    https://www.amazon.com/Acer-BM270-LED-LCD-Monitor/dp/B07F8114JT
    https://www.amazon.com/Philips-436M6VBPAB-DisplayHDR1000-MultiView-DisplayPort/dp/B07D5S3QCS

    Some are quite expensive at ~$2k and they all have bad designs. One option some people have tried is using an OLED TV as a monitor. They are 45"+ but start at around $1000:



    The quality is nice but it would need to be sat further away to be usable for a computer screen.





    It's strange that LG sells 32" 4k OLED monitors for $4000 but 48" OLED TVs for $1000, maybe it's just down to the size of the target market:

    https://www.amazon.com/LG-32EP950-B-Ultrafine-Display-DCI-P3/dp/B097NYL7XS/
    https://www.bestbuy.com/site/lg-48-class-c1-series-oled-4k-uhd-smart-webos-tv/6453311.p?skuId=6453311

    If they sold a 32" OLED TV, that would be ideal. Of course there's the burn-in issue with OLED.

    It seems likely that they should be able to scale up the tech from the 16" XDR display to 27"-32". It's only 4x the size but I definitely think they'll be able to reduce the price on the 32" XDR display while increasing the dimming zones. 32" with 2500+ dimming zones under $3k would be competitive with other monitors. I assume they'll call the 27" iMac the iMac Pro as it will have M1 Pro/Max so it would make sense to have XDR to match the Macbook Pro and iPad Pro lineup.
    PC guys often more concerned about work space, refresh rate and such, as for laptops 1080p is a great option to cheap out, adding performance & battery life in return.  Few if any would take that much of care of their displays like Apple, which often becomes a point to accuse Apple being “overpriced”.
    edited December 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 31
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    tundraboy said:
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    I think the point is that with the screen size unchanged, it is now pretty close to the lower end 24" which increased from 21.5".  I myself had hoped that it would have been bumped up to 30”.
    Then I guess you won’t be buying one, huh.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    I’m pumped! I’ll be repeatedly refreshing Apple’s store page on announcement day. 

    I don’t get why most ppl would want anything bigger than 27”. You know you’re siting right in front of it, right?? I have an older 21” and even that is plenty big for everything I need. 
    As a 27” iMac 5k owner, Ive had this since 2016. 
    It now feels small. I use it far more often than my MBP simply because of screen size and clarity. 

    It felt huge when I first bought it. Like an exotic item from the future. 

    As a multimedia designer, the 27 inch screen is nice to see the fine details as I create. 

    But that was jumping up from a a laptop screen. 

    Now, having much more experience with intricate design and hardware, the 27 inch screen feels cramped. 

    The 27 inch size was exotic 6 years ago. Now it’s just ok. 

    Apple coming out with a long awaited redesign is great. But it will be so disappointing to be stuck at 27”. 

    It’s fine for a lot of people. But it’s not special anymore. And it’s not big anymore. 

    For those who want it, 27” will be great. 

    But a great many folks want more. Thankfully, it seems Apple will be giving us a 32 option also. 

    Heck, Apple used to sell a 30” Cinema Display forever ago. It’s 2022! Time to move up. 
    Very interesting hearing your perspective. Thanks for articulating it so thoroughly. Makes a lot of sense. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 31
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    lkrupp said:
    tundraboy said:
    Really…27”? 
    This is just a replacement of the 27" Intel iMac. They've had those for over a decade.
    I think the point is that with the screen size unchanged, it is now pretty close to the lower end 24" which increased from 21.5".  I myself had hoped that it would have been bumped up to 30”.
    Then I guess you won’t be buying one, huh.
    Wow, you took an incredibly innocuous comment and found a way to be an asshole.  I'm in awe of your talent.
    muthuk_vanalingamTRAGcharlesnbaconstangdewmeapplguy
Sign In or Register to comment.