After an over 12-year run, Apple has discontinued the 27-inch iMac

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    sevenfeetsevenfeet Posts: 469member
    This is a curious choice. The base model Mac Studio + Studio display could easily replace the 27" iMac if you configured the iMac more toward the expensive side to get a price in the mid $3000s. And this machine would crush that iMac in all aspects. But for the base 27" iMac, the only choice would be the Studio Display and the Mac Mini in order to get a price target under $3000. And while that machine would certainly be faster than the outgoing iMac, the Mac Mini still leaves you with fewer ports to work with.

    I still think a larger iMac is coming since many customers like the all-in-one form factor and have always liked it. We may not see it until M2 debuts but there is a curious hole in the Apple lineup now.
    foregoneconclusionopinioncgWerks
  • Reply 22 of 34
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,097member
    I am totally disappointed at the fact they discontinued the iMac 27" as I had a couple of the 27" models over the past few years and the current one I have is getting older. OH well I guess I being looking at the upgraded Mac mini in the future with the display today but I really wanted a all in one solution with a bigger screen that the 27" iMac represented

    I feel the opposite way. I am curently typing this on a late 2009 27" iMac that fulfills all my current needs. I am very much a "consumer level" user, but like you, know The End Approacheth. This new monitor opens up some better opportunities for the replacement that help "future proof" that choice. Even though the 27" is spacious, if have used a  monitor setup for several decades, (Duo230 users here?) and come to rely on it. This 27" iMac has a second 4k HP monitor attached. I see the new studio monitor replacing my iMac and a mac mini driving both. It is then essentially the same base concept, but with much more modern and robust tech. And...when the CPU needs upgrade, it is much, much easier to do. Monitors last for a very much longer time. I see options for beter value over the 27" iMac at my level. YMMV.

    I've been weighing the choices, and choices are always good. The non-27" availability reduces that somewhat, but perhaps not crippling so. And of course, a 24" iMac is still an option - my wife has one and it is an incredibly nice machine too. 
  • Reply 23 of 34
    Apple replaced the $3000 27" iMac you can afford with a $6000 Mac Studio and screen you can't afford. The 27" iMac has RAM you can upgrade at a reasonable price as well. The prices I mentioned are for well configured but not the most expensive versions of either products. Doubling the price is not acceptable.
    I hate to say this, but Apple no longer makes a workstation computer I want to buy.
    opinion
  • Reply 24 of 34
    lkrupp said:
    Huh, but there won’t be a replacement asap…
    So purchase a Studio Display, Mac Studio base model, Magic Keyboard and Mouse for $4300?
    No, you can buy a Mac Mini and a LG display the size of your choosing. 
    You can, but the point is we should simply have a larger version of the 24” iMac. It’s as simple as throwing the parts of a Mac mini M1 inside a newly redesigned 27” iMac body.

    • The M1 Mac mini starts at $699 with 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD storage, and does NOT include accessories.
    • The M1 iMac 24” with 4.5K display starts at $1299 with 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD storage, + accessories.
    • The Mac Studio with M1 Max SoC starts at $1999 with 32GB RAM, 512GB SSD storage, and does NOT include accessories.
    • The 5K Studio Display 27” starts at $1599; and is nothing more than a really good display and speaker system, with an A13 Bionic SoC.

    • The discontinued 2020 iMac 27” with 5K display started at $1799 with Intel i5 (6-core), 8GB RAM, and 256GB SSD storage, + accessories.

    Doing some quick math, a 27” iMac in 2022 with an M1 or M2 chip could and should cost about $1999-$2199, would include the same base 8GB RAM as other M1 systems, same base 256GB SSD storage as other M1 systems, and would include accessories, and a nice display.

    Why not take it a step further? A new iMac Pro with a 30” Pro display sounds appetizing to those who want an all-in-one, but also want the pro features and speed. It should include an M1 Pro or Max SoC’s, base 16GB RAM, and base 512GB SSD storage, and they could easily fit all this (base specs only) in the $2799-$2999 range (starting off).



    They shouldn’t have removed the 27” yet. It’s a popular one, and they KNOW that. They want you to buy the more expensive “Pro” feeling Studio machine and Studio display before you have the chance to consider a newly updated 27” all-in-one iMac. Because if the new Apple Silicon iMac 27” came out first, it would out perform the Mac Studio and Studio Display by heaps in terms of consumer-sales.

    They know users who want an iMac aren’t gonna buy an LG display with their Mac Studio. They want Apple branded. Apple, again, knows this.
    It will come, so if you’re holding out for it, you probably should. Removing the old 27” is to scare consumers into purchasing the new Mac Studio & Studio Display. After enough are purchased, I’d bet lots of money a new iMac with at minimum a 27” display, maybe larger, is coming in 2023 or earlier.

    edited March 2022 williamlondoncgWerksdoozydozen
  • Reply 25 of 34
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,966member
    elijahg said:
    Seems a shame, the high-end 27" iMac was a beast. I suppose though keeping that around would have shown what a ripoff the new display is, since the base 27" iMac was only $200 more than the new display but for an entire computer. No more cable-free experience if you want 27" anymore either. Really haven't been happy with Apple's Mac direction as of late. We've gone from stagnation to incompatibility and expense. Same direction as the mid-90's Macs. Excellent machines in their own right, but pricey and proprietary. 
    Actually it shows that the 27" imac was a bargain. I bought an iMac 5k several years ago and remember thinking that it was overpriced at the time. Then I decided to dock my MBP and give the imac to my daughter last and I got a bit of sticker shock when I looked at the price of 5k monitors. 

    Earlier today I looked at 5k monitors at newegg.com. they had 2 LG models - one was about $1300, the other $2100. I didn't look closely at the specs, but $1600 is not unreasonable.
    williamlondoncgWerks
  • Reply 26 of 34
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,401moderator
    iPhoneOS1 said:
    lkrupp said:
    Huh, but there won’t be a replacement asap…
    So purchase a Studio Display, Mac Studio base model, Magic Keyboard and Mouse for $4300?
    No, you can buy a Mac Mini and a LG display the size of your choosing. 
    They shouldn’t have removed the 27” yet. It’s a popular one, and they KNOW that. They want you to buy the more expensive “Pro” feeling Studio machine and Studio display before you have the chance to consider a newly updated 27” all-in-one iMac. Because if the new Apple Silicon iMac 27” came out first, it would out perform the Mac Studio and Studio Display by heaps in terms of consumer-sales.

    They know users who want an iMac aren’t gonna buy an LG display with their Mac Studio. They want Apple branded. Apple, again, knows this.
    It will come, so if you’re holding out for it, you probably should. Removing the old 27” is to scare consumers into purchasing the new Mac Studio & Studio Display. After enough are purchased, I’d bet lots of money a new iMac with at minimum a 27” display, maybe larger, is coming in 2023 or earlier.
    Apple's laptops outsell their desktops more than 4:1 and you can assume the 24" iMac outsold the 27" by at least 2:1, likely more than 3:1, which means laptops overall outsold the 27" iMac by at least 12:1, likely over 16:1. If they can sell standalone 27" displays to 1/12th-1/16th (6-8%) of Mac laptop buyers, they will make roughly as much as selling a 27" iMac. Margins on a $1999 Mac Studio are probably higher than a $1799 27" iMac that includes keyboard/mouse/display.

    Apple doesn't discontinue popular products, people make the wrong assumption that they are popular.

    That's not to say the Mac Studio will be more popular than the 27" iMac, it probably won't be but they will make sales of that model plus some displays for use with both it and the laptops and all combined can be more than the 27".

    The Studio model also works better for the server environment than the iMac for iOS development and render servers.

    https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/mac/

    Apple said there's only the Mac Pro left to update. Premium desktops make under 0.5% revenue for Apple, whatever decisions they make for them are not about the money but what is the most sustainable route to go long-term.
    williamlondonstompymuthuk_vanalingamsflageldesignr
  • Reply 27 of 34
    Marvin said:
    iPhoneOS1 said:
    lkrupp said:
    Huh, but there won’t be a replacement asap…
    So purchase a Studio Display, Mac Studio base model, Magic Keyboard and Mouse for $4300?
    No, you can buy a Mac Mini and a LG display the size of your choosing. 
    They shouldn’t have removed the 27” yet. It’s a popular one, and they KNOW that. They want you to buy the more expensive “Pro” feeling Studio machine and Studio display before you have the chance to consider a newly updated 27” all-in-one iMac. Because if the new Apple Silicon iMac 27” came out first, it would out perform the Mac Studio and Studio Display by heaps in terms of consumer-sales.

    They know users who want an iMac aren’t gonna buy an LG display with their Mac Studio. They want Apple branded. Apple, again, knows this.
    It will come, so if you’re holding out for it, you probably should. Removing the old 27” is to scare consumers into purchasing the new Mac Studio & Studio Display. After enough are purchased, I’d bet lots of money a new iMac with at minimum a 27” display, maybe larger, is coming in 2023 or earlier.
    Apple's laptops outsell their desktops more than 4:1 and you can assume the 24" iMac outsold the 27" by at least 2:1, likely more than 3:1, which means laptops overall outsold the 27" iMac by at least 12:1, likely over 16:1. If they can sell standalone 27" displays to 1/12th-1/16th (6-8%) of Mac laptop buyers, they will make roughly as much as selling a 27" iMac. Margins on a $1999 Mac Studio are probably higher than a $1799 27" iMac that includes keyboard/mouse/display.

    Apple doesn't discontinue popular products, people make the wrong assumption that they are popular.

    That's not to say the Mac Studio will be more popular than the 27" iMac, it probably won't be but they will make sales of that model plus some displays for use with both it and the laptops and all combined can be more than the 27".

    The Studio model also works better for the server environment than the iMac for iOS development and render servers.

    https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/mac/

    Apple said there's only the Mac Pro left to update. Premium desktops make under 0.5% revenue for Apple, whatever decisions they make for them are not about the money but what is the most sustainable route to go long-term.
    Always arriving with receipts, your posts are one of the BEST things about AI!
  • Reply 28 of 34
    sflagelsflagel Posts: 829member
    sevenfeet said:
    This is a curious choice. The base model Mac Studio + Studio display could easily replace the 27" iMac if you configured the iMac more toward the expensive side to get a price in the mid $3000s. And this machine would crush that iMac in all aspects. But for the base 27" iMac, the only choice would be the Studio Display and the Mac Mini in order to get a price target under $3000. And while that machine would certainly be faster than the outgoing iMac, the Mac Mini still leaves you with fewer ports to work with.

    I still think a larger iMac is coming since many customers like the all-in-one form factor and have always liked it. We may not see it until M2 debuts but there is a curious hole in the Apple lineup now.
    There is a glaring hole, especially visible once the new colourful MacBook Airs debut in the autumn:

    Consumer                         Pro
    Colourful, fast                   Grey and silver, solid, monster-fast 

    iMac                                  [iMacPro 27 inch?]
    Mac Mini                           MacStudio
    2022 MacBook Air           MacBook Pro
    iPad Air                             iPadPro
    iPhone                              iPhone Pro

    (Plus entry levels iPhone SE and iPad which I guess only a small percentage of people in developed markets buy)

    Apple has not had such a clear and aligned line-up in a long time.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 29 of 34
    Maybe they will rethink the Apple TV - a real 65" TV with an Apple engine.
    I love my Sony's, but I can't stand the Android OS and all it's quirks.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 30 of 34
    divid2divid2 Posts: 5member
    I purchased the 2021 16 inch MacBook pro on introduction.  Was still waiting on the 27 or 32 inch iMac.  I find sitting at a larger screen much more comfortable.  I will "NOT" be buying a $1500 monitor or the studio pro.  My 2009 27 inch iMac with an SSD is till plenty fast for the web and some other activities.  Guess it is going to last me longer.  Electronics typically get cheaper but looks like Apple is trying to soak people.   Not very happy about it.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 31 of 34
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,952member
    sflagel said:
    We are seeing clearer delineation between Pro and Consumer (the colourful ones). The Pros are really becoming Pro again and the Consumer levels are becoming more powerful. ...Thankfully, the Pro line is now mostly overkill for consumers.
    That's a very fair point, except that with the way the chips are now designed/packaged, there is no room to get more along one vector w/o jumping into Pro category. For example, if you want more RAM, you're now a Pro. Maybe the swapping and stuff is so fast that even a consumer with RAM needs will get by on a base machine?

    I'm actually glad for the Studio base model (they could have gone just Ultra!), and Pro M1 chips, as they make properly configured machines a bit more power-consumer friendly.

    And, then there is the GPU. The biggest problem I see, is that a lot of average consumers might want more GPU power than the base models have, especially if they have any inclination to game. The GPU lineup is still comparatively weak.

    The base GPUs are better than nearly useless integrated GPUs in previous products, for sure. But compared to the PC market, not that good. You have to get into a M1 Pro to get entry-level dGPU performance, M1 Max for what most Macs with better GPUs had (ie. RX580), which is still kind of PC entry-mid level.

    You have to get a decked out Studio to match a nice gaming PC that would cost $2k-3k. And, they are only that expensive due to crypto-mining.

    But, for the average web-surfer, consumer app user, etc. yeah, the base level machines are completely fine, if not overkill. Just get an M1 mini or MacBook Air and add a monitor if needed. Spurge on a Studio Display if you want to match the 5k iMac display.

    eightzero said:
    This new monitor opens up some better opportunities for the replacement that help "future proof" that choice. Even though the 27" is spacious, if have used a  monitor setup for several decades, (Duo230 users here?) and come to rely on it. This 27" iMac has a second 4k HP monitor attached. I see the new studio monitor replacing my iMac and a mac mini driving both. It is then essentially the same base concept, but with much more modern and robust tech. And...when the CPU needs upgrade, it is much, much easier to do. Monitors last for a very much longer time. I see options for beter value over the 27" iMac at my level. YMMV.
    Yeah, all-in-ones aren't really much of an advantage besides aesthetics. Having a good display opens up a lot of options. I really want to see a 27" version of the iMac for the people who love it (just like I want to see mini and max iPhones, etc.), but of all the problems Mac users face, this one is fairly miner. Using a monitor + some desktop or even laptop gives the same capabilities with even more flexibility. It just might not look quite as pretty.

    But, a monitor with 1 cable to a laptop or Mac mini isn't exactly ugly or a mess either.

    Apple replaced the $3000 27" iMac you can afford with a $6000 Mac Studio and screen you can't afford. The 27" iMac has RAM you can upgrade at a reasonable price as well. The prices I mentioned are for well configured but not the most expensive versions of either products. Doubling the price is not acceptable.
    I hate to say this, but Apple no longer makes a workstation computer I want to buy.

    I get what you're saying (and that you're frustrated). But, I'd guess in real-world performance/usage, you're not making a fair comparison there. The $1999 studio is going to blow it away. I kind of figure a M1 Mac mini is probably going to do most things about as well.

    iPhoneOS1 said:
    They shouldn’t have removed the 27” yet. It’s a popular one, and they KNOW that. They want you to buy the more expensive “Pro” feeling Studio machine and Studio display before you have the chance to consider a newly updated 27” all-in-one iMac. Because if the new Apple Silicon iMac 27” came out first, it would out perform the Mac Studio and Studio Display by heaps in terms of consumer-sales.
    Yeah, agree there. Especially since they need a few good Intel models in the lineup, as things aren't going smoothly on the software side of things. I guess people can buy a mini + eGPU + display, but having that iMac made sense.

    MplsP said:
    Actually it shows that the 27" imac was a bargain. I bought an iMac 5k several years ago and remember thinking that it was overpriced at the time. Then I decided to dock my MBP and give the imac to my daughter last and I got a bit of sticker shock when I looked at the price of 5k monitors. 
    Yeah, I suppose that is the better way of looking at it. I've long heard the 5k iMacs are one of the best deals around. So, basically you're buying a 5k display, and they are throwing in a computer with it? LOL

    Marvin said:
    ... Apple doesn't discontinue popular products, people make the wrong assumption that they are popular.
    ... Apple said there's only the Mac Pro left to update. Premium desktops make under 0.5% revenue for Apple, whatever decisions they make for them are not about the money but what is the most sustainable route to go long-term.
    I'm going to make the same argument here I make for the iPhone mini, though. Apple needs to serve their customer base, not just look at what models are most popular. That means a relatively broad range of models that cover various needs, including some at the edges of popularity (like the Mac Pro).

    Also, I think there is a lot of room to make variations of particular products once they are all transitioned (or even before). The 27" iMac no longer needs to be its own machine. Maybe they just add a size selector in the BTO for the iMac. Just one more machine left, I don't think, means there won't be a ~27" iMac some day.
  • Reply 32 of 34
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,952member
    designr said:
    I'm not sure this is as much of a hole as you think. Mac Studio likely covers the need here.
    Yeah, if you don't get tripped up with the Ultra config, even the base model Studio with Max chip is pretty intense. It's like one-bump down from the top MacBook Pro for under $2k. You don't necessarily *have* to buy the Studio Display either if you don't need that good of a screen and need so save a bit of money. But given this thread, I guess doing so would be appropriate (closest thing to the iMac). But, the performance gap is going to be pretty big.

    The main issue is if you need the x86 compatibility. Doable, but you end up with a desk full of equipment.
  • Reply 33 of 34
    Adding my disappointment here over the discontinuation of the 27" iMacs.  Over the holidays, I stopped by the Apple store to browse iMacs.  I asked one of the employees, "Where are the 27" models?" and was shocked to hear they had been discontinued.  The 27" models were a fantastic value... piecing together a Mini + 5K monitor, not so much.

    Our early 2013 model with the Fusion drive and self-upgraded RAM to 24 GB has been excellent.  The only reason we need to upgrade is that Apple stopped supporting OS updates past Catalina 10.3, and more and more apps we use need MacOS 11+.  Before that we had a first-gen 27" iMac (2009?) and there is no way we were going down in screen size with our third model.

    Fortunately, I found a leftover 2020 27" model at Best Buy on sale and picked it up yesterday.  It's amusing how the form factor/case is exactly like the 2013 model, down to the RAM cover.  I will say, the 5K screen is beautiful.  Unfortunately we had to take a step down in disk (256GB SSD only vs. 1 TB HDD+256 GB fusion) so we also picked up a WD Ultra Passport.
Sign In or Register to comment.