Although I agree the phrase "shed doubt" is not common, it is indeed valid English, but only when you are eliminating doubt, which is probably not what the authors of this article intended to convey in their title. Here are some real world examples from reputable sources using the words "shedding doubt", and "casting light":
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
This is exactly what I expect Apple to do do and yes, people would buy it. That would be my ideal Mac.
Interesting, more so because it seems so feasible. The current Studio Display already has a nontrivial computing element in it.
I was thinking big iMac people would be hoping for something with a 32” screen size to further differentiate it from the 24” iMac and the Mac mini + Studio Display combo.
Of course a 6K screen is a much better fit for a 32” screen but there’s no way that Apple is going to put an XDR display in the thing and hit a price target that would attract iMac buyers other than those who were buying iMac Pro.
What price are people willing to pay for a bigger iMac? A realistic price target for a midrange Mac Studio and Studio Display system including keyboard and trackpad is around $5K. Going with an M2 Mac mini (speculation) with a decent amount of memory and storage instead of the Mac Studio would probably lop a grand off that price, so you’d be at $4K. Where does a large iMac slot in price wise? If they stay with a 5K screen they could probably get in in the gap at $4.5K. A cost reduced 6K screen based iMac would probably blow through the $5K mark quite easily.
Do these prices sound scary? Considering that adding an XDR display to a system BOM gets you to the $5K mark before you even select a computing platform I don’t think those prices are very scary. I’m still talking midrange systems, not the minimum memory and minimum storage ones or the high end ones that blow past $10K without blinking.
No denying that the previous generation non-pro 27” iMac with 5K screen and a hot (in so many ways) Intel processor was a relative bargain. It will be interesting to see how Apple can pull off similar things with their own Silicon in the mix. I sometimes forget that even the original M1 is a significantly powerful processor compared to what we were getting with the old Intel Core processors. A Mac mini with M2 or pro/max variants of the M2 (or M1) is still a very solid basis for a personal workstation class system.
It really depends on how Apple views the iMac. Judging by their most recent movies, the iMac is a positioned as a non-pro machine. And I think a 27" ASi iMac will just be a bigger version of that. If I remember correctly, the previous Intel 27" iMac had a starting price of $1,799 for the base model so I wouldn't be surprised if that's the starting price for a 27" ASi iMac. But I don't see this model showing up until the M3 series SoC's are introduced.
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
This is exactly what I expect Apple to do do and yes, people would buy it. That would be my ideal Mac.
Interesting, more so because it seems so feasible. The current Studio Display already has a nontrivial computing element in it.
I was thinking big iMac people would be hoping for something with a 32” screen size to further differentiate it from the 24” iMac and the Mac mini + Studio Display combo.
Of course a 6K screen is a much better fit for a 32” screen but there’s no way that Apple is going to put an XDR display in the thing and hit a price target that would attract iMac buyers other than those who were buying iMac Pro.
What price are people willing to pay for a bigger iMac? A realistic price target for a midrange Mac Studio and Studio Display system including keyboard and trackpad is around $5K. Going with an M2 Mac mini (speculation) with a decent amount of memory and storage instead of the Mac Studio would probably lop a grand off that price, so you’d be at $4K. Where does a large iMac slot in price wise? If they stay with a 5K screen they could probably get in in the gap at $4.5K. A cost reduced 6K screen based iMac would probably blow through the $5K mark quite easily.
Do these prices sound scary? Considering that adding an XDR display to a system BOM gets you to the $5K mark before you even select a computing platform I don’t think those prices are very scary. I’m still talking midrange systems, not the minimum memory and minimum storage ones or the high end ones that blow past $10K without blinking.
No denying that the previous generation non-pro 27” iMac with 5K screen and a hot (in so many ways) Intel processor was a relative bargain. It will be interesting to see how Apple can pull off similar things with their own Silicon in the mix. I sometimes forget that even the original M1 is a significantly powerful processor compared to what we were getting with the old Intel Core processors. A Mac mini with M2 or pro/max variants of the M2 (or M1) is still a very solid basis for a personal workstation class system.
It really depends on how Apple views the iMac. Judging by their most recent movies, the iMac is a positioned as a non-pro machine. And I think a 27" ASi iMac will just be a bigger version of that. If I remember correctly, the previous Intel 27" iMac had a starting price of $1,799 for the base model so I wouldn't be surprised if that's the starting price for a 27" ASi iMac. But I don't see this model showing up until the M3 series SoC's are introduced.
This brings up an interesting thought. I wonder if Apple might use the current ASi for the Pro models, and the previous one for Consumer models. So M3 for Macbook Pro, M2 for the Air. This means any big iMac would have the M2, the same as the 24” version, and the M3 for an iMac Pro if they have one. Then when the M4 comes out the M3 would go to the Consumer models. The Mini would stay on M1 until the M3 comes out, then be upgraded to an M2. They already do something similar with the iPhones and iPads.
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
This is exactly what I expect Apple to do do and yes, people would buy it. That would be my ideal Mac.
I suspect that apple used the introduction of the Mac Studio and the Studio Display to get rid of what was probably its lowest margin mac.
If Apple did do this it would have to be a grand above the price of a studio display or it would make the display look very overpriced. That would make the clear and obvious price hike over the old Intel 27 inch iMac generate extremely bad press.
I suppose the alternative would be to do a 27 inch 4K iMac, but Apple would have to do something about at OS level (both technically and philosophically) to make that work well. Meantime, just strap an M2pro Mac mini to the back of a Dell U2723QE display…oh.
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
This is exactly what I expect Apple to do do and yes, people would buy it. That would be my ideal Mac.
I suspect that apple used the introduction of the Mac Studio and the Studio Display to get rid of what was probably its lowest margin mac.
If Apple did do this it would have to be a grand above the price of a studio display or it would make the display look very overpriced. That would make the clear and obvious price hike over the old Intel 27 inch iMac generate extremely bad press.
I suppose the alternative would be to do a 27 inch 4K iMac, but Apple would have to do something about at OS level (both technically and philosophically) to make that work well. Meantime, just strap an M2pro Mac mini to the back of a Dell U2723QE display…oh.
I am planning to do precisely that when I retire this 27" late 2009 iMac. I am going to use a HP 4k display and an M1 mac mini. Done.
I hadn’t thought about it but I think your analysis is likely spot on.
Wasn’t the Mini one of the very first Macs with Apple silicon? It’s definitely due. But then it is the bottom end machine and I was surprised when it got Apple silicon so early. Maybe they figure that it can go longer between updates because it is just the Mini. Whatever the reason, I’ve got new computer fever. I can wait till early next year, (and my bank account would be happier if I did), but I was hoping not to have to.
The delay in introducing an up-speced Intel mini between 2014 and 2018 certainly made it appear that the mini was the poor stepchild in Cupertino.
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
I would think that the quick and dirty approach could attract a lot of buyers. Well, maybe not "dirty." A clean, updated enclosure design along the lines of the 24" iMac shouldn't be a stretch...
...but with just a little more time, perhaps the 27" iMac turns into a 27"-28" M-whatever iMac with a 5.5K display.
Lots of people have suggested the next bigger iMac should be a 32" or some ultra-wide screen format. I would worry about the price of this approach. Those not wanting to wait, and/or that have the budget will pair a Mac mini or Mac Studio with a nice screen like the Studio Display or even the XDR (with the obvious added benefit of allowing CPU upgrade while keeping the display).
However, keep in mind that the 21.5" 4K iMac turned into a 24" 4.5K iMac. The value proposition of Apple's AIOs have always been quite good, especially with the 5K iMac, and so it is with the 24" iMac. AFAIK, you can't even get a separate 4.5K monitor anywhere, but somehow, Apple was able to put one in for a decent price. For that price, I don't think you could build an equivalent separate Mac/display. Yes, a mini with a 4K would be close, but to keep a similar pixel pitch as the 24" iMac, the 4K should not be larger than 24", and there are not as many choices on these. Don't get me wrong, the typical 28" 4K monitors are nice, but I guess I am spoiled by my 27" 5K iMac.
I suppose the economics going from 4K to 4.5K and going from 5K to 5.5K are not the same, so I won't hold my breath for a 5.5K iMac -- I just can't imagine Apple not coming up with some sort of replacement for the 27" 5K iMac in the near future.
I hadn’t thought about it but I think your analysis is likely spot on.
Wasn’t the Mini one of the very first Macs with Apple silicon? It’s definitely due. But then it is the bottom end machine and I was surprised when it got Apple silicon so early. Maybe they figure that it can go longer between updates because it is just the Mini. Whatever the reason, I’ve got new computer fever. I can wait till early next year, (and my bank account would be happier if I did), but I was hoping not to have to.
The delay in introducing an up-speced Intel mini between 2014 and 2018 certainly made it appear that the mini was the poor stepchild in Cupertino.
It did, however, get a shout-out from the CEO in October 2017: "I'm glad you love the Mac mini. We love it too. Our customers have found so many creative and interesting uses for the Mac mini. While it is not time to share any details, we do plan for Mac mini to be an important part of our product line going forward."
The Mini, let's not forget, wasn't "one of the first" Macs with Apple Silicon, it was the first, in the form of the "Developer Transition Kit" = an A12Z SoC with 16 GB RAM inside a Space Grey Mac mini. The M1 Mini has carried on in that role, I think, as a low-cost way to test Apple Silicon. I got one early on and hooked it up to an old Thunderbolt Display, but that's been replaced now with a Studio Display in a configuration that is pretty much the 27" M1 iMac:
DEWME said, "The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess."
My iMac is a late 2013 27". Apple no longer supports it. My MacBook Pro is a late 2016, it is already partially obsolete and I suspect it will be no longer supported by Apple in the very near future. I've been waiting for two years now for a larger-than-21.5 or 24" iMac. Now at the very earliest it will be the latter part of March 2023, if we see it all. I've been seeing all of the rumors that everyone else has, as well as Apple's typical BS marketing tactics. The way they play on words, they could come out with a replacement at any time and just call it something other that iMac, or not at all. But again, as the OP noted, it's anyone's guess. PC's are looking more and more attractive...
I hadn’t thought about it but I think your analysis is likely spot on.
Wasn’t the Mini one of the very first Macs with Apple silicon? It’s definitely due. But then it is the bottom end machine and I was surprised when it got Apple silicon so early. Maybe they figure that it can go longer between updates because it is just the Mini. Whatever the reason, I’ve got new computer fever. I can wait till early next year, (and my bank account would be happier if I did), but I was hoping not to have to.
The delay in introducing an up-speced Intel mini between 2014 and 2018 certainly made it appear that the mini was the poor stepchild in Cupertino.
It did, however, get a shout-out from the CEO in October 2017: "I'm glad you love the Mac mini. We love it too. Our customers have found so many creative and interesting uses for the Mac mini. While it is not time to share any details, we do plan for Mac mini to be an important part of our product line going forward."
The Mini, let's not forget, wasn't "one of the first" Macs with Apple Silicon, it was the first, in the form of the "Developer Transition Kit" = an A12Z SoC with 16 GB RAM inside a Space Grey Mac mini. The M1 Mini has carried on in that role, I think, as a low-cost way to test Apple Silicon. I got one early on and hooked it up to an old Thunderbolt Display, but that's been replaced now with a Studio Display in a configuration that is pretty much the 27" M1 iMac:
Very nice. The Studio Display is especially well suited to pairing with the Mac mini because it gets you a camera, speakers, and a few more ports.
I'm pretty sure the next version of the Mac mini with newer Apple Silicon will make it even better.
2015 iMac 27 here. No Ventura for me. Or in my late 2016 touchbar MacBook Pro. The desktop is a priority to upgrade, but I also am not happy with choices. The 24” would feel like a downgrade. I already have a second 27” second monitor beside, use lots of screen real estate and use if as my main video & movie screen. A Mac studio & studio monitor would be swell, but way pricy compared to where the large iMac cost when it was around. I’d love the specs of the studio monitor, but not at that premium. The design of the new 24” is great. Just supersize the screen with those color depth specs and open up the pro/max/ultra options…. Otherwise I’ll be reluctantly getting a M2 mini and a different brand monitor.
I have been waiting for an M2 iMac - in particular I am curious for some potential design adjustments. Nothing in the rumours mill about that?
Given the bump hasn't happened to M2 as yet I wonder the iMac and MacMini might move to the M1 Pro instead of the M2. Arguably a better upgrade than the M2 anyway especially given both desktops can run free in terms of power draw and heat the way a laptop/tablet can't and the studio starts with the Max chip so the Pro missing from the Desktop top line up would seem a natural fit.
Have the M1 pro as a good and better options available in stores have the M2 Pro as built to order best option. Next year rolls down as M2 and M3.
I would think with a redesign of the mIni internals they could even have the same mainboard for both the Mac mini and iMac24. with the socket of the iMac plugging into a round power supply under it based on the power supply from the Mac Studio.
I have been waiting for an M2 iMac - in particular I am curious for some potential design adjustments. Nothing in the rumours mill about that?
Given the bump hasn't happened to M2 as yet I wonder the iMac and MacMini might move to the M1 Pro instead of the M2. Arguably a better upgrade than the M2 anyway especially given both desktops can run free in terms of power draw and heat the way a laptop/tablet can't and the studio starts with the Max chip so the Pro missing from the Desktop top line up would seem a natural fit.
Have the M1 pro as a good and better options available in stores have the M2 Pro as built to order best option. Next year rolls down as M2 and M3.
I would think with a redesign of the mIni internals they could even have the same mainboard for both the Mac mini and iMac24. with the socket of the iMac plugging into a round power supply under it based on the power supply from the Mac Studio.
Makes sense, but it doesn’t explain the delay in the iMac and the Mini. The only thing that explains the ongoing delay is they are waiting to introduce the M2 Pro as an option.
The fate of the 27” iMac is anyone’s guess. At this point it’s a safe bet that we will never see a transitional version of the 27” iMac, i.e., where Apple shoves Apple Silicon magic into the same chassis the last Intel version 27” iMacs used. Personally, I think Apple will go in a totally new direction if they do a larger than 24” format all-in-one. They may not even call it an iMac and keep the current 24” iMac as the only iMac. I also think it may be a massive touch based device somewhat akin to Microsoft’s Surface Studio. Imagine a very large touch based all-in-one Mac with significant Apple Silicon based performance that can be used by itself but also be paired with a Mac Studio or Apple Silicon Mac Pro for extremely intensive 3D design, simulation, modeling, and tasks requiring unparalleled graphical performance capability. Of course this sounds like an exceedingly niche product, but as long as the Mac Studio and 27” Studio Display are still around, the music has stopped playing and all of the available chairs are already taken. The 27” iMac is the odd man out.
Overall I agree with your analyses. I would doubt though that the replacement for the 27” iMac might be a touch screen. Apple seems to be very intent on keeping their touch devices separate from the Macs. If they ever do make a really big touch device I would expect it to run ipadOS.
Yeah, it's a stretch.
Apple could seemingly do a quick & dirty Apple Silicon 27" iMac by putting the guts from a 14"/16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro into a variation of the Studio Display. Would anyone buy it?
This is exactly what I expect Apple to do do and yes, people would buy it. That would be my ideal Mac.
Interesting, more so because it seems so feasible. The current Studio Display already has a nontrivial computing element in it.
I was thinking big iMac people would be hoping for something with a 32” screen size to further differentiate it from the 24” iMac and the Mac mini + Studio Display combo.
Of course a 6K screen is a much better fit for a 32” screen but there’s no way that Apple is going to put an XDR display in the thing and hit a price target that would attract iMac buyers other than those who were buying iMac Pro.
What price are people willing to pay for a bigger iMac? A realistic price target for a midrange Mac Studio and Studio Display system including keyboard and trackpad is around $5K. Going with an M2 Mac mini (speculation) with a decent amount of memory and storage instead of the Mac Studio would probably lop a grand off that price, so you’d be at $4K. Where does a large iMac slot in price wise? If they stay with a 5K screen they could probably get in in the gap at $4.5K. A cost reduced 6K screen based iMac would probably blow through the $5K mark quite easily.
Do these prices sound scary? Considering that adding an XDR display to a system BOM gets you to the $5K mark before you even select a computing platform I don’t think those prices are very scary. I’m still talking midrange systems, not the minimum memory and minimum storage ones or the high end ones that blow past $10K without blinking.
No denying that the previous generation non-pro 27” iMac with 5K screen and a hot (in so many ways) Intel processor was a relative bargain. It will be interesting to see how Apple can pull off similar things with their own Silicon in the mix. I sometimes forget that even the original M1 is a significantly powerful processor compared to what we were getting with the old Intel Core processors. A Mac mini with M2 or pro/max variants of the M2 (or M1) is still a very solid basis for a personal workstation class system.
It really depends on how Apple views the iMac. Judging by their most recent movies, the iMac is a positioned as a non-pro machine. And I think a 27" ASi iMac will just be a bigger version of that. If I remember correctly, the previous Intel 27" iMac had a starting price of $1,799 for the base model so I wouldn't be surprised if that's the starting price for a 27" ASi iMac. But I don't see this model showing up until the M3 series SoC's are introduced.
This brings up an interesting thought. I wonder if Apple might use the current ASi for the Pro models, and the previous one for Consumer models. So M3 for Macbook Pro, M2 for the Air. This means any big iMac would have the M2, the same as the 24” version, and the M3 for an iMac Pro if they have one. Then when the M4 comes out the M3 would go to the Consumer models. The Mini would stay on M1 until the M3 comes out, then be upgraded to an M2. They already do something similar with the iPhones and iPads.
The biggest hurdle there is that Apple has a long track record of tying new features to new hardware. What you are proposing essentially declassifies the consumer iPhone into a "lite" model. Sure, no problem technically.
That's really a more philosophical marketing course change that would signal Apple going from a premium electronics maker into something more like their competitors. It would basically dethrone the iPhone as the industry benchmark.
If Apple were to stick previous gen SoCs in their consumer-grade iPhones, they'd also likely have to change their pricing tiers.
Also if there is no corresponding process node change, the newer SoC might not have much of a performance uplift compared to the previous generation.
I'm sure it has crossed their mind more than once. For sure, they have a wide assortment of prototype devices in their labs with new prototypes next to older ones and even released models.
It's not like Apple just got into the smartphone business a couple of years ago.
Comments
I suppose the alternative would be to do a 27 inch 4K iMac, but Apple would have to do something about at OS level (both technically and philosophically) to make that work well. Meantime, just strap an M2pro Mac mini to the back of a Dell U2723QE display…oh.
...but with just a little more time, perhaps the 27" iMac turns into a 27"-28" M-whatever iMac with a 5.5K display.
Lots of people have suggested the next bigger iMac should be a 32" or some ultra-wide screen format. I would worry about the price of this approach. Those not wanting to wait, and/or that have the budget will pair a Mac mini or Mac Studio with a nice screen like the Studio Display or even the XDR (with the obvious added benefit of allowing CPU upgrade while keeping the display).
However, keep in mind that the 21.5" 4K iMac turned into a 24" 4.5K iMac. The value proposition of Apple's AIOs have always been quite good, especially with the 5K iMac, and so it is with the 24" iMac. AFAIK, you can't even get a separate 4.5K monitor anywhere, but somehow, Apple was able to put one in for a decent price. For that price, I don't think you could build an equivalent separate Mac/display. Yes, a mini with a 4K would be close, but to keep a similar pixel pitch as the 24" iMac, the 4K should not be larger than 24", and there are not as many choices on these. Don't get me wrong, the typical 28" 4K monitors are nice, but I guess I am spoiled by my 27" 5K iMac.
I suppose the economics going from 4K to 4.5K and going from 5K to 5.5K are not the same, so I won't hold my breath for a 5.5K iMac -- I just can't imagine Apple not coming up with some sort of replacement for the 27" 5K iMac in the near future.
The Mini, let's not forget, wasn't "one of the first" Macs with Apple Silicon, it was the first, in the form of the "Developer Transition Kit" = an A12Z SoC with 16 GB RAM inside a Space Grey Mac mini. The M1 Mini has carried on in that role, I think, as a low-cost way to test Apple Silicon. I got one early on and hooked it up to an old Thunderbolt Display, but that's been replaced now with a Studio Display in a configuration that is pretty much the 27" M1 iMac:
My iMac is a late 2013 27". Apple no longer supports it. My MacBook Pro is a late 2016, it is already partially obsolete and I suspect it will be no longer supported by Apple in the very near future. I've been waiting for two years now for a larger-than-21.5 or 24" iMac. Now at the very earliest it will be the latter part of March 2023, if we see it all. I've been seeing all of the rumors that everyone else has, as well as Apple's typical BS marketing tactics. The way they play on words, they could come out with a replacement at any time and just call it something other that iMac, or not at all. But again, as the OP noted, it's anyone's guess. PC's are looking more and more attractive...
The desktop is a priority to upgrade, but I also am not happy with choices. The 24” would feel like a downgrade. I already have a second 27” second monitor beside, use lots of screen real estate and use if as my main video & movie screen.
A Mac studio & studio monitor would be swell, but way pricy compared to where the large iMac cost when it was around. I’d love the specs of the studio monitor, but not at that premium. The design of the new 24” is great. Just supersize the screen with those color depth specs and open up the pro/max/ultra options…. Otherwise I’ll be reluctantly getting a M2 mini and a different brand monitor.
Arguably a better upgrade than the M2 anyway especially given both desktops can run free in terms of power draw and heat the way a laptop/tablet can't and the studio starts with the Max chip so the Pro missing from the Desktop top line up would seem a natural fit.
Have the M1 pro as a good and better options available in stores have the M2 Pro as built to order best option. Next year rolls down as M2 and M3.
I would think with a redesign of the mIni internals they could even have the same mainboard for both the Mac mini and iMac24. with the socket of the iMac plugging into a round power supply under it based on the power supply from the Mac Studio.
That's really a more philosophical marketing course change that would signal Apple going from a premium electronics maker into something more like their competitors. It would basically dethrone the iPhone as the industry benchmark.
If Apple were to stick previous gen SoCs in their consumer-grade iPhones, they'd also likely have to change their pricing tiers.
Also if there is no corresponding process node change, the newer SoC might not have much of a performance uplift compared to the previous generation.
I'm sure it has crossed their mind more than once. For sure, they have a wide assortment of prototype devices in their labs with new prototypes next to older ones and even released models.
It's not like Apple just got into the smartphone business a couple of years ago.