The 27-inch iMac conundrum
Allow me to speak on behalf of the world’s 27-inch iMac owners:
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!
Ah. Good. Had to get that out of my system. Honestly, I have never been so appalled at an Apple strategy. Between the launch of Mac Studio and the simultaneous death of iMac 27, we who have so patiently waited for an Apple Silicon-powered 27-inch iMac are suddenly left with only two options.
We can hang onto our aging computers and simply hope that a new iMac 27 will one day appear. Or we can spend more than double the cost of a typical new iMac 27 for a Mac Studio + Studio Display.
There are only two ways to explain what Apple is doing. It is either failing the transparency test miserably, or it is blatantly committing an act of corporate greed. Sadly, “all of the above” is also a possibility.
Farewell, old friend
iMac 27 has been around for 12 years. This “prosumer” iMac has given high-end users (and many businesses) an option for faster processors, more storage and a professional workspace in a sleek all-in-one design.
We are the people who want more than an entry-level computer, but have little need for the performance and price of an iMac Pro or Mac Pro.
I am not a graphics or video professional. But my iMac 27 has more than enough muscle to run Adobe apps and Final Cut Pro when I need them. Better still, the all-in-one design keeps my physical desktop clean.
What my computer does not have is the benefit of an M1 processor and the redesign that has revitalized sales of the 24-inch iMac.
Patience without a payoff
When Apple unveiled the ultra-slim M1 iMac nearly one year ago, we iMac 27 owners were disappointed that our model was not similarly upgraded. But we are a hearty lot. We sucked it in, assuming that our day would come soon enough.
For months, we rejoiced in rumors that a new iMac 27 was in development. How could it not be? Of course Apple would have to bring this important class of customers into the Apple Silicon age.
When the “Peek Performance” event was announced, it seemed that a new iMac 27 would fit right in. But, instead reaping the reward for our patience, we were knocked off balance once again.
I don’t mean to rain on Mac Studio’s parade. It was a wonderful surprise, harking back to the good old days when Apple could actually keep secrets. It is awesome in every measure, designed for a critical segment of Mac users whose livelihood calls for computer-intensive work in graphics, music, video and web development.
It does everything incredibly well—except replace the iMac 27. That’s because the Mac Studio is way, way, way outside the price range that most iMac 27 users are comfortable paying.
As the event was ending, without any word about an M1 iMac 27, we could still cling to the hope that our new computer would arrive at some future event. That is, until Apple’s Senior VP of Hardware Engineering said that the transition to Apple Silicon was now nearly complete, “with just one more product to go: Mac Pro.”
“Huh? What about the 27-inch iMac?” we wondered. Within minutes, the other shoe dropped. Unceremoniously, the old iMac 27 was removed from Apple’s website—officially given “end-of-life” status.
A path not taken
Never in a million years did I imagine that Apple could leave such a large group of customers twisting in the wind. It’s frustrating. Even more so because Apple could remove the frustration by simply telling the truth.
Just the briefest of communiques would suffice. One tiny clue about the possibility of a new Apple Silicon-powered iMac 27. Do we sit tight, or do we make other plans?
Apple’s silence is a slap in the face to an important group of loyal customers. One of the traits that helped build the Apple brand—empathy for its customers—has tragically gone missing.
A word from Steve Jobs
Steve had a strong opinion about pricing (as he did about everything). That opinion came to the fore in our attempts to market the ill-fated Power Mac G4 Cube.
The Cube was a prosumer computer. From the start, Steve’s plan was to price it at $1,499, just $200 more than the iMac and far less than the Mac Pro. But in the days leading up to the launch, Steve walked into one of our regular marketing meetings in a dark, deflated mood.
He had just received catastrophic news from his manufacturing team—the Cube had to be priced at $1,799. Steve did not mince words. He said that at that price, the Cube was doomed. iMac customers could reasonably be expected to pay $200 more for a premium version, but $500 would be a deal-killer.
Savor that one as we return to the present.
iMac 27 customers are already paying at least a $1,000 premium over the price of the iMac 24. We’re cool with that. If we are to upgrade to a Mac Studio, we would be paying that premium, plus $2,000-$5,000 more. On what planet would that be a realistic option?
The obvious rebuttal is that the Mac Studio is not designed for high-end consumers. It’s for creative people running compute-intensive apps for video, graphics, music and web development.
Got it. But the obvious rebuttal to the obvious rebuttal is: what are we iMac 27 people supposed to do now? We’re lost!
Hello?
I am dumfounded by this entire episode. (Could you tell?)
Before last week, I would have said it is not even remotely possible that Apple would orphan its iMac 27 customers. What makes our situation extra-debilitating is that we don’t know if this has really happened, or if we just think that this has happened—because Apple isn’t talking.
This is simply disrespectful to a large group of loyal Apple customers. Do we really have to make plans based on conflicting internet rumors? Just tell us. We can take it. Is there a plan for us or not?
Silence means that Apple is being guided solely by the profit motive. If they were to say that a new iMac 27 is in the works, the sub-group of iMac 27 owners willing to pay that much will be disincentivized. But going the silent route risks creating an even larger group of customers who feel ignored and abused.
This is corporate greed stacked on top of disrespect, with a side order of brazen nerve.
Apple has already played its hand. It has chosen the course of announcing the Mac Studio, discontinuing the 27-inch iMac and then going into Silent Mode. It is a stain that cannot be removed—but at this point, at least it can be mitigated.
All it would take is a tiny bit of transparency.
Help us out, Apple. Talk!
Maybe an updated Mac mini with an M2 and a Studio Display?
Yeah, thought about that. Problem is, at least with the current model Mac mini, is that 2TB is maximum storage. I need more! And I don’t want to start cluttering my desk with external disks.
My guess is Apple will produce a Mac mini with the M1 Pro chip inside. Then their concept will be to pair the Mini with the 27” display for those wanting that size monitor.
To answer your previous criticism: It is possible to use a Mini with extra storage without heaps of cables and clutter.
There are some great accesories for the Mac mini that are essentially ‘docks’ on which the Mini sits (link below). The dock matches the Mini’s size and brushed aluminium appearance so they appear ‘as one’. Within the dock it is possible to house an m.2 SSD – allowing YOU to buy storage at a price you are willing to pay. A hit in performance for it not being internal, but perfectly adequate for most use cases.
https://satechi.net/products/stand-hub-for-mac-mini-with-ssd-enclosure?variant=39461828657240
Came here to post this exact thing. We need a Mac mini with the “Pro” version of the chip (M1, M2, whatever).
Wish I could have gotten my iMac with an M1 Pro as well (mainly to get 32 GB), but the Pro did not exist back than. I sincerely hope Apple offers a Pro in the iMac at some point.
Right now, weirdly, there is no desktop M1 Pro machine.
I think it’s as simple as this: the constraints that the base m1 has in storage and ram will be eliminated in the m2, and a m2 Mac mini + studio display will fill the gap of the 27in iMac. The studio display and the Mac studio will fill gap of the iMac Pro.
I’m betting once the m2 comes the need for the 27in iMac will be really slim.
I have the mini and a monitor, I took all my external disks (and a hub) and Velcro’d them all to the bottom of my desk. There’s one cable going from the mini under to the underside of my desk, and it’s totally clean on top. I totally forget those other disks are there.
I get this post is more venting than asking for solutions; I respect that. But if you want a Mac mini solution, this has worked better for me than I would have thought.
I appreciate all the suggestions. But — I’ve been spoiled by Apple over the years, and I’m unwilling to kluge together a system that only resembles the design and performance I need. Apple has worked very hard over the years to “create” customers like me. (I know, I spent years as part of that effort!) I’ve become hooked on everything the 27-inch iMac has to offer.
Will Apple ultimately give 27-inch iMac customers a product we can love? Maybe. Possibly. Theoretically. That’s my point. WE DON’T KNOW. Abruptly dropping that kind of uncertainty upon a large group of loyal customers is not only confusing. It’s very un-Apple.
This is a good example of “people take all sorts of behavior, but they take disrespect the worst.” Any time a company leaves buyers feeling disrespected, they’re gonna get HARD pushback. They should have seen it coming.
Why not buy a non-Apple display? They’re much more cheaper, and there are some good ones. The next time you need to upgrade your computer, it’s going to be cheaper than an iMac since you already would have a display.
Possible, but it’s the Mac Studio that is more distressing to me. That alone will cost $3,400 with 4TB storage. Not sure if a non-Apple display would satisfy my elitist design standards 🙂 I’d have to do the research. But even if I could find a great display for $500, I’d still end up spending $2,000 more than I had to before. That’s one hell of a leap.
If you are hoping to get 4 TB of storage, a 24 inch iMac with just 2TB (16GB RAM) costs $2500. The last gen 27inch iMac cost t $4K with 4TB of storage and 32GB of RAM). I.e., the old 5K iMac doesn’t seem to be that great a deal compared to the new Mac Studio.
Now you can get an entry-level Mac Studio with 4TB storage (32GB of unified RAM) for $3200. Excellent 4K monitors exist for $400 – $600, so you aren’t that far off from a similarly spec’d out iMac.
My biggest gripe with ALL the Macs is Apple’s outrageous surcharge for upgrading the SSD. They’ve gotten better, but still ridiculous. SSDs are a commodity item, and as Apple is one of the biggest purchasers in the cosmos, it seems like their prices should be a little more reasonable.
I don’t find the SSD prices on M1 macs that unreasonable. The chips Apple is using are dramatically more performant and costly then commodity drives. The M1 Macbook Air doubled read/write speeds.
Apple has always overcharged for memory and storage, but I think the M1 devices offer a better deal than on Intel Macs.
Apple 1TB SSD upgrade: $200
Apple 2TB SSD upgrade:$600
Apple 4TB SSD upgrade: $1200
Sabrent 1TB SSD: $157
Sabrent 2TB SSD: $310
Sabrent 4TB SSD: $750
These SSDs are comparable speed to the Apple SSDs, i.e. NVMe 4.0 Gen4 PCIe, 7GB per sec
1TB apple upgrade isn’t too bad until you remember that you’re replacing a 512 GB SSD which should be worth $90.
It would never satisfy. Never means never. You’ll get noise & many issues while using active colour calibration or any extra feature even dark mode
I’m a victim & lost many on display! + there’s no refund or something in Pakistan as there’s no official support.
https://www.benq.com/en-us/knowledge-center/knowledge/how-to-fix-mac-m1-m2-external-monitor-flicker.html
Good luck finding a display with a webcam, mic, and speakers today that doesn’t have an Apple logo on it. Literally the only one I know of is the LG Ultrafine 5K and that comes with a boatload of issues of its own (I have one).
“This is corporate greed stacked on top of disrespect, with a side order of brazen nerve.”
Talk to some developers sometime, who have to deal with Apple’s developer tools and the App Store Review process. Developers are treated with utter contempt these days.
Unlikely, but just as a new 14″ MBP was brought out, so wasn’t considered a transitional model, could it be that they’re looking at changing the dimensions of the 27″ and creating a new iMac?
So it wouldn’t be a model that needs to transition, and thus wouldn’t be put in the same bracket as the Mac Pro?
I think/feel that Apple wants to put an M2 in the 27-inch iMac and make some other changes to it. However, it wasn’t ready for this March event. Therefore….
I thought so too. And that’s the problem—this did not happen, and then Apple sent the exact opposite message by discontinuing the existing 27-inch iMac. Result: confusion!
Agree…confusion. But let’s keep the faith in Apple for a little longer and see what happens.
Ken – I have been feeling your same pain since the M1 24″ iMac was announced and have waited with baited breath every since to desperately upgrade my ailing 27″ iMac. As an Apple stockholder, I am still upset that Apple has decided to clearly go down the corporate greed road instead of giving satisfaction to what so many past customers have been waiting for. I think they are hoping that most will upgrade to the Studio with the monitor or even buy the monitor and get the Mac Mini, which is still more expensive than most versions of the 27″ iMac (based on previous version prices).
Hoping that Tim and the gang will decide to make their customers happy someday in the relatively near future.
I have a Mac Mini M1 with LG5k and it works pretty well. Yes, 2 items instead of 1. But when you start spending that money on a display, being separated is not such a bad idea.
I hear what you’re saying Ken, but with respect, when has Apple ever shared their future product plans with their customers? If they’re working on a new iMac Pro 27” (and there’s still rumours to suggest that’s the case) why would they dull potential sales of the Studio to those who can’t wait in the meantime? They wouldn’t.
Steve – and by some extension you – created the mystique and secrecy of Apple in regards to transparency with users. So it shouldn’t be a big surprise that they aren’t very forthcoming about it. The fact they haven’t specifically said there won’t be another 27” iMac though, may actually be a good sign that you will get your wish when they’re ready with it.
The only times I can think of that Apple has spoken of future products, were the Mac Pro reboot after the trash can, which took a long time for them to come around to, and people had been crying out for years about; and the multi-device wireless charge pad that they then discovered they couldn’t make, which was just a big embarrassment to them. I get it’s frustrating not to know for sure, but it’s hardly unlike them!
Sorry, delayed response. You are correct—Apple has rarely tipped its hand about upcoming products (iBook is the only exception I can remember), and I agree with that policy 100%. But this is a very different case. On a single day, Apple simultaneously launched a new 27-inch desktop and killed the existing 27-inch iMac.
There was no tipping of the hand, but there were definitely mixed signals. We 27-inch iMac people are left to guess Apple’s intentions based on rumors and logic. Personally, I go with logic. If Apple had any intention of updating the 27-inch iMac, they would simply keep selling the Intel version until the Apple Silicon version was ready to ship, as they’ve done with other Macs to date. No one would be upset. We’d have to be patient a bit longer.
But that isn’t what happened. By choosing this route, it seems pretty clear that Apple wants us to upgrade at a price more than 3x what we’ve paid before. I remember those quaint times when Steve and Jony would explain that Apple does not prioritize on profit—it prioritizes on making great products, and profit is the natural result. Today it seems that profit has become the prime motivator.
I could be wrong, but Apple’s intentions seem clear. The 24-inch iMac will be the general purpose desktop, Mac Studio will be the prosumer and pro desktop, and Mac Pro will be the super high-end desktop. We, the 27-inch iMac prosumer users, are re-assigned to the middle level, squeezed for maximum profit.
Given my history with Apple, I don’t say these things lightly. It hurts me to make this observation, but I see no other explanation.