Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Nunyabinez

macrumors 68000
Apr 27, 2010
1,758
2,230
Provo, UT
On a 4K display like he mentioned, "Looks like 1080P" HiDPI mode would not require scaling. OSX would output the full 3840x2160, but because it's HiDPI mode you would get the effective "real estate" of a 1080P display.

The only thing that would be scaled would be applications which aren't HiDPI-aware.

Got it. Looks like I'm waiting for 4K :p.
 

JH4DC5

macrumors member
Sep 10, 2010
76
1
i hope they include a magsafe 2 -> magsafe 1 adapter. I would love to have this for my 2011 mbp.
 

Michael73

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2007
1,082
41
It would be nice if the connectors put out more power. I can dock my iPhone but not my iPad with the USB ports on my ACD. And by extension, I can't use the USB ports on my wired keyboard either.
 

AppliedMicro

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2008
2,163
2,428
Why dont these have an hdmi input aswell? Or do they am I reading it wrong???
You're not reading it wrong.
Your HDMI devices are (likely) outputting it wrong.

Most HDMI devices (and cables, if I'm not mistaken) do support Full HD resolution only, rather than the 27" CD's native resolution. This includes most (all?) of Apple's Computers as well.

And because even most uninformed people know HDMI but not DisplayPort, chances are that some will purchase this thing and/or try via HDMI - and then find out later that it's native resolution isn't supported. Lest we forget all the other functionality (except sound).

So put it short: HDMI would be a bag of hurt™ on this display.
This is why it won't be included.
 

rmwebs

macrumors 68040
Apr 6, 2007
3,140
0
I've been waiting for an updated Thunderbolt display since buying my rMBP. Currently got it hooked up to a couple of Samsung Syncmaster 24" displays, but they are pretty old and have a very slight yellow tint that you really notice next to the rMBP.

Only reason I didn't bite the bullet and buy the Thunderbolt display was because of its crap range of features. USB 2.0, only 1 TB port, etc. For it's price I'd like to see 2 thunderbolt ports and at least 3 USB 3.0 ports.

A price drop would be welcomed too!

I couldn't give a crap about it being thin though - there really is zero point in even trying to call that a feature for a desktop monitor.
 

Nunyabinez

macrumors 68000
Apr 27, 2010
1,758
2,230
Provo, UT
:D lol Exactly.

This is a silly discussion. Use an iPhone 4 or 5 for a while and then pick-up an iPad mini. The difference is jarring (at least it was to me). People who don't appreciate the value of a retina display have just not seen one in action. My iMac looks nice, but I can clearly see pixillation at (what for me) is a normal viewing distance (YMMV). I use my computer for many hours a day and I know that eye strain would be reduced with a retina display. Eventually, we will all be saying "I can't believe I used to look at that crap all day long." The reality is that we could live with much more crappy displays, but once you acquire a taste for quality, it doesn't go away.
 

mgipe

macrumors demi-god
Oct 6, 2009
675
145
CA
My wish list (in priority order):

27 inch reduced glare screen from the new iMac
Same thin edge styling as new iMac
Second input to support legacy Macs and PCs (and eliminate the need for an ACD) DVI or HDMI or whatever
USB 3.0 (maybe more of these?)
Ability to daisy chain to a mini DP monitor
Audio out -- the same analog/optical plug used for other Apple products
Other features the same
Same price

Credit card in hand....
 

fiveainone

macrumors 6502a
Sep 16, 2011
761
76
Why? Do you sit the same distance from your 27" monitor as you do a 15" MacBook Pro?

I do. Otherwise what's the point? Covering more of your field of vision is part of the point of a bigger screen. I never understand why people buy a 46" TV and put it 30 feet away.
 

rainydays

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2006
886
0
Let's hope that they include an audio out connector on the new one!
I can't imagine why they didn't put one on the current one. It ruins the docking experience.
 

hayesk

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2003
1,459
101
Why? Do you sit the same distance from your 27" monitor as you do a 15" MacBook Pro?

Yes. My external monitor is right next to my 15" MacBook Pro.

Retina would be awesome, though I don't expect it in a panel that size.
 

rainydays

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2006
886
0
Heck,
I would love a 30" or larger ACD version.
It's been so many years. These larger displays are great for designers. The space is so nice. If they can manage even higher resolutions, even better.

The resolution on the 27" is exactly the same as on the 30" so it's not as if you get less screen real estate. Sure the display itself is a bit smaller, but you could just move it a bit closer to make up for that.

I personally prefer the 27" size on the desktop.
 

iamkarlp

macrumors regular
Oct 15, 2008
102
0
Heres hoping they'll introduce sensible pricing points... (Over everything else).

The pricing is already sensible.


Other panels of this type are 800$~ without the docking components.

While it would certainly be reasonable to ask them to make one without docking components for 749~799$, for what it is the price is justified.

If you want a cheaper monitor those already exist and are fully compatible.

Karl P
 

BC2009

macrumors 68020
Jul 1, 2009
2,236
1,371
USB 2.0 was a major sticking point for me in buying a MacBook for my wife this last Christmas. She wants a MacBook to use mostly as a desktop replacement, but plans on keeping it on her desk most of the time with a Thunderbolt Display. I could not see buying a Thunderbolt Display with USB 2.0 when USB 3.0 was available on all the latest Macs. The MagSafe versus MagSafe-2 thing was a minor issue for me since the adaptor was available.

There is no adaptor to convert USB 2 to USB 3 speeds.
 

deconstruct60

macrumors G5
Mar 10, 2009
12,219
3,821
It still is the most elegant solution you can get for a Mac, and as always, Apple choses elegancy over standards compliance.

Elegant for the Mac laptops. For the Mac mini ( and Mac Pro if had Thunderbolt ) there is the question of the dangling, superfluous power cord. Apple doesn't always go for elegant. It is more combination of elegant and quantity.

It would make sense to come up with a Thunderbolt-less $799 monitor. There is little to no margin loss if they simply just dump the additional TB complexity, power distribution complexity, and cost along with the additional price. It would still share costs with a TB docking station ( 27 panel and most of the enclosure design) but only would have a USB 3.0 hub instead of a full fledged USB 3.0 controller ( Ethernet , FW would drop also.).

So it does less non display stuff and you'd pay less.

Take a look at other monitors using the same LG 27" 2560x1440 IPS panel, you'll see they cost the same while being made out of plastic and having no webcam, no speakers, no FireWire/Thunderbolt/Ethernet hub, no charger for your laptop and a lower resale value.

Generally, the 2013 models are heading for the $700-800 street pricing levels. These display also generally have more video switching conversion capabilities to (i.e., handle 2-3 inputs formats. ) and factory calibration if pointing at the $900-1,100 level monitors.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.