So regular < studio < pro? I'm not sure what pro means anymore because of iPad Pro and iPhone Pro. Those are toys compared to Mac ProPro all the things!
So regular < studio < pro? I'm not sure what pro means anymore because of iPad Pro and iPhone Pro. Those are toys compared to Mac ProPro all the things!
The current iMac is listed as "iMac 24"" which gives me hope. You wouldn't need to name it that if it was the only size.I much rather have a 27” iMac.
These are highly focussed controlled tests though, it's not something to ever worry about in real world usage.
The current iMac is listed as "iMac 24"" which gives me hope. You wouldn't need to name it that if it was the only size.
I think his sources are in the display panel companies, not the final assembly. Check out his Twitter and read his comments on his tweet. He seems 100% certain. Also is the only leaker with a 100% accuracy thus far.The sources of these rumors are obviously very iffy, as if they are peering at an Apple production line from far away with binoculars, only able to make out fuzzy shapes and hole cutouts. That’s the only logical way to explain confusing a display with an iMac.
Disagree...Perhaps, a polishing cloth will be provided with the new monitor!...LOLThis would be hilarious since it would piss off so many people who just bought the new display. There’s no way it will come so soon.
What if this panel Ross leaked is destined for the iMac Pro after all? He’s admitted he can’t tell the difference between a stand alone display and an iMac at this stage of production. His sources are only at the panel manufacturers, not final assembly. Would also squash the debate in this thread over whether or not 120Hz ProMotion is even possible over Thunderbolt, as the panel would be directly connected with whatever Apple needs to make it work (not a USB-C cable).I can't really figure out the marketing angle on this new "pro" product:
1. The Studio Display is already targeted at professionals. Go see the unveiling. They didn't show a single use case of this product in a consumer setting. It's highly unlikely they are creating yet another professional tier above the Studio Display.
1B. The Studio Display is $2000 with the ergo stand. That's amongst the most expensive monitors around. Mini-LED + Promotion would add a significant amount to the cost. What's the market for a 27-inch non-reference monitor that cost $2500-4000?
2. It's weird that they would create another product in the exact same size class, especially for such a niche product.
3. It's unlikely they would introduce two very similar products only 3 months apart, especially when this new Studio Display is already back-ordered by 3-4 weeks. Apple's usual MO is to milk a new product as long as they can before introducing an upgrade.
4. They are already struggling to make enough mini-LEDs for the iPad Pros: it's only on the 12.9" version so far due to production issues (per rumors). Why would they dedicate the production capacity to a super niche product like a second Studio display?
5. There's no way they would make their $5000 top-of-the-line monitor obsolete with a new model at fraction of the cost. Who would buy the XDR when you get better technology in this Studio Pro? Most would wait to get this technology in the 6k size. If anything, Apple would bring mini-LED and Pro-motion to the XDR before they introduce the 27" with these technologies. (I'm not talking about the technical feasibility, but rather about the marketing aspect.)
Seems to me the Mac Studio combo replaces the iMac Pro. It certainly has the power capability to fill that niche, even beyond most expectations. I could see a 27" iMac come along that is simply a bigger version of the current M1 24", but with newer chip, and thin display, maybe in color options? It would be a great option for even professionals who don't need extreme power, but still want and all-in-one, but in a larger size.The most frustrating is for those waiting an 27" iMac as the quiet removal gives no hint as to whether a replacement is coming. The Studio display does appear to just be the iMac 5K display in a new housing ( not sure if that's why they've removed the iMac from the website as they're diverting production to the Studio Display), but costing more than the 27" iMac!
at $1599, the Studio Display should already include these features....
Mostly a financial decision. And I actually prefer 27” screens over 30+”. And the built-in speakers and camera / microphone.
If this new display is the same $5,000+ as the current XDR, then it’s a non-starter for me. However, I would pay an extra ~$1,000 to get mini-LED and ProMotion in the Studio Display. And I’d be willing to wait two months for it.
Indeed, the price of the Studio Display is out of whack vs the iMac 5k.The most frustrating is for those waiting an 27" iMac as the quiet removal gives no hint as to whether a replacement is coming. The Studio display does appear to just be the iMac 5K display in a new housing ( not sure if that's why they've removed the iMac from the website as they're diverting production to the Studio Display), but costing more than the 27" iMac!
How would they include ProMotion? Thunderbolt 4 has only Displayport 1.4, thats not enough bandwidth for a 5k 120Hz display, you'd need Displayport 2.0. And that would need a new Thunderbolt version.
While I agree that $1599 is quite steep for the Studio Display, it’s not just like a $400 monitor. 600nits, P3, webcam and speakers. It’s pricey, but I don’t see the equivalent from PC OEMs and I don’t even see them making an effort above 4K. Don’t get me wrong, I have a refurb BenQ SW271 that cost me $647 that I think is great, but it maxed out at 300 nits and I still have to put it at a proportional resolution to achieve 1440p@2x to make the best use of the space, it’s a good monitor. Reviews of the Studio Display will make or break it. I wouldn’t right it off immediately and if your management would simply laugh you out of the office perhaps they’re the issue, not Apple. However, if your devs are dealing with code all day, then they don’t need a Studio Display, they need multiple displays and for that 4K does just fine.Completely agree, yet I am even hard pressed to see the value proposition at $1600. I use my computer in a creative professional capacity (web dev, design, photography) and I already can't quite justify even the $1,599 Studio Display, when I have a 27" Dell 4K that does exactly the same thing in terms of productivity. $999 like the ACD/ATD? I'm in, for the integrated speakers and webcam. But 50%+ more? It just doesn't make sense for me. We are a dev/marketing firm with 20 employees, and management would laugh any one of us out the door requesting a $1600 monitor that really just monitors like any other $400 monitor.
Sure, if money is not a thing to you, why not. But when you need to compare what you get to what it costs, like the majority of creative pros, it's an awfully big apple tax.
To your 2nd point, I also completely agree. I really just would like a direct 4K replacement for the ACD/ATD. Two thunderbolt ports, two usb type a ports, headphone port. Simple webcam. Built in speakers. No need for a chip inside it, no need to make it crazy thin. Hell, I don't even really care if it has HDR. $999. It sells like hotcakes.
It's not a trick, it's a standard called DisplayPort alt mode and it's already part of the USB4 specification, which means it can in turn be enabled on Thunderbolt 4-compatible ports. Thunderbolt 4 and USB4 both support DisplayPort 2.0 this way. Yes, it means that specific port can only be used for video and not for data, offset by the fact that on M1 Macs each TB4 port is on a dedicated bus.Using compression will lead to image degradation, always. Especially with real time compression and decompression.
DSC is for huge signage displays and stuff, not when your face is inches away from the screen.
Mhmm, that would be a nice trick, but likely you could not transfer USB that way anymore? And it would be breaking so many standards, compatibility would be a huge issue, if even possible.
Yeah that looks like the most probable scenario. Gurman is still saying that an iMac Pro is coming, and Young is still point out to 27 inch displays that are going into mass production. That looks like this panel is for the iMac Pro, not a standalone display. Other than the technical limitations of Thunderbolt, it would not be logical at all for Apple to release a 27 inch display 3 month after the Studio Display, with mini-LED and promotion it would be competing with the Pro Display XDR, which Apple clearly will not discontinue (I don't see them leaving the 32 inch+ monitor market).What if this panel Ross leaked is destined for the iMac Pro after all? He’s admitted he can’t tell the difference between a stand alone display and an iMac at this stage of production. His sources are only at the panel manufacturers, not final assembly. Would also squash the debate in this thread over whether or not 120Hz ProMotion is even possible over Thunderbolt, as the panel would be directly connected with whatever Apple needs to make it work (not a USB-C cable).