Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Confirms Studio Display Will Work With PCs, But With Some Caveats
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While Center Stage will most certainly require macOS, we don't yet know whether the webcam will have basic functionality in Windows as a generic camera.
Update: It will work as a generic camera in Windows. https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/9/2...indows-pc-compatibility-camera-5k-thunderbolt
Update: It will work as a generic camera in Windows. https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/9/2...indows-pc-compatibility-camera-5k-thunderbolt
Last edited:
It's pointless from top to bottom for a Windows system. Windows looks best on $300 monitors anyway.
I don’t see any excuse for no webcam support on PC and it has built in A13 chip so they should be able to power the features like True Tone on PC, OS independent (I would think).
Yes, I am sure Apple could write drivers to enable most or all of the functionality under Windows 10/11.
But considering Apple are moving away from supporting Windows OS in the Mac ecosystem (no Boot Camp for Windows ARM on the M family of SoCs and VM support being handled by third-parties like Parallels and VMWare), I do not find it surprising they have not done so.
Let’s be honest, how many PC owners are gonna fork out $1500 plus for an Apple display?
I mean, that makes as much sense as blaming Apple for not writing drivers for an OS they don't own and are moving away from supporting.
This is a piss poor excuse, considering interoperability and compatibility among popular hardware and operating systems is not only common, but encouraged for the sake of consumers. Apple just tends to flip flop on whether or not they are for, or against this.
For the wide variety of display options that exist on the market right now, I cannot imagine the justification for its purchase, or even why someone would recommend it in the first place. I love a great deal of the products Apple has to offer, but this is far away from one of them. On all aspects, I just don't see what it fits into because its price is outlandish for a rather embarrassingly lackluster feature set.
-5k res. Quite literally: who cares. This is so painfully obvious a move to say "it's better than 4k." A problem that no one has needed solving.
-27"...at $1600. uh, what?
It does not support any form of HDR, its peak brightness is pathetically low for the price point, though I guess since it does not do HDR perhaps its brightness is not entirely relevant.
The unique features it has which can't work on any other system except macOS are absolutely nothing groundbreaking.
Spatial audio is whatever when it possesses effectively an integrated sound bar. An inexpensive 2.1 system would be a much better quality audio experience.
I would not even recommend this to mac users considering I can immediately think of many display options before this that would have much better feature sets, comparable or better image quality, and cost way less.
Tech specs for the Studio Display says it is compatible with iPads that don't have Thunderbolt. Therefore DisplayPort 1.4 is required. DSC is required in that case for billions of colors but not millions of colors (assuming the iPad supports 5K 60Hz timing).
There are HDMI or DisplayPort to USB-C adapters that include USB 2.0 data transmission.
TB4 would add a downstream Thunderbolt port to connect Thunderbolt devices. 5K 60Hz requires 29 Gbps if DSC is not supported. With DSC, only 11.3 Gbps is required leaving enough bandwidth for full PCIe speed (which for Thunderbolt is ≈23 Gbps). In either case, mostly only write speed is affected by DisplayPort transmission.
Because DisplayPort 1.4's DSC support would allow 30bpp for non-Thunderbolt connections.
If the display supports HBR3, then 5K 60Hz 24bpp would be possible for non-Thunderbolt connections with GPUs that support DisplayPort 1.4 but not DSC (such as the RX580, VII, Vega).
I think the XDR doesn't have an HBR3 mode except for the dual tile HBR3 mode that requires a Thunderbolt connection.
Absolutely not the target market for this display, and I do think the price is pretty steep, but:
It's the the difference between native Retina 1920x1080 (4K = 3840x2160) and native Retina 2560x1440 (5K = 5120×2880. For you or me that might not be important, but for creative workflows where extra real estate is important, that's a big deal. There's certainly a world of difference between a 1080p display and the screen real estate on my pre-Retina 1440p iMac.
I know some people like their displays as large as possible, (32", 40", etc.), but that comes at the cost of desk space and pixel density. From what I've seen of 4K/5K monitor prices, packing that many pixels into a smaller screen size always comes at a premium.
This x1000000000.
It’s not like Apple couldn’t provide drivers for the functions to work on a PC. I get that this built for Macs, but in this new WFH age such an expensive monitor being so proprietary is a non-starter to say the least.
I still want one, but I will definitely wait until reviews come out to see how well it interacts with PCs.
Apple’s Studio Display should work with Windows — including the webcam
You won’t get Spatial Audio and Center Stage, though
www.theverge.com
Apple told the Verge that the webcam will work. Just features like Center Stage will require macOS.
Apple’s Studio Display should work with Windows — including the webcam
You won’t get Spatial Audio and Center Stage, though
www.theverge.com
The webcam works with Windows. Just not features like Center Stage. Apple confirmed that to the Verge.
It’s not the 100% PC owners, it’s people like me who like Mac, but still have to use a work-provided Windows-PC to work from home.
I’d be more willing to pay premium for a well built Apple branded 5K display that be the hub for all of my devices, Mac or PC. Being able to use the webcam on PC would be amazing for work video calls. It’s just annoying when it wouldn’t take much effort from Apple to allow it work.
Thanks for the link, this brings me hope. I will still probably wait to see reviews, but it looks like I’ll end up buying it eventually.Apple told the Verge that the webcam will work. Just features like Center Stage will require macOS.
Apple’s Studio Display should work with Windows — including the webcam
You won’t get Spatial Audio and Center Stage, though
None that I know of. I personally won't go above $500? My current 27inch ASUS IPS 2K (1440p/170hz) Gsync monitors cost me $349 each at Microcenter? Maybe $399?
I would much rather spend the extra $1100 on a GPU.
If you are getting a gaming PC, I would not suggest this monitor. For one, there is only one input and you really do not want to have to unplug and plug in on a regular basis. Second, whatever everyone thinks of this monitor, I think we all can agree that it is not a good gaming monitor. It just isn't built for that. Unfortunately since macOS does not do well with non-integer scaling we are all stuck between getting something like the Studio Display and sacrificing features present in gaming (or most for that matter) monitors or getting a 3rd party display and dealing with poor scaling within macOS.
I agree that the iMac you price out here is more inline with the kind of power the Mac Studio is putting out. I look at it all slightly differently. I see the Mac mini + Studio Display ($2300ish) as the real successor to the $1800 27" iMac. To me, the Mac Studio + Studio Display is replacing the iMac Pro.
I honestly don't see a line of PC users waiting for this display. This is the most ridiculous thread ever. People complaining that it won't fully function with a PC?