$2500 for a monitor is still not worth it for the general consumer, when a plethora of great displays by LG are already on the market at a way more affordable price, and work seamlessly over USB-C.
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 is Finally Making a Cheaper Display: What We Know
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's no eGPU support for Mac silicone. No way Apple is going to let Nvidia drop some drivers for macOS. Apple literally went out of their way to make sure Nvidia isn't able to sell to Mac consumers.
I read papers and write code, and sometimes the other way around. In that kind of work, a midrange $500 27" monitor is close to the sweet spot when you need more screen estate. You can get better image quality by paying more, but that quality is not worth the price.
I might buy a high-end $1000 monitor for quality of life improvements such as multiple USB-C inputs. If Apple insists that we should use USB-C for connecting external monitors, a single input is clearly insufficient. With two inputs, you can use the monitor as a second display for iMac while occasionally connecting a laptop to it without too much trouble.
A $1500 monitor would be way too expensive. I prefer spending the extra money on better computers rather than better displays.
I might buy a high-end $1000 monitor for quality of life improvements such as multiple USB-C inputs. If Apple insists that we should use USB-C for connecting external monitors, a single input is clearly insufficient. With two inputs, you can use the monitor as a second display for iMac while occasionally connecting a laptop to it without too much trouble.
A $1500 monitor would be way too expensive. I prefer spending the extra money on better computers rather than better displays.
I can see the difference. Also, there are other differences between displays that also stand out.
I have an LG 5k next to an LG 27" 4k. It is true that sometimes when I am focusing at the 4k, I find the image to be good. However, when I go back to looking at the 5k, the 5k just looks better.
Having them side by side, the differences do show themselves a lot of the time which might be not true if they weren't side by side. I also have the MacBook Pro M Pro next to the monitors, and the screen on the MacBook Pro looks better than the 5k although it is hard to quantify.
Having the retina MacBook pro's is what caused all this trouble for me to begin with. Having a regular monitor next to the retina display of the MacBook made the flaws of the regular monitor stand out. I found myself not wanting to use the monitor because it did not look as good. I upgraded to a 4k monitor, and it was a lot better, but I still preferred the MacBook Pro screen so I upgraded to the 5k LG.
Also, the resolution is not the only thing that makes the image better. The colors are better on the 5k LG and the glossy display also makes a difference.
That's what it is, 100%
One acclimates and doesn't think anything of it without a point of comparison
Am I the only one not in love with glossy displays?
I really wish we could get options on that again, particularly on laptops
I really wish we could get options on that again, particularly on laptops
I wasn't saying the images were indistinguishable. Simply proving that the difference is extremely subtle at best and that hardwickj's comments are all silly. The photos are of a 2021 MBP and 27" 4K display in case you were wondering. (Also updated my ppi mistake, not sure why I wrote 225 instead of 254 ?)
Unfortunately despite some Benq and Dell efforts, we need Apple to do this with the price tag that comes along. I also believe this is one of the reasons why it will sell like hot cakes. I’m sure a lot of Mac users were reluctant to buy LG Ultrafine because of design and built quality which made the good specs feel expensive.
Personally, having 24” under 1k, would make it a real tough sale 27”or even 30” for 2.5k.
Some remarks:
- These are some very different price ranges, and Apple would be appealing to different categories of customers.
- A 27-inch monitor selling for $2,500 would not be consumer-oriented. Apple currently sells a 27-inch iMac, with the computer inside, plus the wireless mouse and keyboard, for $1,799. A 27-inch monitor would need more than MiniLEDs and a 120 Hz refresh rate to justify costing $2,500. It will need some unveiled killer feature (wireless?) to appeal to consumers or professional features to appeal to professionals.
- A 24-inch monitor selling for $999 seems cheap compared to $2,500 or $5,000, but not exactly. If the 24-inch does not have either 120 MHz refresh rate nor MiniLEDs, it would make for poor value. It might be on par with the monitor in the 24-inch iMac. The 24-inch iMac costs $1,299 and comes with everything. The cheapest Mac mini, paired with a $999 24-inch monitor, a Magic Keyboard, and a Magic Mouse, would cost $2,256, which is almost double the price. It does not make any logical sense.
- The Thunderbolt Display sold for $999 but it was a 27-inch model and it was released in 2011. Over a decade later, we have many cheap IPS 4K monitors. Selling monitors at these prices to consumers will be a tough proposition, except perhaps for the few rich Apple enthusiasts.
It's the same for me. I would very much love to have a matte option.
If $2500 is the equivalent of $50 billion to you then you’re probably using a Chromebook because that’s all you can afford. There’s nothing wrong with that because some people are poor but that’s never been the market Apple has targeted. Apple products have never been cheap with the exception of maybe the Mac mini because it’s the most basic computer sold without any accessories.
No I absolutely love glossy displays. I’m pretty sure all of the MacBooks have glossy displays or do you mean Windows laptops?
So basically you’re saying that Apple doesn’t compete with the lower end market but there’s no reason they couldn’t. Of course there’s a reason. That market has way too little profit margin. That profit margin wouldn’t cover R&D cost to design something that meets Apple’s standards. That’s why I said they take a panel and put it in the cheapest possible plastic housing so they can throw all these high specs out there and keep the price low enough to be competitive. Apple is not willing to do that. Apple would have to design a custom housing for their monitor probably along with some custom features that would cost a fortune with R&D. They would also be ordering custom panels made to whatever specifications they wanted.
What Apple is not going to do is buy some panels that every other monitor is using then throw it in a cheap plastic housing with an Apple logo on it. If they did that they could probably price it competitively with similar non Apple monitors but what would be the point. I could put an ? sticker on my monitor and then it becomes an Apple monitor ?
Of course all of this what Apple is going to do or not do is my speculation. Rumors say that Apple is going to release $1000 and $2500 monitors. Going by these rumors and some speculation it’s possible that the $1000 monitor monitor is the same 4.5K panel as in the 24” iMac but in a more sleek housing. Perhaps the more expensive one is a 32” 5K or 6K monitor.
If it’s a 32” 6K monitor monitor for $2500 I will be very interested and I’m sure quite a few others will be as well. Of course this all depends on specs and what kind of panel but I suspect if Apple is going to release a new product like this it’s going to impress. I don’t mean impress people that dislike Apple because that’s not going to happen. To them Apple just sells overpriced garbage and that’s their opinion but they have a right to that opinion. It’s impossible for a company to make something that everyone likes and fits everyone’s needs. I think this monitor is going to be for productivity and not gaming. The focus is going to be color accuracy and high resolution. For the average person that is on their computer 45 minutes a day this is a complete waste of money. I think for gamers it would be a terrible choice as well. Again this is just my speculation or maybe hopes.
I totally agree. Unless you’re just rich or spend a lot of time on your computer there’s absolutely no reason to spend more than $1000 on a monitor. Even that is a bit much. I’ve seen some nice 32” monitors for $600. Now this being said you’re going to have people that buy them. I’m sure there’s someone right now that bought a fully maxed out 16” MacBook Pro that only uses it to browse Facebook ?
I don’t think Apple will make a monitor for general consumers. I think this is going to be targeted at prosumer and lower end pro customers. When I say lower end pro customers I mean ones not like Disney that are buying $6000 displays by the dozen.
I agree — we could get 3
But does 24" for 1k and 27" for 2.5k even seem realistic? It sounds way off to me.
I'm not sure how you get $2256. My calculations only come up to $1880.
Nevertheless, your point that it's not a great value is still valid.
I can't see the $2500 model being the same size as the XDR, even if it lacking in some features.
My guess is a 29.5" rounded up to 30" at 5.5K to achieve a similar 217ppi resolution as the current 5K 27" iMac.
Why don’t you think they would make it as big? I mean I don’t see how it be that much cheaper to make it 2.5” smaller. Do you think the 6K is just not going to happen at that price?
I mean I’m going to hold off judgment so perhaps even if it is 5.5 K it might be interesting depending on what else it has.
Honestly though if they release a MacBook Air that’ll probably be my purchase because I really want a new MacBook but I don’t need the computer power of a MacBook Pro but still want a modern looking MacBook. If I get the larger monitor that means I’ll also have to get the new Mac mini. This would replace my iMac.
I don't know enough about LED panels or manufacturing costs to comment on that. But my guess (like everyone else here), is mostly from a marketing perspective.
Regardless of features, quality, etc... if both models are at 32", the perceived value of the XDR will be lower.
I think Apple will want greater differentiation and their thinking has been 'bigger is better'.
Plus it makes for a more varied product photo shoot for their marketing material.?
I hate to tell you this but when you're sitting in front of your screen for 10+ hours a day looking at 11pt text in an IDE, yes, those two images actually make a massive difference.
One means I can get to the end of the day and feel like I can still see correctly, the other my eyes are straining by about 6 hours.
Something to also consider is that you can actually have an even bigger visual difference than that if using higher DPI still and no matte screen. One of the common comments from users of Dell's 8K UP3218K is that, despite having a 280 PPI density, smaller text is still surprisingly readable even with modest scaling.
Last edited:
Dell sells a 27" monitor for as low as $375 to as high as $1625. Regardless, his point still stands. There's a reason there is a price differential, "bud".