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

Apple Thunderbolt Display Supplies Again Running Low at Third-Party Resellers

ctdonath said:
For the displays in question, 1.5x matches 4K dimensions, making it a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

Why '4k' definition are you using. Because there's
UHD which is 3840x2160
DCI which is 4096x2160

And a range of 'full aperture' and cropped formats

Personally I'm going with DCI which is what I think Apple would so as well because you can always scale down via a little letter boxing

----------
sparkie7 said:
30" or larger, Matte screen please!! :D
Click to expand...

40 inch, low glare (matte tends to screw with color), HDMI inputs and a refresh rate etc high enough to support blu-ray if not 3d and I'll go a couple thou for it.
 
Not seeing.....

Retina displays in this case anytime soon. MagSafe 2 and Thunderbolt 2 are more likely. Form factor redesign also is possible. Maybe a better integration between display/hub combined with a better price can make them more appealling....:D

:):apple:
 
Give me a 21" iMac-like display with:

3 USB 3.0
2 Thunderbolt 2.0
Ethernet Port
OPTICAL DRIVE (Never will be featured on another Apple computer sadly)
MagSafe 2
SD Card Slot
and a 128gb SSD built in to allow file access by whatever computer is hooked up.
 
charlituna said:
With the Mac Pro supporting 4k it is logical that so will Final Cut and they would want a display to fit with that system. If they can price it at the same $999 as the current display companies will go for it.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no way Apple will sell a 4K display for $999 this year. If they bring one to the market in 2013, I'm expecting more like $1999.
 
Methinks there is a possible workaround to drive the 5K 5120x2880 resolution.

02x thunderbolt connectors for input.

Already present on all MacBook Pros with retina displays, and there are 3 pairs on the new Mac Pro.

Essentially, each port will only need to carry a 2560 x 2880 signal, which will be merged upon display. And problem solved!
 
A Hebrew said:
Give me a 21" iMac-like display with:

3 USB 3.0
2 Thunderbolt 2.0
Ethernet Port
OPTICAL DRIVE (Never will be featured on another Apple computer sadly)
MagSafe 2
SD Card Slot
and a 128gb SSD built in to allow file access by whatever computer is hooked up.
Click to expand...

I like this. A lot. Sadly, there is such a thing as product differentiation.

----------
Chaszmyr said:
There is absolutely no way Apple will sell a 4K display for $999 this year. If they bring one to the market in 2013, I'm expecting more like $1999.
Click to expand...

Let's make it even & can call it $1499 :D
 
It seems obvious Apple is going to do 5160x2880 as the resolution which lets them say they have more than 4k resolution.

If you have a thunderbolt 1 connection it will run at 2160x1440

If you have a thunderbolt 2 connection it will run at full resolution.

Seems to make sense.
 
Radiating said:
It seems obvious Apple is going to do 5160x2880 as the resolution which lets them say they have more than 4k resolution.

If you have a thunderbolt 1 connection it will run at 2160x1440

If you have a thunderbolt 2 connection it will run at full resolution.

Seems to make sense.
Click to expand...

Except that Thunderbolt 2 will be limited to DisplayPort 1.2 spec, which maxes out at 3840x2160 @ 60 Hz (4K UHDTV). 5160x2880 would require bandwidth greater than what Thunderbolt 2 can provide... unless you are talking about dual Thunderbolt 2, which I think would be too clumsy.
 
verniesgarden said:
you'd never get 4K in matte, matte screens lose sharpness
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter how sharp it is if all you can see is glare. ;-)

I work everyday on an ACD30 with a window over my right shoulder. Not a hint of glare even on a sunny day. To be honest, I can't say that this display seems to be lacking in sharpness so for me, a glossy is out of the question.

I have accepted for a while now that if my current monitor fails then the replacement wouldn't be an Apple.

Threads like this at least keep the dream alive.
 
They definitely need the display to complete the Pro; ideally one with a heap of USB 3 ports for good measure. A Firewire port or two would also be good to ease people into the transition, though that probably isn't really the domain of a display as a hub will likely suit most people better (especially since many professionals will already have the displays they need).

A 4k version of the display would be ideal, but I shudder to think what it could cost!
 
charlituna said:
Why '4k' definition are you using. Because there's
UHD which is 3840x2160
DCI which is 4096x2160

And a range of 'full aperture' and cropped formats

Personally I'm going with DCI which is what I think Apple would so as well because you can always scale down via a little letter boxing

----------



Sounds like the industry is happy with UHD for consumers, though editors would want DCI. Not much of an increase in LCD panel size, but the format might make for inefficiencies in nesting panels, and increase cost.
Click to expand...
 
I have the Thunderbolt Display connected to my 13" MBP for more than a year. I'm mostly happy with it, but there are a couple of things I'd really like to see in a newer version (that would even make me consider upgrading):

1) audio out!!! I have this elegant one-cable display docking connection, but to get proper audio out to my high quality speaker system (TB integrated speakers are junk), I have to connect a separate ugly audio cable to my MBP. :(

2) less reflection!!! Reduction to at least to the levels of the latest iMacs.

3) faster connections (Thunderbolt 2 + USB 3.0).

4) The dimensions and design from front should match 1:1 iMac, so you can use the second screen comfortably beside it.

5) in addition to 27", a 21,5" Thunderbolt Display to match the smaller iMac

6) Magsafe 2, but please also offer an adapter to Magsafe 1 (as far as I know there is only Magsafe 1 to 2 adapter currently).


One more thing "out of the box", that I can't see Apple doing, but would be awesome - add a little door on the back to a space for 3,5" hard drive, which would make the Thunderbolt Display also one awesome and fast Time Capsule! But we all know Apple will just make it thinner... :rolleyes:
 
so if these news are real and not a rumor, we could get this late year probably October the mac refresh with mac mini, macbook retina,retina imacs, and the thunderbolt display also with "retina".
 
Woodcrest64 said:
The question is whether the GPU can drive both the Macbook's Retina display and a 4K Thunderbolt 2 display at the same time. I might be wrong but I don't believe the GT 750m is that much of an improvement over the GT 650m assuming that is what Apple ends up putting in the next Retina Macbook Pro.
Click to expand...

Think about it, a graphics card ten years ago drives a 2048*1536 display! 2D is never a problem as long as the interface supports enough bandwidth. As for 3D, you won't render 3D on all the displays at the same time with a MBP
 
koppie644 said:
Think about it, a graphics card ten years ago drives a 2048*1536 display! 2D is never a problem as long as the interface supports enough bandwidth. As for 3D, you won't render 3D on all the displays at the same time with a MBP
Click to expand...

don't forget that even the macbook air with HD4000 can do that for 27" thunderbolt display...so i don't think there are problems with the technologies.
Like apple said with GPU+thunderbolt 2 of MAC PRO you can have 3x4K.So i guess with actual thunderbolt we can deliver 4K or retina 27" displays. Probably just 1 display but it is enough for now.
 
baryon said:
It is strange how the Apple Thunderbolt Display is thicker than an iMac, even though it only contains a screen. It also almost costs as much. Is the image quality at least better than that of the iMac? Plus if you buy it, you'd think you'll have a screen for many years (the main reason to buy a Mac Mini or Mac Pro is so you can upgrade it part by part, rather than the whole machine at once) yet you'll be limited by USB 2, Thunderbolt 1 and MagSafe 1 if you bought the current version.

I mean it's great that a screen has these hubs built in, but then it becomes just as prone to obsolescence as a computer. Wouldn't it be great if all you had to upgrade was a little chip inside that carried the controllers and the cables? Why replace the whole screen, unless they really do make a Retina screen, of course, but that won't necessarily happen.
Click to expand...


Simple really... Apple won't make money that way.
 
ctdonath said:
For large displays, 1.5x is enough to get the same result (indistinguishable pixels) and the GPUs are now strong enough to handle the slightly more complex scaling.

However, HiDPI bitmap assets designed for 2x screens will never look quite as good when they are displayed reduced by 75% because (a) the result will have fewer pixels and (b) scaling introduces artefacts, especially if the original has been anti-aliassed for its target resolution.

I have to day that I never stare at my 27" Cinema display and say to my self "Know what this needs? More pixels!"

Observation: a pixel-doubled 21.5" iMac screen would be UHD 4k and well-and-truly retina.

My guesses:

- at launch, the Mac Pro will be demo'd with 3rd-party professional 4K displays costing as much as the computer.
- Retina/4K TBDs of any form won't appear until next spring when the Thunderbolt 2 controller chips are in plentiful supply.
- The 27" TBD may shortly get a quiet bump to Magsafe 2 and, maybe USB3, but again its not worth a big update until TB2 chips are plentiful (even if it doesn't get a 4k display, you'll want TB2-through).
- the 21.5" iMac will get retina'd first.
Click to expand...
 
so if there will be thunderbolt display 2 4k, that should be the imacs 4k display right??
 
Lots of silly speculation here. Apple will release something that works with all Thunderbolt Macs since 2011. That means no Retina/4k or whatever the current internet wet dream happens to be.

A Thunderbolt2 version down the road. Way down the road.
 
thedeske said:
Apple will release something that works with all Thunderbolt Macs since 2011. That means no Retina/4k or whatever the current internet wet dream happens to be.
Click to expand...
Why not? Build in pixel doubling for "standard resolution" input and it looks fine. And considering they need something to match the new Mac Pro, of course Thunderbolt 2 will be a given. Manufacturers are turning out 4K panels now, Mac Pro needs a screen to match its GPUs, T2 is available on MP, it's all lining up.

Your position is like introducing a new high performance sports car, and offering only standard touring sedan tires for it while scoffing at the notion anyone would be wanting or able to turn tighter corners at higher speeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back