Apple's New Standalone Monitor Could Be Around Half the Price of the Pro Display XDR

[lewchenko]

$2500 is a joke price.
Especially when you can get perfectly usable 4K 27or 32” monitors with high refresh rates that display fantastic colour coverage from a variety of manufactures which seem to service many non apple pro customers who make content (print or video)

So clearly Apple must be aiming this at the minority of people who are willing to shell out stupid money (but for a quality product).

Fools and their money are easily parted , and Apple knows this.

 

[rsands1]

I'm a professional photographer and the options for Mac users when it comes to monitors are really limited. If you want high 4k-5k and at least 500 nits, there is the LG 5k 27 Ultrafine (which I own and love) and some high end Eizo monitors plus a few Asus monitors but they don't play well with Mac OSX. Apple should be ashamed that they have ignored their customers like this. I for one am looking forward to what they are making, just so long as it's bigger than 27 inches because that size is honestly too small at this point. I used to rock two of their 30 inch Cinema displays but those have long since been retired. $2500 for a really great 32 inch monitor with 5k and at least 500-750nits of brightness would be awesome and I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Hell, I'd buy one at $2,999 since that's what the original 30 inch Cinema display cost back in the day.

 

[skaertus]

At $2500 it's an instant buy for me. My Thunderbolt display has been a trooper for almost a decade but it's way past time for an upgrade and I just can't tolerate cheap plastic junk on my desk. If some of you guys want cheap stuff go buy cheap stuff. This is a Mac forum, (and no I don't mean LowEndMac)... Complaining that the display isn't going to be $500-1000 sounds crazy to me when even the ugly-ass LG Ultrafine is $1300 and is a dinosaur product at this point. Why don't you guys change gears and go peddle $200 Walmart laptops in the MacBook Pro forum?

Congratulations, you belong to an elite of wealthy customers that can afford only the very best. But do not expect everybody else to do the same. You may think that a $500 monitor is a piece of plastic junk, but most users worldwide simply cannot afford a $2500 monitor. Anyone that thinks a $2500 model will sell like hotcakes is delusional.

The LG UltraFine is now a line of monitors. If you just take a look at LG's website, you will see that the vast majority of the models is available for less than $500, and many sell for less than $400.

There is a new model, called LG UltraFine Display OLED Pro, aimed at professionals. This is a 32-inch OLED model selling for $4000, which is $2000 cheaper than the Pro XDR Display (counting the stand, which is, well, kind of necessary). I am not sure which one is better, but the LG model is OLED, which is expected to be more expensive.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Hopefully, the XDR monitor is within the price range. There shouldn’t be a reason for them to have a hefty price tag.

 

[Traverse]

Apple under Tim Cook has shown that they're not afraid of having multiple products in a line (look how many iPhone's are available). Given this, I don't see why Apple can have a display spread:

1. 27" 5K General Display - same panel as the existing 5K iMacs - $1,499
2. 27" 5K Prosumer Display - 5K panel with miniLED and ProMotion - $1,999 to $2,499
3. 32" 6K Pro Display XDR - 6K panel marketed toward professionals $4,999 plus stand.

Let's be honest, I don't think today's Apple would make a display less than $1,499 given how much that very meh Ultrafine sells for.

 

[skaertus]

I'm a professional photographer and the options for Mac users when it comes to monitors are really limited. If you want high 4k-5k and at least 500 nits, there is the LG 5k 27 Ultrafine (which I own and love) and some high end Eizo monitors plus a few Asus monitors but they don't play well with Mac OSX. Apple should be ashamed that they have ignored their customers like this. I for one am looking forward to what they are making, just so long as it's bigger than 27 inches because that size is honestly too small at this point. I used to rock two of their 30 inch Cinema displays but those have long since been retired. $2500 for a really great 32 inch monitor with 5k and at least 500-750nits of brightness would be awesome and I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Hell, I'd buy one at $2,999 since that's what the original 30 inch Cinema display cost back in the day.

You are probably the kind of customer Apple would be willing to reach with this rumored new monitor. A professional, not a consumer.

 

[rsands1]

$2500 is a joke price.
Especially when you can get perfectly usable 4K 27or 32” monitors with high refresh rates that display fantastic colour coverage from a variety of manufactures which seem to service many non apple pro customers who make content (print or video)

So clearly Apple must be aiming this at the minority of people who are willing to shell out stupid money (but for a quality product).

Fools and their money are easily parted , and Apple knows this.

Can you name me one 32 inch monitor that has 5k and at least 500 nits plus isn't an ultra ultra ultrawide with a wacky aspect ratio? I'm aware of the Asus ProArt PA329C, Asus ProArt 32UCX and Eizo ColorEdge CG319X...all of those are 4k by the way and don't play nice with OSX.

 

[UBS28]

For a monitor. Or I can almost get two M1 iMacs.

Since you also need to pay for a stance, priced at $999, you can throw in a M1 Mac Mini or a MBA.

 

[chucker23n1]

The iPhone 13 Pro Max is over 450 ppi. Apple certainly has the ability to get there.

This is only kind of true. The green subpixels are 458 ppi, but the red and blue ones are 324. They do this unusual subpixel layout mainly to offset some OLED weaknesses.

I don't expect any Mac (or external display) to be OLED; it's an OK technology for the Apple Watch and iPhone, but Apple clearly prefers mini-LED for Pro workflows (e.g., photography), where color accuracy matters. Hence mini-LED in the iPad Pro, and in the MacBook Pro. And for those, I think they'll stick to a more typical layout where red, green, and blue exist in equal amounts.

Plus, an external display is typically at a much larger distance than a phone. So even if they were to use this kind of layout, we'd see red and blue at ~220 ppi, and green at ~310 ppi, nothing close to 458.

 

[rsands1]

You are probably the kind of customer Apple would be willing to reach with this rumored new monitor. A professional, not a consumer.

Yup, you're very much correct. I'm hoping that Apple is trying to reach their professional customers with this rumored 32 inch monitor. $2499-$2999 is perfectly acceptable since I use this for work. If they want to make a 27 inch 5k monitor at $1499 for consumers that would work too..perhaps another 24 inch 5k at $999?

 

[chucker23n1]

Apple under Tim Cook has shown that they're not afraid of having multiple products in a line (look how many iPhone's are available). Given this, I don't see why Apple can have a display spread:

1. 27" 5K General Display - same panel as the existing 5K iMacs - $1,499
2. 27" 5K Prosumer Display - 5K panel with miniLED and ProMotion - $1,999 to $2,499
3. 32" 6K Pro Display XDR - 6K panel marketed toward professionals $4,999 plus stand.

Let's be honest, I don't think today's Apple would make a display less than $1,499 given how much that very meh Ultrafine sells for.

In no universe is $1500 a general-audience display price point for a display, though. They might as well not bother selling that at all.

 

[rsands1]

Congratulations, you belong to an elite of wealthy customers that can afford only the very best. But do not expect everybody else to do the same. You may think that a $500 monitor is a piece of plastic junk, but most users worldwide simply cannot afford a $2500 monitor. Anyone that thinks a $2500 model will sell like hotcakes is delusional.

The LG UltraFine is now a line of monitors. If you just take a look at LG's website, you will see that the vast majority of the models is available for less than $500, and many sell for less than $400.

There is a new model, called LG UltraFine Display OLED Pro, aimed at professionals. This is a 32-inch OLED model selling for $4000, which is $2000 cheaper than the Pro XDR Display (counting the stand, which is, well, kind of necessary). I am not sure which one is better, but the LG model is OLED, which is expected to be more expensive.

The problem with that LG oled monitor is that its only 250nits of brightness...that is just too low even with the amazing contrast of OLED : (

 

[torontotim]

Shame we can't use the 27" 5K iMacs as external monitors. Pretty soon they'll be cheap, and I have my daughter's 2019 model sitting in a box since she got her 14" MBP.

That being said, for the last 5 years I've been using a 28" ASUS PB287Q with my 2015 15" MBP, a Huawei Matebook X Pro and now my 14" MBP, currently connected via a Targus Thunderbolt dock > Displayport at 4K 60Hz and it's been great. Paid $250 for it 2nd hand and it does fine for day to day work.

I have it mounted on an arm with my MacBook on another arm/tray beside it. Both float above my desk and with the black bezels and keyboard of the MacBook, they look perfectly at home together. Frankly an aluminum framed monitor would look awkward beside the MacBook, if you use both displays actively.

I can appreciate the world the $5000 display lives in, and perhaps a $2500 display from Apple would be of some value to some users, but there are a ton of good options out there for a lot less that look just fine - but if you're spending $2500-$5000 on a display, its appearance should be the last thing you consider.

 

[rsands1]

Shame we can't use the 27" 5K iMacs as external monitors. Pretty soon they'll be cheap, and I have my daughter's 2019 model sitting in a box since she got her 14" MBP.

That's very true. It is a bummer you can't repurpose those iMacs as monitors...Apple should release an osx update that adds that functionality. 27 inch 5k plus 500nits is a nice option to have.

 

[Boil]

an iphone is $1000, a mac is starting from $1000....$2500 is the right price for what it can be...average consumer dont look(or shouldnt) at Apple devices...content creators and so on, yes

Wow, you are being rather elitist here, saying the "average consumer" shouldn't be using Apple gear...!?!

 

[skaertus]

Yup, you're very much correct. I'm hoping that Apple is trying to reach their professional customers with this rumored 32 inch monitor. $2499-$2999 is perfectly acceptable since I use this for work. If they want to make a 27 inch 5k monitor at $1499 for consumers that would work too..perhaps another 24 inch 5k at $999?

I doubt a 27-inch 5K monitor at $1499 for consumers would work. The 24-inch 4.5K iMac sells for $1299 and comes with a full computer equipped with a powerful M1 processor, keyboard, and mouse. A $999 model would be much more reasonable and appropriate for those buying the Mac mini, for instance.

 

[nebojsak]

Wow, you are being rather elitist here, saying the "average consumer" shouldn't be using Apple gear...!?!

Unfortunately he's right. In previous decade, Apple gear for sure has become a status symbol, not a tool for pros and enthusiasts.

 

[skaertus]

an iphone is $1000, a mac is starting from $1000....$2500 is the right price for what it can be...average consumer dont look(or shouldnt) at Apple devices...content creators and so on, yes

Yet Apple sells iPhones for $399 (the SE model) and Macs for $699 (the Mac mini). And Apple many products are found heavily discounted these days.

Apple sells for the average consumer and not only for content creators. Selling for content creators produces the hype Apple needs to sell to consumers at a higher price.

Apple is a $2.9 trillion company. Its market cap is approaching $3 trillion. The only reason Apple is so valuable is that its products appeal to a general mass of consumers. If Apple were to sell only for wealthy content creators, then its audience would be much more limited and not able to generate the kind of revenue it needs to be at this level.

EIZO sells high-end monitors for professionals. Its market cap is 86 billion yen, which is approximately $700-800 million. Apple can buy one EIZO per day with its revenue.

 

[femike]

Customers want an iMac without the computer inside of it. Couldn't be simpler. No - they have to release a $5k base price monitor. Customers obviously object and say they want a monitor that's cheaper than an entire computer (is that reasonable!?) and not 3x the price of one. Apple is now working on a monitor that's equally as unaffordable for the average user? What the hell is their problem with this - stick an iMac panel in a nice aluminum body and it can't possibly be 50% more expensive than an entry 27" iMac from ~3 years ago? What is this insanity?

Agree with this. But obviously Apple doesn't care. Apple makes alot of money from people with the money, so the shareholders are happy and that all that matters to them.

 

[loby]

I have the LG 5K UltraFine display (£900) and a separate LG 4K IPS display (£300) connected to my M1 Mac mini, both are attached to a monitor stand. They work great for me, a "pro-sumer".

A $2,500 (read: £2,500 in the UK) Apple monitor is a definite "no" for me. That's crazy pricing. I can get EIGHT good 4K's for that!

I understand that Apple might be wanting to push this as a really great monitor, better than anything out there at the price, but they're going to miss a LOT of Mac users who can't justify that amount of money when there are just as good monitors out there for a fraction of the price.

Apple, if you're listening, just release a monitor that lots of people will buy. We don't all need the best colour representation and all the other gubbins you're thinking of adding on.

It will be interesting to see what the price will be...even at $999 for the Thunderbolt monitor at the time, it seemed expensive back in the day when there were equivalent monitors at the time that were cheaper (matted and non-reflective)....I bought a Cinema AND a Thunderbolt monitor and still use the Thunderbolt monitor (though it is too reflective now for me). It was a good monitor, though probably overpriced.

Those who want "All Apple" will of course pay for the monitor at any price probably...but there are really good monitors out there (Example a few LG monitors at 27" monitor) with a $550 or so price point) that it will be hard to justify Apple's pricing. I tried so hard to like Apple's LG offerings...but had to return it due to sub-par screen and quality for Apple's price. I ended up buying one of LG's non-Apple monitors and it is "way better" than what Apple offers in their stores at $300 or more less. More ports, can hook up four additional computers etc. Way better (though plastic-y, but good screen).

I really don't see how they can price their monitors at $2,500 in these days. Yes...the screen will be wonderful, but I think for monitors, it will be a hard sell at probably what Apple will suggest.

Just like the HomePod, they might mess up with pricing even though they give us a great monitor (s)....

 

[Boil]

Unfortunately he's right. In previous decade, Apple gear for sure has become a status symbol, not a tool for pros and enthusiasts.

Well, he actually said Apple gear should be used by "content creators and so on...", so it seems you are taking the elitism to a whole new level and indicating that only the privileged few, those of the proper status, should be allowed Apple gear, the entitlement is ridiculous...

 

[Biro]

First, we have to determine if the price rumor is correct. But, assuming it is, I'd probably opt for a Mac Mini with a $580 LG 27-inch 4K Ultrafine monitor. I'm not even sure I'm going to bother with another iMac. Are Apple's 5K screens better? Sure. But I don't absolutely, positively have to have them. Apple is pricing itself out of the market. For the same reason, an iPhone 5G SE is likely to be my next phone.

 

[Spock]

Apple does not need to make a "low cost" monitor, plenty of other manufacturers make good enough displays to pair with a Mac mini. That is why Apple makes the iMac, that is the consumer display and it just happens to include a computer. Honestly, that's how it has been for years and years, Apple has never really made a low cost display.

 

[BrownyQ]

If that price range turns out to be accurate, it'll be a hard pass from me. I'll find an alternative, reluctantly.

 

[Fishrrman]

The new display may be introduced as a "companion peripheral" to the upcoming "smaller" m-series Mac Pro.

$2,500 for a display?
Or... how about "just" $2,000?
Or... even $1,700?

These aren't "consumer-oriented" displays.
Apple left that part of the business years ago.
They won't be coming back to it.