IF it's a 6k 32 inch screen, $2,500 is a great price and I'm in.
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's New Standalone Monitor Could Be Around Half the Price of the Pro Display XDR
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple once again proving they are out of touch with the vast majority of their customers... Let's hope this rumor is just a trial balloon that turns out to be wrong. I remember when the first iPhone was released Apple chose to reduce the price after a couple of months to speed up the adoption rate. If the display is really priced at $2,500 I hope no one buys one so Apple will be forced to come to its senses.
The first iMac Pro came out while there was a non-Pro 27 inch iMac. There is speculation that the new 27" iMac will be given the Pro name and replace, not supplement, the 27" iMac. With that in mind, the Apple Silicon iMac should be the same or only a little more than the current 27" iMac it is replacing.
Nothing mars the desk more than an Apple computer connected to an ugly black Acer, or Asus, or AOC, or even a Dell monitor. It’s like having mismatched random appliances in your kitchen. Yes, design aesthetics matter, and if you are in a creative business like graphic design, a “gaming” set up is not conducive to creativity. It’s not a difficult problem for Apple to solve, and the buyers are waiting…
The new iMac Pro should be a lot cheaper without the Intel tax, but you are correct that $3,999 seems like a good guess.
My logic is that the entry level iMac Pro has an Intel Xeon 10 Core that retails for nearly a thousand dollars now, years later, and Apple's price was probably over $800. A good rule of thumb is that Apple's retail prices are 2x component prices, so if a 20 core M1x costs $250 (4x as much as a 6 core M1), CPU markup drops from $1,600+ to $500ish, the new iMac Pro should have an entry level price of at least a thousand less.
That does make sense. I had not considered there is no other 27" iMac. I am thinking though the iMac non-Pro won't get that HDR Promotion display.
If it's a 6K Retina display, then that may make sense. But a 4 or 5K Retina display shouldn't really cost way more than $1000 or something. I'm reminded of how Apple's 27" Thunderbolt display made from 2011 to 2016 cost $1000, and that wasn't even a Retina display! (Not to mention it still had USB 2.0 ports, even long after all the Macs abandoned that in favor of USB 3.)
I disagree. Apple traditionally tends to stay away from markets that are well served by other brands, and this is one of them ( the lower-end, not the high-end). There are quite a few good looking monitors, that look almost like a copy of a flatter iMac.
Here is an example, that looks exactly like something Apple would have designed :
Looks nice but they don't have 5K or 6K monitors.
not necessarily. not only may certain people prefer 32" and 4k instead of 5k for better movie viewing experience, the current macbook pro has probably the WORST response time of any 120+ hz monitor
The new iMac Pro is presumed to replace not just the $5k iMac Pro, but also the $1799 27-inch iMac. It'll start at a slightly higher price and presumably eventually go down again after a while. E.g., by the time we have an M3, they might continue selling the M1 iMac Pro at $1999. Maybe.
I know all our needs are different and for some a $2500, lesser version of the PD XDR fits the bill just fine, while for others an iMac without the motherboard is a better fit. I was an Apple TB monitor user but felt the real estate was too small for my coding and general use needs so I switched to a – clearly non-Apple – 34" TB ultra-wide monitor and have not looked back since. This form factor is so great for my needs that unless Apple enters the ultra-wide market, I don't really care what's getting released.
We value various aspects of monitors differently and for me the form factor has greater value than tighter integration with my MBP or Mac Mini. My non-Apple TB monitor offers single cable convenience to a MBP with power delivery and built-in USB-C hub into which an ethernet adapter, microphone and webcam are permanently connected. Apple, if you're willing sell an ultra-wide with a Retina display, I'll be interested!
We value various aspects of monitors differently and for me the form factor has greater value than tighter integration with my MBP or Mac Mini. My non-Apple TB monitor offers single cable convenience to a MBP with power delivery and built-in USB-C hub into which an ethernet adapter, microphone and webcam are permanently connected. Apple, if you're willing sell an ultra-wide with a Retina display, I'll be interested!
Because an M1 Pro and systemboard costs Apple significantly less than an Intel Xeon CPU, an AMD Vega Pro GPU and an Intel workstation systemboard.
Apple, it's not that hard. Give us an iMac without the processor, keyboard and mouse...$499 for the 24 and $999 for the 27 or 32.
1299 (M1 iMac) - 699 (mac mini aka processor) - 79 (mouse) - 149 (keyboard) = $372 + Apple tax of $127 + $499 for a 24 inch 4.5K external monitor / hub for your Macbook.
Sell the 27' 5K for $999 and maintain the $500 difference between the 24 and 27 inch iMac.
1299 (M1 iMac) - 699 (mac mini aka processor) - 79 (mouse) - 149 (keyboard) = $372 + Apple tax of $127 + $499 for a 24 inch 4.5K external monitor / hub for your Macbook.
Sell the 27' 5K for $999 and maintain the $500 difference between the 24 and 27 inch iMac.
Apple's many millions of repeat customers willing to pay pay premium prices for Apple products, year after year after year, would disagree with you. As would their almost $3 trillion market valuation.
Apple will price its display to support their required and reasonable (approx) 40% GPM.
If the specs are outstanding for its price point and meet customer needs, why would you want people to not purchase one? Or even care if they did? It's their money.
just so y'all know, samsung is gonna showcase a 32in 4k 240hz MiniLED at CES real soon. y'all should keep an eye on that. however, i'm unsure if that monitor is even compatible with any current m1 macs
I get the impression that very few people here have priced out a truly high end monitor recently...
well the people here are usually just casuals. if there's actually a professional device that we need, the company will pay for it.
And 240Hz is hardcore gaming, not exactly Mac territory.
the issue here isn't the diminishing returns of a 240hz monitor, it's the fact that the current macbook pro has among the worst response time of any 120hz+ monitor. hopefully that samsung monitor has an adequate number of local dimming zones. i have to assume that the m1 macs can still run that thing but at a lower refresh rate. hopefully the price of it is within range of the $2500 apple monitor if that was the case
I just cannot justifying paying more for a monitor than my base MBP 14". Who is this for? If you're willing to drop 2500 for a monitor, I'm sure your pockets are already deep enough to spring for the Pro Display XDR (and, it'll probably even make more sense, considering tax write-offs).
This is the display equivalent of a medium-sized popcorn.
This is the display equivalent of a medium-sized popcorn.