LG Unveils UltraFine 6K Display With Thunderbolt 5 Support

[dannys1]

We run a test in the studio 5 years ago with all 27” imacs at standard resolution, nobody noticed it for the whole day, of course it looks way better at hidpi, but thats why MBP got “standard” hidpi at smaller ppi since 2016 (downscaled 3x vs 2x) moving from the assumed retina ppi

Hidpi 5k supports 32” pretty well with the MBP 3x method even better as the desktop screen is even further from your eyes.

I bet just few people in few specific cases can tell the difference even side by side of 32” 5k vs 6k

What do you mean by "standard resolution" though? You couldn't put the 27" retina into an SD mode, you could set it so things were displayed 1:1 but it still gave you the same PPI it's just that the desktop and icons would be tiny and you'd have loads of real estate.

Making it 2x meant you'd see those pixels (or blurry images) if they weren't up to retina resolution. Whilst technically 2x meant scaling was better for many things including true-type fonts, making it 3x didn't lower the PPI it just gave more desktop real estate.

 

[Ethosik]

What do you mean by "standard resolution" though? You couldn't put the 27" retina into an SD mode, you could set it so things were displayed 1:1 but it still gave you the same PPI it's just that the desktop and icons would be tiny and you'd have loads of real estate.

Making it 2x meant you'd see those pixels (or blurry images) if they weren't up to retina resolution. Whilst technically 2x meant scaling was better for many things including true-type fonts, making it 3x didn't lower the PPI it just gave more desktop real estate.

Also to add to your point, native resolution with scaling always wins. A 27” 1440p native resolution display looks so much better than if I manually set my 27” 4K monitor to render at 2560x1440 (note I’m not talking about looks like here but actual render output resolution).

It looks so bad if I need to play some games at 1080 or 1440 I’d get a dedicated monitor for that than use a 4K+ screen at a lower resolution.

 

[dannys1]

“Picasso had a saying: ‘Good artists copy, great artists steal.’ And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.” (Steve Jobs 1996, Triumph of the nerds).

So please stop whinging about other companies copying Apple designs.

Yes but he was making the clear distinction between copying and 'stealing' in this sense (and by the way Picasso likely never said this it's been attributed to many people)

The distinction between “copying” and “stealing” in this context is philosophical rather than literal:

1. Copying: A “copy” is a mere duplication of someone else’s work, often lacking creativity or reinterpretation. It suggests imitation without innovation, essentially reproducing the original without adding anything unique or personal.

2. Stealing: “Stealing,” in this sense, implies taking inspiration from someone else’s work and making it your own in a transformative way. A great artist doesn’t replicate; they assimilate. They take the essence, idea, or technique from the original and adapt it into their own creative vision, blending it with their unique perspective and skill.

The phrase celebrates the idea that all art is influenced by what came before. True creativity lies not in working in isolation but in building on, reinterpreting, or reimagining existing ideas. To “steal” creatively is to honour and elevate the source material by integrating it into something entirely new.

 

[Altis]

“Looks like garbage” is exactly what I am saying why this is massively overblown. It looks crisp and clean here for me. Maybe you have a bad cable or monitor.

No, it's that some people have lower standards. Some people think 1080p looks crisp and clean at 27" -- can't tell them they're wrong if that's how they see it.

This has been observed and documented by many at this point and the cause and workarounds are known. If it doesn't bother you, all the power to you.

 

[e-coli]

Which ones, and what was wrong with them?

The LG UltraFine 27" from a few years back (the ones Apple helped design in lieu of releasing an updated studio display).

They all died for various reasons. Just quit working. They were unbelievably fragile. One of them died when I picked up the monitor and gently moved it to another desk. It never worked again.

 

[steve09090]

That was Apples famous line from Steve Jobs. And let’s hope the LG display comes with the stand included at a normal price 😊

I’m sure it will be a bestseller and lots of people were waiting for something like this.

Very nice LG. Thank you 😊

Yeah I heard it at the time and i can’t disagree. Hard to believe it’s taken 5 years to partially catch up. With technology moving forward quickly and the fact their R&D budget only had to buy the stand to copy it, you’d hope they would include the stand. We shall see. It will be hilarious if they charge for it (even if it’s not as much) and copy that idea too.

Not sure why you thumbsdown my comment when you agree with the statement. Anyway….

 

[Ethosik]

No, it's that some people have lower standards. Some people think 1080p looks crisp and clean at 27" -- can't tell them they're wrong if that's how they see it.

This has been observed and documented by many at this point and the cause and workarounds are known. If it doesn't bother you, all the power to you.

You can certainly objectify the results. The 1080p argument is way over the top example. As I have said. 4K looks like 1440p on one screen and a 5K iMac. I cannot tell a difference. I do detailed photo and motion graphics work so I need my screens to be high quality. Unless I get extremely close, there is no difference. Thus the “looks like garbage” over the top reaction.

1080p at 27” is not in the same league of examples. You can objectify the presence of individual pixels and the blockiness of the visuals. This is why running raw resolution that is NOT native is worse than a similar display at native.

That is the reason this whole conversation about how horrible macOS is dealing with resolution and scaling is just over the top reaction. It doesn’t look fine TO YOU. In no way is it “garbage” if you cannot quantify the issues to a significant impact. Is text warped? Unreadable? Is the entire UI unreadable? It cannot output the correct colors or is in black and white? Those are “garbage” identifiers. Let’s say things what they are, you prefer 5K for the best scaling visual experience. That doesn’t mean 4K at 1440 looks like is “garbage” and it doesn’t help these threads as I became MASSIVELY concerned about replacing my native 27" 2560x1440 with 27" 4K at looks like 1440. But it was an insane jump in visuals I absolutely love it. Looks like 1080 is too big for me and anything higher than 1440 is too small for me. I no longer see the individual pixels which hurts my eyes, and text looks super crisp and clean.

 

[Altis]

You can certainly objectify the results. The 1080p argument is way over the top example. As I have said. 4K looks like 1440p on one screen and a 5K iMac. I cannot tell a difference. I do detailed photo and motion graphics work so I need my screens to be high quality. Unless I get extremely close, there is no difference. Thus the “looks like garbage” over the top reaction.

1080p at 27” is not in the same league of examples. You can objectify the presence of individual pixels and the blockiness of the visuals. This is why running raw resolution that is NOT native is worse than a similar display at native.

That is the reason this whole conversation about how horrible macOS is dealing with resolution and scaling is just over the top reaction. It doesn’t look fine TO YOU. In no way is it “garbage” if you cannot quantify the issues to a significant impact. Is text warped? Unreadable? Is the entire UI unreadable? It cannot output the correct colors or is in black and white? Those are “garbage” identifiers. Let’s say things what they are, you prefer 5K for the best scaling visual experience. That doesn’t mean 4K at 1440 looks like is “garbage” and it doesn’t help these threads as I became MASSIVELY concerned about replacing my native 27" 2560x1440 with 27" 4K at looks like 1440. But it was an insane jump in visuals I absolutely love it. Looks like 1080 is too big for me and anything higher than 1440 is too small for me. I no longer see the individual pixels which hurts my eyes, and text looks super crisp and clean.

My "looks like garbage" was specifically referring to my 1080p 24" monitor (although applies to my 27" 1440p monitor too, as well as my 2013 MBA) because of the elimination of sub-pixel aliasing for text in low-PPI displays. I'm not saying "looks like 1440p" on a 27" 4k display looks like garbage -- you're right that would be a great exaggeration but it's not what I said.

Many have noticed a difference and some have documented it in greater detail using integer-mulitple scaling, ie. "looks like 1080p" on a 4k monitor vs "looks like 1440p". If it doesn't bother you, then ignore it.

It did bother me but my solution was simply to use "looks like 1080p" and go into settings and reduce the standard text size, make a few things like the dock smaller. Only a few things are bigger than they ought to be but not enough to bother me (probably better for my eyes anyways).

I recommend trying this if you do graphic/photo/video work for two reasons: get rid of softness or artifacts/moire that happen from the 5k to 4k conversion, and to eliminate the computational resources needed to do this conversion. I've read enough that it can be a lot of additional work, especially if you either have older hardware, or you're taxing the system already with graphics demands.

Also, I've never recommended 5k -- I've said it's a hardware solution to a software problem. 4k is the standard and 5k only exists because of Apple's scaling -- they could have made their displays 4k like everyone else and used non-integer UI scaling but it very clearly isn't good enough, entirely because of the scaling. And back to the topic of this thread: 6k only exists for 32" for the exact same reason. It's another non-standard display resolution for Apple's scaling purposes.

 

[Ethosik]

My "looks like garbage" was specifically referring to my 1080p 24" monitor (although applies to my 27" 1440p monitor too, as well as my 2013 MBA) because of the elimination of sub-pixel aliasing for text in low-PPI displays. I'm not saying "looks like 1440p" on a 27" 4k display looks like garbage -- you're right that would be a great exaggeration but it's not what I said.

Many have noticed a difference and some have documented it in greater detail using integer-mulitple scaling, ie. "looks like 1080p" on a 4k monitor vs "looks like 1440p". If it doesn't bother you, then ignore it.

It did bother me but my solution was simply to use "looks like 1080p" and go into settings and reduce the standard text size, make a few things like the dock smaller. Only a few things are bigger than they ought to be but not enough to bother me (probably better for my eyes anyways).

I recommend trying this if you do graphic/photo/video work for two reasons: get rid of softness or artifacts/moire that happen from the 5k to 4k conversion, and to eliminate the computational resources needed to do this conversion. I've read enough that it can be a lot of additional work, especially if you either have older hardware, or you're taxing the system already with graphics demands.

Also, I've never recommended 5k -- I've said it's a hardware solution to a software problem. 4k is the standard and 5k only exists because of Apple's scaling -- they could have made their displays 4k like everyone else and used non-integer UI scaling but it very clearly isn't good enough, entirely because of the scaling. And back to the topic of this thread: 6k only exists for 32" for the exact same reason. It's another non-standard display resolution for Apple's scaling purposes.

Ah thank you for the clarity and apologies for my misunderstanding regarding your "garbage" statement. I have seen dozens of these threads that all turn out to be the same that macOS is absolutely HORRIBLE with scaling issues and how oh so much better Windows is and Apple should be ashamed. It is not uncommon for those extreme overreactions to occur in any thread about monitors.

 

[Altis]

Ah thank you for the clarity and apologies for my misunderstanding regarding your "garbage" statement. I have seen dozens of these threads that all turn out to be the same that macOS is absolutely HORRIBLE with scaling issues and how oh so much better Windows is and Apple should be ashamed. It is not uncommon for those extreme overreactions to occur in any thread about monitors.

No problem, my friend I was worried myself about how the U2723QE would look with the M4 Mini but it looks great. I tried it on my parent's 32" 1440p monitor and text didn't look so great to me (quite low PPI and no sub-pixel aliasing doesn't help) but they loved it so I'll probably pick up another Mini for them as MS arbitrarily decided their otherwise perfectly fine PC is obsolete later this year.

 

[jakey rolling]

Hard to believe it’s taken 5 years to partially catch up.

It would be more accurate to say that it has taken five years for someone to care about the Mac market enough to build a monitor meant to specifically cater to that market. There is really nothing to "catch up" to - 5k display technology has always been LG's technology and the PC world is already eyeing a jump to 8k (with products already on the market at a price lower than Apple's 6k).

Now, if you're referring to the stand - Sure. Apple's design language is being copied by LG here. It is meant to appeal to Mac users, after all. I'd say that it really is no different than Logitech releasing a silver keyboard with white chichlet keys and a command button and calling it a "Mac edition".

I'd hardly call it "catching up" to anything, though. Apple's own HAS and VESA mount design for the ASD is certainly not functionally better (and in many ways, is arguably functionally worse) than the HAS/VESA designs that have been standard fare on most mid-level monitors for the past decade-plus. It is pretty and metallic though, so the target market will react favorably to it, which is the one and only goal with that kind of F.O.F. design.

With technology moving forward quickly and the fact their R&D budget only had to buy the stand to copy it, you’d hope they would include the stand. We shall see. It will be hilarious if they charge for it (even if it’s not as much) and copy that idea too.

From the photos, it would at least appear that the connection between the stand and the monitor itself follows the same tried-and-true design of most other HAS - a latching square that, when removed, reveals the same old 100mm VESA mounting screws that most normal consumers expect to find on a mid-level monitor. So at the very least, there would be no additional accessory needed nor any specific SKU to specify in order to VESA mount the LG. I would be very surprised if LG would sell this monitor without a stand, but then again they are following Apple's precedent here, so all bets are off on that one.

What I would say is probably more likely, though, is that LG might release it with the same two-sku offering that they have for their other productivity monitors like the Dual-up: one SKU that includes a regular stand and one that includes an articulating desk-clamping arm.

If LG does follow Apple's lead and charges for the stand, then that again would just be LG catering to the target market. And yes, for us PC users who would never have to tolerate that kind of garbage, it would be hilarious.

 

[steve09090]

It would be more accurate to say that it has taken five years for someone to care about the Mac market enough to build a monitor meant to specifically cater to that market.

How is that accurate? Do you mean it’s an opinion based on feels? Good on you.

If LG does follow Apple's lead and charges for the stand, then that again would just be LG catering to the target market. And yes, for us PC users who would never have to tolerate that kind of garbage, it would be hilarious.

You do know that Mac users also use monitors that a PC user can use don’t you? Why are you making this a Mac v PC thing anyway? But if you really want to go there, check out the history of monitors and video outputs. Don’t make this a "Hi I’m a Mac, Hi I’m a PC" bs thing. It’s a monitor. Geesh.

 

[ThomasPicard]

The LG UltraFine 27" from a few years back (the ones Apple helped design in lieu of releasing an updated studio display).

They all died for various reasons. Just quit working. They were unbelievably fragile. One of them died when I picked up the monitor and gently moved it to another desk. It never worked again.

Can't agree with that - maybe you had "bad luck"

I have 2 LG Ultrafine's 5K - 3 & 5 years old - moved multiple times - many hours of use - absolutely no problems at all..

On the other hand I had a new 27" Apple Studio display, which "died" after 1 week - so I replaced it with a XDR..

 

[jakey rolling]

You do know that Mac users also use monitors that a PC user can use don’t you?

Yes, I do know that. I would also wager that most Mac Mini users also use monitors that PC users can use, given Apple's ridiculous monitor pricing model.

Why are you making this a Mac v PC thing anyway? But if you really want to go there, check out the history of monitors and video outputs. Don’t make this a "Hi I’m a Mac, Hi I’m a PC" bs thing. It’s a monitor. Geesh.

You missed the point. That's okay - it is expected.

 

[steve09090]

Yes, I do know that. I would also wager that most Mac Mini users also use monitors that PC users can use, given Apple's ridiculous monitor pricing model.

You missed the point. That's okay - it is expected.

Easy to miss something if there was nothing there. With regard to Apples pricing model. That fight has been fought forever. Yet people still want quality and many are willing to pay for it. I’ve lost count on the positive comments on the Studio Display and the XDR display (for those who have a need). What was your point again? 🙄

 

[theluggage]

I was worried myself about how the U2723QE would look with the M4 Mini but it looks great. I tried it on my parent's 32" 1440p monitor and text didn't look so great to me (quite low PPI and no sub-pixel aliasing doesn't help) but they loved it so I'll probably pick up another Mini for them as MS arbitrarily decided their otherwise perfectly fine PC is obsolete later this year.

Here's one reason why it may be so subjective:

A 27" '4k' UHD display - 163ppi - meets the criteria for "retina" - the pixels appear to be about 1 arc minute* in angular size - when viewed from a distance of 21". That's pixel size divided by distance & converted from radians to arc minutes - 1 arc minute is equivalent to the definition of "20:20" vision. Not sure Jobs ever described it thus - but that's the basis for "retina".

For an iPhone, you'll maybe view it from half the distance - so you have to double the ppi - hence the over-300ppi resolution for "retina" iPhones.

So, for a 27" UHD display a person with typical 20:20 eyesight viewing it from a typical arm's length viewing distance is going to have difficulty seeing 1-pixel-sized artefacts, whether that's seeing jagged edges on curved shapes or artefacts due to fractional scaling.

Trouble is, all of those "typicals" make it all a bit hand-wavy. For starters, your eyesight may vary: 20:20 is not "perfect", and not "poor" but rather (waves hands) "typical" or maybe "not problematic" - then there's a whole bunch of subjective stuff on top of that as to whether you prefer a "crisp" or "softer" display when reading, or how triggered you are by a bit of "shimmer" when scroiling.

Then, you may prefer to sit closer to the screen, or you may buy a larger screen to mount on the wall behind the desk or (if you're, say, a YouTuber doing a comparative review vs. a 5/6k display that you've just been given for free) you might climb on the desk and start taking pictures with your phone and blowing them up 300%...

On top of all that, Apple's silly way of describing "5k downsampled to 4k" as "2560x1440" (It. Just. Isn't) when it actually shows far more detail than any 1440p display just promotes FOMO and resolution anxiety...

The "scaling artefacts" issue is real, but certain widely circulated articles that demonstrate it with extreme-close-up simulations and hyperbolic comments about "horrible" or "unusable" greatly exaggerate the problem... and nobody seems to consider the fact that you can run a 27" UHD display in 2:1 "1920x1080 (not)" or a 32" UHD in 1:1 "3840x2160" and get a pixel-perfect display. OK, in 2:1 the MacOS UI is a bit large but not "unusable" in any reasonable sense of the word - and most serious apps let you scale your content or font size to taste anyway.

None of that changes the fact that 5k@27" or 6k@32" is still higher resolution than UHD, gives you plenty of headroom over the "retina" threshold and produces a pixel-perfect display with the "one true MacOS UI size" at 220ppi. Unfortunately that doesn't change the fact that you can get 3 27" UHD displays for the price of a Studio Display or a 32" UHD display and a car for the price of the Pro XDR. Even these new, third party options are more expensive than UHD and - so far - unknowns in terms of picture or build quality (except the Samsung which hasn't exactly received rave reviews).

UHD is a perfectly sensible compromise for anybody who doesn't want to splash the cash or wants to explore alternatives such as multi-display setups, ultrawide or 3:2 screens, OLED, dual purpose TV/monitors...

As for actual 1440p displays - well, a few years ago they were the bee's knees, and I'm not going to say they are useless. If I had a spare 1440p screen around I'd certainly find a use for it! However, they're not really in contention with 4k displays and can't display 4k content at all. There may be a niche of users who have very specific needs that mean 1440p makes sense (maybe refresh rate or colour gamut is more important to you than resolution - there are certainly specialist 1440p and 1080p displays around) but unless you know why you may be in that group I wouldn't recommend buying less than a 4k UHD display for your Mac.

 

[EugW]

As for actual 1440p displays - well, a few years ago they were the bee's knees, and I'm not going to say they are useless. If I had a spare 1440p screen around I'd certainly find a use for it! However, they're not really in contention with 4k displays and can't display 4k content at all.

I actually have a true 27” 1440p display but I don’t really have a use for it. It’s a 2010 27” iMac which works as a display with any source that can use DisplayPort. (It’s not a Thunderbolt model so there isn’t that Thunderbolt requirement. It works fine with Macs, PCs, and even my iPad Pro M4 as the source.) I can’t bear to part with it but I keep it really just for nostalgic purposes and aesthetics at this point.

 

[baummer]

I hope this actually is released this year.

 

[EugW]

I hope this actually is released this year.

I suspect it will be. The competing Asus was actually announced last year.

Get a stunningly high PPI on a 32-inch screen with the ProArt Display 6K PA32QCV - Edge Up

The ProArt Display 6K PA32QCV gives you outstanding PPI on a large 32-inch panel with its 6016x3384 resolution.

edgeup.asus.com

BTW, I suspect the LG will be the same panel as the Asus (as they are they are sourcing the panel from LG AFAIK). Different from the Dell, the Asus has these specs as follows:

32" (although some articles said 31.5")
6016x3384 <-- Same as Apple Pro Display XDR*
HDR600
Matte screen
Ambient and backlight sensors
2 x Thunderbolt 4
DisplayPort 1.4 with DSC
HDMI 2.1
USB hub with automatic KVM support for mouse and keyboard
Tilt, swivel, pivot, and height adjustable stand

*What is the exact diagonal size of the XDR? Apple says it is 32", but it can't be exactly 32" if their 218 ppi spec is accurate.

31.5" is 219.1 ppi.
31.6" is 218.4 ppi.
31.7" is 217.7 ppi.
32.0" is 215.7 ppi.

 

[TonyTech]

218 PPI makes this display pretty much useless for Mac users because of atrociously incompetent scaling in macOS.

I still hope that some company will finally come out with a 5K 32” OLED.

It is exactly the same pixel density as the Apple Pro Display XDR.

 

[theorist9]

For me, this won't serve as a replacement for Apple's external Retina displays unless, unlike the case with the Samsung 5k and Dell 6k, it's offered in a glossy version with an AR coating as good as Apple's. For text work, I find glossy displays are noticeably sharper when you get to Retina-class pixel density (>=220 ppi). If the display has a lower pixel density, the effect is less prounced.

Yes, they are more reflection-prone than matte displays. But I've found that, for indoor use where you don't have a bad lighting situation, Apple's AR coating is sufficient to eliminate reflections.

Plus glossy displays avoid the "sparking snowfield" effect you get on white backgrounds.

 

[theorist9]

It looks awesome, but if it doesn't have webcam, speakers and microphones, means you will be running a bunch wires around making the desk look as average as with any other display. I hope it was 38 inches atleast

Like the XDR, it's probably intended for professional monitoring use, where:
(1) They use external speakers and cameras that exceed the quality of what can be built into a monitor.
(2) Multiple monitors are used, in which case it would be wasteful to have speakers and cameras on each.

 

[lilkwarrior]

As Forrest Gump would say - "I think maybe its both. I think both is happunneng at the same time.."

There is definitely attention to detail going on - the problem is that more often than not, the "detail" getting Apple's attention has nothing to do with enhancing the workflow of the end user. Again, though, this isn't something I'd necessarily blame Apple for. At least not directly. When you have a whole host of loyal customers who think that a 5" cube is a great design for a desktop computer and that an aluminum chassis is the definition of "good build quality" for a monitor, you have to make.. creative.. design decisions.


Apple has mastered the art of cultivating consumer elitism into stupid-high profit margins. If you can convince people that they belong to an elite group (even call them "professionals".. but please don't forget the quotes), then it only takes some very incremental product specifications (say, 5k instead of 4k resolution, 1000 nits of brightness instead of 400, and an aluminum body) to convince those people to open their wallets wide.

It is the same marketing technique that has driven the sales of tens of thousands of Canon XL1 video cameras, Bose, Klipsch, and KRK speakers, Monster power conditioners, and Ford F350 trucks to people who convince themselves they need that level of power, but who have absolutely no idea how to use it.

…It seems you seem to not like the idea of prosumer products catered to the likes of creative professionals being distinct and a focus of a manufacturer beyond what’s good enough for most that the manufacturer also serves very well.

You’re free to ignore those products and be mad all you want that a definitive market exists for such products at the same time as products for most who have more modest needs did computing hardware.

Prosumer hardware have to meet specific and ideal specs most people don’t understand, can’t justify, and/or afford such as ideal and standardized, high pixel-dense screens that necessitates a device pixel ratio (DPR) of 2+ or a pixels-per-inch (PPI) of about 218PPI that Apple and other manufacturers target.

It’s okay that’s the reality is the most; such products have every right to exist compared to what you think is good enough for most (same applies to other prosumer hardware Apple releases such as the Mac Studio, iPad Pro, Vision Pro, Macbook Pro, and so on).

Such products like the Pro Display XDR are explicitly needed to support the proliferation of tech like its XDR tech (1000 sustained brightness, 1600 peak brightness Dolby Viaion + HLG HDR ideal for creative professionals)to cheaper and more mainstream devices over time.

It’s laughable and ironic you mention marketing: Marketing primarily from TV manufacturers is what au’s inflated and ingenious made most people believe 4K is a quality resolution for panel sizes in which that resolution cannot offer a high PPI experience (any panel size larger than 24 inches).

This is all supported by and mitigated by modern human-computer-interaction (HCI) computer science and modern display standards governed by standard bodies such as VESA that seem to be far more knowledgeable about displays than you care to be debunking your BS drivel.

Browsers and modern native apps (especially mobile ones) use such knowledge to conditionally serve high PPI content or not for over a decade.

For the Web platform, Apple helped innovate with their employees that contribute to Webkit playing an invaluable part in securing such realities for the Web.

It is ubiquitously known that creative professionals, Silicon Valley, and various other prosumer segments overwhelmingly support Apple’s prosumer hardware regardless that most cannot afford or justify their capabilities.

That is again okay. Good business is varying accommodating needs in addition to accommodating niches others can’t do as well hopefully to consistently secure profit or high ROI.

Despite most people scoffing at some of other prosumer hardware being a well known brain, Apple has prosumer hardware that has no competition or peer, invaluably trickled its technology to mainstream devices otherwise impossible, and some that even outsell the variant for most towards being a 4 trillion dollar company.

Apple often best secures continual success before many in expensive new categories or maximize new breakthroughs in such categories by continuing to strategically sell prosumer products alongside variants for most.

The Pro Display XDR is actually one of their most successful products doing so aging like fine wine with little competition and invaluably had its tech passed down to bigger product categories that gave Apple hard-to-beat or impossible advantages over peers.

 

[JimmyG]

An iMac with this panel could be nice 🧐

I was thinking the exact same thing!

Slap on a chin with some M4 Max goodness inside with plenty of I/O and add a top bezel with a conference camera and jam in some speakers...c'est voila, 32" 6K iMac AIO bliss! One cord to rule them all! LOL In the meantime the Mini and Studio folks can just go out buy this LG unit (or not) and be on their merry way.

Win, win!

 

[Pressure]

I was thinking the exact same thing!

Slap on a chin with some M4 Max goodness inside with plenty of I/O and add a top bezel for a conference camera and jam in some speakers...c'est voila, 32" 6K iMac AIO bliss! One cord to rule them all! LOL In the meantime the Mini and Studio folks can just go out buy this LG unit (or not) and be on their merry way.

Win, win!

Some of us already have better 8K monitors ...

I just want an updated Mac Studio 😂