Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So Apple is all about carbon neutral (yeah good luck with that) and the environment, but apart from not giving you a charger for your incredibly expensive iphone (er, the environment), I can't buy one of their incredibly expensive displays as a second monitor to my 2017 imac which is working perfectly well because of ...... planned obsolescence? Ah yes, only M series ipads could run stage manager because of ... oh hang on, yes they can suddenly! How about that!
 
Just curious if you can you control the monitor 's volume using the keyboard volume controls or is it like other external displays when used with a Mac?
 
There is absolutely no way this is true, I need to see someone plug this monitor into a 3 year old Intel Mac Pro, if it doesn't get signal I will be stunned.
 
Absolutely. Divisive topics like this may get more engagement, but good journalism tries to convey the full truth. (I can’t understand why anyone would disagree and downvote your comment!)
Based on the timing of the downvote, it was in retaliation to me downvoting one of his comments.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kalsta
It's just a display. Why does it care what CPU the host computer is using? Why is it more complicated than it needs to be do its job as a display?

Is actually closer to being a docking station display. There are no buttons on these ‘display’ ( and haven’t been any on Apple display ever since they went heavy into the docking station aspects ) .

Want to change the brightness , contrast , color profile , etc …. It is the host system . No software on host system then no control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbeLincoln1984
There is absolutely no way this is true, I need to see someone plug this monitor into a 3 year old Intel Mac Pro, if it doesn't get signal I will be stunned.

Can plug it in, but how do you change the brightness , contrast , color profile, etc. ? There probably is a nominal operate mode that will try to put something on the screen ( if all the DSC and DisplayPort aramerters are decoded ) ,but the non basic features of the system will not work. At 5at point what is the extra price point worth.

The is difference because “happens to (somewhat ) work” and has active technical support.
People will possibly buy this and claim it is Apple fault that all the features work. If not on the supported list that is a short support session . Same for the ambulance chasing lawyers claiming some claims. Never was supported.
 
Can plug it in, but how do you change the brightness , contrast , color profile, etc. ? There probably is a nominal operate mode that will try to put something on the screen ( if all the DSC and DisplayPort aramerters are decoded ) ,but the non basic features of the system will not work. At 5at point what is the extra price point worth.

The is difference because “happens to (somewhat ) work” and has active technical support.
People will possibly buy this and claim it is Apple fault that all the features work. If not on the supported list that is a short support session . Same for the ambulance chasing lawyers claiming some claims. Never was supported.
After writing my comment I went and looked at Apple's website and I absolutely just think this is a misunderstanding on MacRumor's part, and also poor wording on Apple's part. The website says "these are the Apple silicon Macs that are compatible". So technically it doesn't mention whether Intel Macs are compatible or not. My guess is that it does work with them, the website just doesn't talk about it, and MacRumors took the omission as if that means they're not compatible, but I think they're just simply not mentioned.
 
After writing my comment I went and looked at Apple's website and I absolutely just think this is a misunderstanding on MacRumor's part, and also poor wording on Apple's part. The website says "these are the Apple silicon Macs that are compatible". So technically it doesn't mention whether Intel Macs are compatible or not.

Technically it does. Looks at the compatible Mac models in the head of this thread and Apple’s site . There is nothing there from prior to 2020. That wipes out the vast majority of Intel models. There were no Intel models released after 2020. The only unspecified 2020 model on the list is the Mac Mini. The last Intel Mini is 2018 … so that cannot be an Intel one. There is nothing other two ‘2020’ models mentioned have a M1 prefix.

There is nothing there Intel . Saying this isn’t clear is denial. It is a deliberately specific list . If Apple was being sloppy then the M1 prefixed 2020 listings would not have that prefix. Apple made several grand announcements about when they were dropping Intel and it was 2020. That is a critical detail cannot punt here.


My guess is that it does work with them,


“Happens to work” and supported are technically two different things. Pretty good chance of take a decent Windows PC with a relatively recent AMD GPU in it ALT DisplayPort out can also get something to appear on the screen . But many features are not going to work .

P.S. to the Windows PC thing.


that 'happens to work' status did not land on Apple's supported list on the previous Studio Display . New display won't be different.
 
Last edited:
Not at all surprised. With the shift to Apple silicon, this should be expected. The Intel Macs too are not going to get any further software updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
To me, such things seem a bit dumb. I have a display that can be controlled from my computer, BUT it also has controls on the monitor. I can see needing a Mac (ideally newer) to get the very best from the display but it seems like it would be pretty easy (especially for that high price tag) to also include the needed ports, controls, resolutions to allowance a wide range of computers.
I agree. It should have buttons and an HDMI input for an alternate display option. I know Apple hates that stuff, but it should be able to operate independently without caring what computer it’s plugged into so long as it can drive the signal.
 
It’s funny to me when people are always negative when it comes to this stuff.

Apple is a company that makes premium tech. Their mission is to deliver the best customer experience and make lots of money doing so. These are top notch, very expensive displays designed for people who don’t have a problem dropping $$$ on tech.

If someone wants to hang on to their old computer, there are plenty of displays they can choose from.

Also, anyone that bought an intel Mac Pro and wanted an Apple Display already has one.

They don’t need to make their $1600-$3000+ brand new displays work perfectly with outdated tech. It’s crazy to assume that.

The people complaining prob aren’t in the market for these anyway.
They just discontinued their “premium Pro Display XDR”. Seem no one really want their ridiculous stuff. Huh!
 
I totally understand why the top end ASD at 120Hz and mini-LED requires TB5 (hence making it incompatible with my Mac Pro Intel with TB3).

I don't understand why the new entry model ASD at 60Hz (which is essentially the same as my current 3-2022 ASDs I have connected) was knee-capped for use on my Intel Mac Pro? Not sure it even needs TB5, but it makes sense for daisy-chaining perhaps as well as being the current spec.
 
Do you think the m3 pro chip can smoothly support 120Hz? I've been waiting for the new studio display to come out for months. Actually, the XDR is much more than my planned budget. But it's a one-time purchase. I don't know what to do. It will mainly be used for software coding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbeLincoln1984
Do you think the m3 pro chip can smoothly support 120Hz?


or if hesitant to look at the manufacturer's documentation... a story posted shortly before this one on the front page.

https://www.macrumors.com/2026/03/03/studio-display-xdr-120hz-limits/


I've been waiting for the new studio display to come out for months. Actually, the XDR is much more than my planned budget. But it's a one-time purchase. I don't know what to do. It will mainly be used for software coding.

"one-time" outside the budget isn't sticking to a budget.

Also a major difference between 'need' and 'want'. If just 'want' it then waiting to find out if it has quirks and issues is likely better. Especially if you are blowing up the budget to get 'there'. Several months after it ships , if not selling well then discounts will appear. If afraid of "FOMO" and that the delay will be very long of don't order 'sight unseen' ... if blowing the budget ... FOMO isn't a reasonable reason to blow a budget.

More time will mean more alternatives show up if it happens to sell out quickly for the first couple of months.

How it is a 'need' (hard requirement) when the specs were not know for months is questionable? If nano texture and 120 is absolutely required for really bad lighting software coding environment. Maybe so.
 
With the right cable and bandwidth and ports it will continue to work cross platform.

On Windows and Linux you won’t have controls for changing brightness and volume. The monitor’s built in iOS saves the settings that were applied in macOS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thenewepic
So that means that you can connect no single computer but an M Series Mac? Not even recent Windows laptops?
It’s a display for crying out loud.
RIP some studios, hopefully they know what they are buying before an awkward situation occurs.
How the single most important US computing company is not „able“ to release a MONITOR in 2026 that works with any other brand or even their own computer released before 2020 is waaaay beyond me.
And for some time I thought Apple actually started caring for something but their profit margins. Joke’s on me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbeLincoln1984
If you're remotely in the market for an overpriced $3000 panel, you've had an Apple silicon Mac for many years by now.
An Intel Mac powering a 5120x2880 resolution display will as loud as this carrying 80 passengers: 😛

gettyimages-125522481-640x640.jpg


You couldn't pay me to use an Intel MacBook in 2026. They run hot, have bad battery life and are loud even when watching a 1440p YouTube video in Chrome. 👎
 
It's just a display. Why does it care what CPU the host computer is using? Why is it more complicated than it needs to be do its job as a display?

Because it requires Thunderbolt 5 as it sends a single stream vs the cheat Apple has been using for years even on the older 5k iMacs to display 5k video using Display Stream Compression (DSC) to merge 2 streams together into 1.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.