Judging by performance of my retina MBP with Iris graphics at "more space" display setting i would not get my hopes high.
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.
New DisplayPort 1.4a Standard Points to 8K Notebook and All-in-One Desktop Displays in 2016
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Judging by performance of my retina MBP with Iris graphics at "more space" display setting i would not get my hopes high.
It's just a spec. It outlines what will come way down the road. We're still two generations behind this spec and struggling to field equipment that properly utilizes the current gen. It's great to see the roadmap where we're going and what will ultimately arrive. People are getting ahead of themselves thinking they'll see the fruit of this in 2015.
Actually if they are working with 4K content it can be handy to have 1/4 of the screen be pixel for pixel 4K. Then they have the rest of the screen to display project information. It would be very handy for professionals working with 4K content.
I wonder what this means for Thunderbolt in Macbook Pros if by 2017 we will see Thunderbolt 4 to handle 8K video.
If Nvidia or ATI manages to manufacture one that can pull off 5K, you can be sure Apple will put it in.
Sadly, the trend of bigger and bigger dashboards with more and more info runs counter to almost all UI efficiency studies ever done... Though in video editing its not as bad since a lot of the screen would be occupied by the content itself and not the interface. In software development though I don't agree at all that this is an improvement in many cases. Its like with so much screen estate to be filled, bigger screen with higher resolution, they need to put something in it.
Isn't that where Apple has always found success? E.g. iPod was not the first, but was marketed once the technology was mature enough for a positive customer experience. E.g. iPhone vs Newton, and so on.
----------
600ppialmost twice of the iphones .
In that context it's insane....
"When we said 300ppi was the optimal resolution, we didn't lie... It's just that according to our usage data, people usually sit closer to their computer's display than their phone's... Or something."
I believe this standard would enable that as well since it brings higher data transfer rates. From the press release:
I've coded/developed massive projects on text consoles with huge letters
Me too, I used to program on a tiny black & white Russian TV as a child, horrible experience. The corners were actually round! I enjoy book quality text now.
I can be? They haven't filled me with confidence before hand. Will something new happen this time round do you think? Their GPUs have been awfully lacking, what with their obsession with making things thinner.
And the GPUs in the iMac, Macbook Pro are how good (which is what we're talking about here)?
How about using "a custom solution" called "discreet GPU" and just-forget-about Intel?
The logic of the argument would be that the pixels are much smaller than can be discerned at the distance where the screen occupies a proper field of view. With a phone, this distance could be very close. I'm very nearsighted and sometimes hold my phone very close when I'm without my glasses or contacts, and the high resolution is great. Getting within a couple feet of a 50-inch TV would seem weird, though.
Aren't there one in retina iMac already?
Top of the line GPUs are amazingly powerful, it's just that apple doesn't use them...
Well, apple fell in TB trap. Dp in TB is always one gen behind, because you can design next TB gen only after the new dp version's design is finished.
Looks like apple jumped over TB2 with their displays, so maybe, just maybe there will be TB3 at the end of this year and display with that in 2016. Or Apple just have dropped designing new displays. They remembered to tell us that they dropped Aperture, but forgot to tell us about dropping displays...
Last edited:
Is it just me or anyone else sick of hearing that there isn't much content available to take advantage of these high resolution displays?
These machines/displays clearly aren't for the average consumer anymore. Everything a computer was needed to do only a few years ago can now be done on a tablet, and i believe 99% of people prefer to do so. Talking of course about streaming video, surfing the web, checking email, etc.
However, as a creative professional I can vouch that I have been working with 4k+ content for many years. I've dealt with 36mp images for quite some time now and this year it looks like 50mp images won't be uncommon. so yeah, bring on a 16k display because these time-lapse movies are about to be huge, and not only would I like to see the image at 100% but I'd like to see the rest of the tools in after effects at the same time.
Also, anyone ever deal with RED footage?
There is more than enough content to take advantage of hi-res displays.
These machines/displays clearly aren't for the average consumer anymore. Everything a computer was needed to do only a few years ago can now be done on a tablet, and i believe 99% of people prefer to do so. Talking of course about streaming video, surfing the web, checking email, etc.
However, as a creative professional I can vouch that I have been working with 4k+ content for many years. I've dealt with 36mp images for quite some time now and this year it looks like 50mp images won't be uncommon. so yeah, bring on a 16k display because these time-lapse movies are about to be huge, and not only would I like to see the image at 100% but I'd like to see the rest of the tools in after effects at the same time.
Also, anyone ever deal with RED footage?
There is more than enough content to take advantage of hi-res displays.
Not exactly true.
Older 35mm movie content is being scanned by the big studios at up to 16K. I remember watching this on an episode of "Click" on BBC News 24 a couple of years ago now, so perhaps they are going even higher now (if that's needed?).