Would make sense.. it's time replace the crappy 27" Thunderbolt display with a 30+" professional display without that hideous glass in front.
Most likely black to match the new black trash can?
New thunderbolt displays are likely. At worst they'll match the current iMac design but at least will include USB 3.0 Ports and hopefully still a FireWire port.Would make sense.. it's time replace the crappy 27" Thunderbolt display with a 30+" professional display without that hideous glass in front.
Most likely black to match the new black trash can?
Yeah, if you can afford it @ $4,000. i rounded up of course.This is the Kid
http://www.asus.com/News/L9xTPmmMwTlPMq5l
I've mentioned before that it would be possible to do with scaling. Both 24 and 27" 16:10 and 16:9 displays fall within what could be done with doubling. 24" has has used 1920x1200 and 1920x1080. 27" has also used 1920x1080. Going for double on one of those could work. 30"+ died out in favor of a 27" middle ground. For a while we had 21" 1600x1200 displays at a medium price range, then most 30" types were priced into the stratosphere. The current 27" panels actually evolved from the prior 25.5" (often called 26") ones that showed up around 2008-2009ish. Those were 16:10 types. They just retained a static height dimension and widened them to 16:9 27" types. I guess the point is that 30" displays have been tested in the past, and LG discontinued panels in that size.Yeah, 4K... what the hell??
For me 24" to 27" is the sweet spot. A 30 or 32" display is just too big. It'll take an hour just to find your mouse cursor.
And 4K on a 30" or smaller monitor means nothing will be readable without wearing some sort of assisted technology headset.
Doubling? Wouldn't that make text and buttons look like crap?I've mentioned before that it would be possible to do with scaling. Both 24 and 27" 16:10 and 16:9 displays fall within what could be done with doubling.
Thru technical understanding and by the way Apple said what they said I think it's like: If you use 4K displays you're limited to three. Implying of course that it support 6 2K displays or 6 1080 displays, etc.With dual 6GB Radeon/Fire Pro cards,
I have dual 24" and have considered adding a 27" as a centre display. HmmMy best combination is a single 27" Cinema flanked by two 24" Cinema displays with my Mac Pro on my circular sit/stand desk. Three 27's won't fit on a desk - too big. And too much real estate really. The 24-27-24 is pretty ideal visually and space wise. Unfortunately they don't sell the 24's anymore.
The next best is 27-27, which I have next to it (an identical desk) in TB monitors.
Yup, it's perfect.I have dual 24" and have considered adding a 27" as a centre display. Hmm
I meant what they do currently to keep things from being tiny on the 13 and 15" rmbps. admittedly I haven't spent much time wiht them. When I did, they looked fine to me. Viewing angles were better than the old ones. They didn't have the really cold whites either.Doubling? Wouldn't that make text and buttons look like crap?
Ah, OK, I see. Yeah I dunno much about retina displays. They're supposed to be of some resolution relative of the human retina or something. I guess my son's iPhone5 has it. The few times I looked I didn't notice any difference but I'm sure there must be.I meant what they do currently to keep things from being tiny on the 13 and 15" rmbps. admittedly I haven't spent much time wiht them. When I did, they looked fine to me. Viewing angles were better than the old ones. They didn't have the really cold whites either.
This is Apple's Thunderbolt strategy.New thunderbolt displays are likely. At worst they'll match the current iMac design but at least will include USB 3.0 Ports and hopefully still a FireWire port.
Intel's HD 4000 integrated graphics can handle 4k.If Apple makes a retina Thunderbolt display at 4K resolution or so, are the rest of the Macs going to be able to power it? I don't see Apple making a product only one of their Macs can handle, a very niche Mac at that.
Or maybe it so happens that they all can power one of these theoretical new displays, but it just so happens the New Mac Pro can power a few more at once than the others, and in which case I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Yeah silly overly generic Apple math that is overly parroted by the Apple faithful. I wasn't referring to that so much. I was referring to the way they're scaled. They have twice the pixels in each dimension when compared to the standard resolution models (not the "high res"), and things on screen are displayed at the same size. It helps a little with text and things.Ah, OK, I see. Yeah I dunno much about retina displays. They're supposed to be of some resolution relative of the human retina or something. I guess my son's iPhone5 has it. The few times I looked I didn't notice any difference but I'm sure there must be.My Android Galaxy Note II phablet is supposed to have some super-special screen too but I don't notice much difference with that either. But I'm pretty ancient too and my eyes are starting to go, so...
If it wasn't for the huge market for ACDs to compliment Apple notebooks, I might agree. I'm of the opinion that there will be TB ACD displays as long as there are Apple notebooks with TB ports on them. Now, if you said Apple was not building displays for the Pro market... that... I'd agree with. The length of the interconnect cables on the current ACDs should be enough to convince anyone of that.No, I will suggest something quite different.
During the Mac Pro reveal, Phil showed a photo with three displays hooked up to the Mac Pro. None of them were Apple displays. I just went back and watched that segment of the reveal. Phil said, "Of course you want to hook up the latest third-party displays, and this supports 4K displays." When has Apple ever even recognized that there are displays other than Apple's? And especially at a big media event?
I think the writing is on the wall -- there will be no more Cinema Displays. It will go the way of the LaserWriter. I'm sure Tim wants to trim down the Pro line to the barest minimum, and I would bet most people who buy a Mac Pro use third-party displays with it anyway, aside from companies like ad agencies that lease Mac products en masse.