Having a higher resolution “display for editing” means that one can see a higher resolution image in the timeline view when editing. Editors do not usually have monitoring displays (displays for just the output image). That is more common for Colorists and those producing DCI or Blu-ray masters.
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.
PCMag Tests Apple's Pro Display XDR Color Accuracy and Brightness, Says It 'Does Exactly What It Sets Out To'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having a higher resolution “display for editing” means that one can see a higher resolution image in the timeline view when editing. Editors do not usually have monitoring displays (displays for just the output image). That is more common for Colorists and those producing DCI or Blu-ray masters.
For video yes (though even there the input material might be 5.5 to 6K), for photography, most cameras from the last decade can fill that 6K display.
Isn't that exactly what those $40,000 displays - that Apple was comparing the XDR with - are for?
Sweet Jeebus.
Adding "computer" makes it even worse: liquid crystal display computer display. How about simply IPS LCD? Doesn't that convey everything the original Apple copy intended to convey? There's no need for the superfluous display or monitor. It's the XDR page. We know it's a display/monitor.
or LCD's
I know we're all joking, but it's surprising that Apple has left that error on their website so long.
Even funnier fact, there's even a name for the phenomenon: RAS syndrome. Funniest fact of all: RAS stands for Redundant Acronym Syndrome, and yes RAS syndrome is very intentional.
Last edited:
Fair to say none of you read the article then as this was discussed in the very first paragraph. LOL.
[automerge]1580918953[/automerge]
Other than all the industry experts concede it replaces $40-50K monitors. LOL.
That is MUCH MUCH better. Looking forward to see updated reviews on it.
[automerge]1580922168[/automerge]
No No, that was not the point. Purely from a value Perspective it is pretty much market price of a Professional Monitor. You have more affordable variant from ASUS, and higher priced variant from Eizo. Apple somewhat sits at the middle.
The Pro XDR is not a Reference Monitor doesn't make it 2/10 value. It may be for consumers, but it was never aimed at consumer for the first place.
The NEC pro level 30" monitors are 99.3% Adobe RGB, come with calibration system built in, and are less than 1/2 the price of the XDR.
But it’s not a steep price for those who want its quality. For them it’s a steal.
The open question is with the calibration that’s yet to come, is it sufficient for a colorist or for use as a mastering monitor.
My favorite similar quirk of language, and I can’t remember who i heard say it, was “The Los Angeles Angels, or The The Angels Angels if you’re even mildly bilingual...”How about Liquid Crystal Device? LCD display. Sort of like PDF which was originally Portable Document File and then became Portable Document Format.
Not just the graphic. If they had actually read the article, it said as much:
"However, it was surprising to see the monitor get beat on this test by what is almost strictly a business-centric display, the Dell U3219Q, with its Adobe RGB reading of 98.1 percent"
No, Apple hit it's target perfectly - owners of new Mac Pros who wanted a 5K+ monitor that matched its styling and had reasonable specs. Rather than offer that and leave a few thousand on the table Apple instead gave them an over-engineered and over-spec'd monitor they don't need but had no real choice to not buy.
So? When Apple launched the XDR they claimed that it was competitive with a $43,000 Sony 4k reference display (the reference is in the PCMag review). Lots of people on MR have used the 'but it can replace a $50k display' to justify the price of the XDR.
The reality seems to be "close - but no cigar" (because even a 500-dimming-zone display isn't going to match a dual-layer LCD with, effectively, 4k dimming zones) - and anybody even contemplating a $40k display is, by definition, very interested in that cigar.. As people have often said about the Mac Pro itself - $40k for a bit of kit isn't necessarily a big deal for the Real True Industry Pros this is aimed at.
However, yes, its 6k - with loads of real-estate. In that respect, its a pity that the review didn't include the $3000 Dell 8k, the LG Ultrafine 5k and maybe an ultrawide option.
Of course it's over-specced and over-engineered for people who just want an iMac 5k screen styled to match the Mac Pro. Same as the Mac Pro is over-specced and over-engineered* for those of us who just want a Mac with a swappable GPU and a couple of spare PCIe slots for extra USBs. Except the base Mac Pro which is under-specced and over-engineered.
The infamous $1000 stand, for starters, is almost the definition of over-engineering (especially since the non-fawning reviews say that it isn't that great) but even if you dismiss that as optional, look at the mounting mechanism: Apple had one job to do: incorporate 4 threaded VESA-spec bolt holes into the back of the case, because a big chunk of their target market will want to use custom (& possibly pre-existing) VESA mounts. Instead, we get a complex proprietary magnetic doodad that needs a $200 adapter just to add VESA boltholes (If someone needs a quick-release mount, guess what? quick-release VESA mounts are available).
* Even the "classic" Mac Pro - which was already built like the proverbial brick outhouse - didn't resort to having PCIe slot covers machined from solid aluminium... on the other hand you could take the cover off without having to unplug all the cables and it didn't have switches and ports on the top so you couldn't access them if the machine was under a desk... etc.
Who are these lots of people? I've seen posts referencing/comparing the XDR to the Flanders (for example), but not a one that said it could *replace* it. They're very different displays. With very different prices and features.
Hands-On With Apple's $4999 Pro Display XDR and $999 Stand
Alongside the Mac Pro, Apple launched the Pro Display XDR, a 6K professional display that's designed to be used with the Mac Pro and other high-powered Apple machines. We picked up a Pro Display XDR alongside our Mac Pro, and it arrived today, so we thought we'd do an unboxing, hands-on, and...
forums.macrumors.com
...and that's from a front page MacRumors story, not to mention all the times the argument has been trotted out in the forums when someone has challenged the price.
To be fair, they didn't actually say "replace" they just compared the price and specs of two random, unrelated, things for no adequately explored reason....
You're right, I didn't since I figured someone got paid at MacRumors to write this article and convey factual information. Instead they wrote:
"In Adobe RGB color gamut testing, relevant for content creation tasks, the Pro Display XDR had what PCMag says is an "excellent" result of 96.7 percent coverage. Comparatively, the Pro Display XDR beat out the Acer Predator X35, the ASUS Rog Strix XG438Q, the Dell U3219Q 4K, and the Razer Raptor 27..."
Which I took as the XDR beating out the Dell U3219Q in that specific test, which it does not.