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.
Pro Display XDR Turns Four Years Old: When to Expect a New Model
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
6k@120hz is roughly 62Gbps... Ultra High Speed HDMI 2.1 is 48Gbps, Thunderbolt 4 is 40 gbps... they have to wait for the new standards, or do you like them to invent yet another connector that's not compatible with anything else.
The studio or XDR are clearly not meant for gamers, but for professionals who value accuracy above refresh rate.
Always keep in mind, that there is a big chance you are dealing with the "logic" of a 12 year old
Yep. Plus I imagine we all remember when the my debuted FaceID and it didn't work? 🤣🤦♂️
How about a second thunderbolt input? So those of us who have to use PC laptops for work don't have to unplug our Mac every time we want to use the Apple display for our work. It seems like an obvious idea. But as far as I can tell, every Apple monitor since the dawn of time has been a single input display.
Bring back a $1k Thunderbolt Display type monitor please!
XDR is a beautiful monitor, 32" is a great size too, but yikes its pricey.
XDR is a beautiful monitor, 32" is a great size too, but yikes its pricey.
Put magnetic connectors on your laptops and fixed connector on the display end.
I regularly switch both my XDR and Studio Display between several different devices.
As technology improves so should the display. If not your left with the Apple Studio Display, for all intents and purpose the same display that debuted in the 5k iMac almost a decade ago in 2014. Oh and Apple is charging over 1500 for a screen, a basically a decade old. Technology moved a lot in a decade, we have HDR, frame rates that have more than doubled, and standard nit brightness that has increased. Heck on MacBook pros we get a standard nit of over 1000, and can have brightness of over 1600 nits.
Okay so why's there not a computer built into it?
It's more expensive than iMac and it's literally worthless without a computer, so why not just put one into the 'void' space? I mean if you're going to spend more than an iMac for what's literally a display why not just go the extra mile and make it an iMac? The iMac certainly did so why not just make this a 27 inch iMac?
This is Apple greed.
There's no computer built into it because it's a professional/prosumer device. It even has the name "Pro" in the name. It's the same reason why a Mac Pro doesn't come with a display—it's a professional device.
The Pro Display XDR is more expensive than an iMac because the Pro Display XDR has a much higher quality display—it has a higher resolution, more accurate colors, the panel is physically larger, the panel uses more complex technology, etc.
Apple products with "i" in the name were originally intended by Steve Jobs to be consumer devices. Jobs clearly stated in a presentation that devices with "Pro" in the name are professional devices, and devices with "i" in the name are consumer devices. Tim Cook made the stupid choice of allowing illogical names such as "iPad Pro," "iMac Pro," and "iPhone Pro," so I understand why customers are confused.
Last edited:
Would you buy the Pro XDR now to complment 2 studio displays or wait? I edit video and stills with Resolve, Final Cut and Capture One. Currently on 14" m1 max 64gb but thinking of upgrading to m3 max and pro xdr due for tax purposes since I didn't buy any business equipment this year. I love the studio display but hate the black levels compared to amazing screen on 14" macbook pro. For those that have Pro xdr and studio display next to each other is it really annoying to have that baclklit bleed on studio vs. pro? Thanks!
If they slap an M3/M4 Max motherboard inside of it, and it can do 120Hz refresh, and handle HDR like my M1 Max MBP, and call it an iMac...I'll be all-in!
I love the optimism in your post.If they slap an M3/M4 Max motherboard inside of it, and it can do 120Hz refresh, and handle HDR like my M1 Max MBP, and call it an iMac...I'll be all-in!
I try and do my part! LOLI love the optimism in your post.
I'm continually hopeful that Apple will fill (what I see as) their "desktop HDR gap" with a ≥27" XDR iMac! Nothing more that I'd like from them so I can "get on" with shooting and processing my growing mountain of HDR Log footage with a nice-and-tidy desktop all-in-one!
Being forced to workflow this footage under cramped conditions on my 16" M1 Max MBP is nothing more than an unnecessary and cruel joke by Cupertino. AFAIC, they can "stuff" their Studio/ASD and/or Pro/PDXDR, er, "solutions", the HDR-shooting iPhone/mirrorless masses require a roomy HDR desktop space and Tim-and-company seem to be fine not taking our money...strange behavior, IMHO! ROFL!
I noticed that myself when comparing the glossy and nanotextured ASD's at the Apple store. Their nanotextured finish is very strong and, like you, I found it unsuitable for text work. However I can understand why they did it:
As you probably know, Apple's products are optimized for use by graphics professionals, especially those who do video work. And for video, I found the nanotextured display to be stunning, for two reasons: (1) it cuts reflections better than any other matte screen I've seen; and (2) all other matte screens seem to reduce the vibrancy of the image, but I didn't notice that with the nanotextured display. In sum, I find the nanotextured coating is a specialized treatmement that is unsuitable for text work, but works beautifully for graphics (and only for graphics).
You should check out the 32" Dell 6k. It has a matte finish, and is thus not for me (I do mostly text work, and thus prefer glossy displays). But you might find its matte finish works for you. Plus it was recently on AZ for $1,830 (the price has since gone up, but it will probably come down again). If you're interested, I'd suggest going on the Dell 6k thread and asking if its matte texture is similar to that of the matte MBP's; there's probably at least a few people there that still have an old MBP to compare.
I’m looking forward to an updated XDR or perhaps even a larger 40” 8K monitor. And I want none of the features claimed in this article. Why would I want a Pro Display with Amateur Features? Especially since Apple allows for qualitatively superior features to run on Macs: using your iPhone for a camera (Continuity Camera), hooking the audio into external speakers…
I have the Studio Display on my Mac mini and it’s fine there as a backup system but the camera and audio are inferior to anything I’d want on my main device.
I have the Studio Display on my Mac mini and it’s fine there as a backup system but the camera and audio are inferior to anything I’d want on my main device.
Agreed, I think many would have preferred the ASD be that way as well.
8k would be awesome for viewing large datasets. An 8k monitor at Retina pixel density should be ≈ 8k/6k x 32" => ≈ 42" to 43". But I don't know if they'll go that large. And I shudder to think of how much they would charge for such a beast.
There were earlier rumors the next XDR would be 7k, which would be ≈ 7k/6k x 32" => ≈ 37".
Last edited: