Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,565
I was thinking about getting one... Until I saw the price! No thanks, Apple. I can buy two 27" iMacs for practically the price of one 5K Retina iMac. 5K isn't really needed at this point in time, since there aren't any devices that can record in 5K. There aren't really many on the market that can even record in true 4K, so I'm going to wait a while

You say you can, but you can't.

The cheapest iMac 27" is $1,799. Twice that is $3,598, not $2,499. However, that iMac has a slower processor and no fusion drive.

You pay $2,199 to get an iMac 27" with the same fusion drive and a processor that is only 100MHz slower. Twice that is $4,398. That's 76% more, not "practically the price of one 5K Retina iMac". In other words, giving up the Retina display and 100 MHz clock speed saves you a whole 12%.
 

MikhailT

macrumors 601
Nov 12, 2007
4,582
1,325
Plenty of graphics cards out there that support that kind of resolution (even if they have to use two cables to deliver it). Too bad there isn't a minitower-style Mac that allows a person to choose their own graphics hardware.

But as I've been told many times by people on here, we don't need that at all. Better to wait two years until Apple decides we're ready to have it. :rolleyes:

Name one graphic card that supports 5K resolution at 60hz through two ports without relying on bandwidth compression and the MST trick.

There are issues with MST, it's not universally supported, and it is merely a transitional trick to get us to the next standard, DP 1.3.
 

WigWag Workshop

macrumors 6502
I don't understand, why Apple can not release a stand alone cinema display. A lot of the other vendors are selling them, is there not enough profit in them? Is Apple not able to get the displays manufactured for them? Is there not enough materials available for the manufacturing of these displays? Or is the quality not up to Apple standards? I am really curious about this, I mean they have a Mac Pro in their lineup, one would think a nice Apple cinema display would be a companion for it.
 

iChrist

macrumors 65816
Sep 7, 2011
1,479
432
3 countries for tax benefit
lol

Read it and weep. I said the same thing on the other thread and 14 others said it was false.

I love how fatty Schiller introduced the Mac Pro after 5 yrs of letting it rot. And here we go again, the Mac Pro gets no display or support from Apple. Next Mac Pro update will probably be in 2017, major change will be shorter trashcan shape.

:confused:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CWallace

macrumors G5
Aug 17, 2007
12,027
10,735
Seattle, WA
I don't understand, why Apple can not release a stand alone cinema display.

As the article notes, it is because no Mac currently shipping can drive it due to the limitations of TB2/DP1.2.

As I understand from said article, the Dell UP2715K also is a "no-go" for Mac owners because Mac's cannot support using both TB2/DP1.2 ports to drive a monitor, which the Dell requires.
 

fs454

macrumors 68000
Dec 7, 2007
1,979
1,825
Los Angeles / Boston
I was thinking about getting one... Until I saw the price! No thanks, Apple. I can buy two 27" iMacs for practically the price of one 5K Retina iMac. 5K isn't really needed at this point in time, since there aren't any devices that can record in 5K. There aren't really many on the market that can even record in true 4K, so I'm going to wait a while

It's not about recording in that format, it's about pixel density and having a screen where the pixels don't slice your retinas in half. iPhone 3GS vs iPhone 4. Classic MacBook Pro vs Retina MacBook Pro. I have trouble using my production house's 27' TB displays after using a Retina iPhone, retina iPad and retina MBP daily - it just feels antiquated and I get a headache after extended periods - something I don't experience on the rMBP.
 

iChrist

macrumors 65816
Sep 7, 2011
1,479
432
3 countries for tax benefit
I don't understand, why Apple can not release a stand alone cinema display. A lot of the other vendors are selling them, is there not enough profit in them? Is Apple not able to get the displays manufactured for them? Is there not enough materials available for the manufacturing of these displays? Or is the quality not up to Apple standards? I am really curious about this, I mean they have a Mac Pro in their lineup, one would think a nice Apple cinema display would be a companion for it.

Apple's last concern is the Mac Pro. They know the market segment for that product will just deal with poor support and no updates, they have been for a long time.

:apple:
 

toomanyipods

macrumors newbie
Sep 27, 2007
28
1
For my Mac Pro I went with a 24" Dell UP2414Q 4k display. ..

- Shipped at an awful 30Hz and took research and hoop-jumping to enable 60Hz.
...

I use mine at a scaled res equivalent to 2304x1296. But it will go as high as 3008x1692 if you like to squint.

Great review. I'm looking for something similar. I'm a long-term iMac buyer but bought this Mac Pro thinking it would be another year or two before Apple would have a 4K iMac. The processors are still less than ideal, and only two TB ports, but I'd buy the Retina iMac today.

Was troubled from the outset with the Displayport and HDMI baked into the Mac Pro, but thought Apple would come through. VERY DISAPPOINTED now to see they will not. I'm getting old and would prefer a 27" or 30" 4k or 5k, but I don't see many good options coming down the pike.

How did you get 60Hz to work? I may just buy the UP2414Q :(

Unfortunately, if anything better comes along, the UP2414Q is not compatible with the first Retina MBP. Can't shuffle it downstream to my laptop.
 

fs454

macrumors 68000
Dec 7, 2007
1,979
1,825
Los Angeles / Boston
As the article notes, it is because no Mac currently shipping can drive it due to the limitations of TB2/DP1.2.

Why not two ports? The Pro machines can all do this. rMBPs and Mac Pro trashcans both have 2 or more TB ports.

This is pretty terrible for the pro community - here's this amazing 5K retina display, perfect for editing video and photos on a professional level like never before, but you HAVE to use mobile hardware to drive it for the rest of eternity. That 12-core, dual-GPU $8000 trashcan over there? Nope. Enjoy your 112ppi.

It's not like you're plugging and unplugging your monitor so often that two TB ports would be a practical issue.
 

macduke

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,142
19,683
Yet another reason to wait until Skylake for those who don't need to upgrade quite yet. That thing is going to be the Mac of my dreams!
 

ElectronGuru

macrumors 68000
Sep 5, 2013
1,656
489
Oregon, USA
Enough, this product arrived 12 months before the standards and cpu/gpu being ready for it.

This needs to be repeated. This iMac is doing the impossible. Like a $2500 time machine, It's not that other solutions are slow it's that this solution is that much sooner. They could create a new new Mac Pro and display but it would be hard to enjoy it over the deafening screams of it being proprietary

Other products (not all on ones) will catch up when the standards do.
 

J. Jizzle

macrumors regular
Mar 30, 2013
231
79
U.S.A.
You say you can, but you can't.

The cheapest iMac 27" is $1,799. Twice that is $3,598, not $2,499. However, that iMac has a slower processor and no fusion drive.

You pay $2,199 to get an iMac 27" with the same fusion drive and a processor that is only 100MHz slower. Twice that is $4,398. That's 76% more, not "practically the price of one 5K Retina iMac". In other words, giving up the Retina display and 100 MHz clock speed saves you a whole 12%.

Lol. Yeah, sorry. My math was off. :eek:
 

Glassed Silver

macrumors 68020
Mar 10, 2007
2,096
2,567
Kassel, Germany
Exactly the point. A second 5K display isn't needed or desired by 99% of the Mac buyers. Apple no longer wants or needs to make products for the 1%ers.

The problem is, that we all have niche needs, we all share some 1% demand.

Some more, some less, but when you boil down products or pipelines down to the lowest common denominator you end up with something, where it's hard to justify ANYONE. Not everyone, but anyone.

The usual response is "shop the competitors", people seem to be unaware of the market, but Apple's still the closest.
It's just that they omit things all the time.
Can't tell me the sidebar in iTunes would be that hard to maintain. Yet, you'd make me happier very easily.
Camera Roll, did they really have to remove it instead of making it an option and seeing by the usage statistics that maybe adding it back or leaving it - and LEAVING it - as an option would be a more sufficient approach?

Listen, I'm not the guy who says they should add DVD drives back to the Mac, I know where we're headed, even though I will always need a DVD/BR drive down the road, I accept that it'll be that one more thing on my desk, a-ok.
However, there are some changes, that just don't add up.
Or changes where I seriously question their wish to provide only what they can provide with excellence. (*hint* iPad Mini 3, it doesn't deserve the name after their decision last year to make the Mini just another size product and making it the key aspect of the Mini)

They constantly build expectations, many many many of which they live up to really well, much better than their competitors.
However, the more excellence they show, the harder their lack of care or thoroughness is to understand.

They harped the "only we can..." instrument so much, so they will have to live up to it, yet here we are with a consumer desktop computer at a 1000 USD price point only Apple could equip with a dual core APU.
*slow clap*

Glassed Silver:mac
 

CWallace

macrumors G5
Aug 17, 2007
12,027
10,735
Seattle, WA
It would work if they released a 24 inch version

A fair point, as there are third-party 24-inch panels with 3840x2160 resolution. Then again, because there are third-party options, that might preclude Apple from actively shipping one since it would only be usable as a standalone display (whereas they can use the same panel in the iMac and a 5K TBD).

Though honestly I would rather go with the LG UltraWide 34" at 3440 x 1440 than a 24" "retina" display.
 

576316

macrumors 601
May 19, 2011
4,056
2,556
Well in 5 years I'm sure many people will upgrade to the latest model of this machine anyway.

I guess Apple wants the Mac Pro users to get a 3rd party 4K display. Not a problem. Not everybody has to have an actual Apple display to use the Mac Pro.

Official Apple displays are usually not the best option or value for money anyway. 9 times out of 10 you're gonna want to pick up a third party. It's just people who insist of the consistent aesthetics on their desk. ;-)
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,196
How did you get 60Hz to work? I may just buy the UP2414Q :(

Unfortunately, if anything better comes along, the UP2414Q is not compatible with the first Retina MBP. Can't shuffle it downstream to my laptop.

I have no regrets about buying that Dell 24" 4k, despite its many flaws. It's still a friggin' retina display on a dead-silent speedy Mac Pro :) And one day I'll sell the UP2414Q and recoup some cost (the warranty is nice and long). It is a reasonable "tide me over" allowing me to wait and see what else comes along (don't need 5k, this 4k size is fine and the current Mac Pro supports it well.) And when something does come along, I can keep waiting--for it to get cheaper.

If you need more power than the iMac, forget 5k and don't look back. The Mac Pro is an awesome machine, and 4k is an awesome resolution. If Apple made a TB2 display equivalent to this 4k display (yes, smaller than the iMac) I'd be delighted. You can't always fret over what's coming next year... because something ELSE is coming the year after that! (And even if you one day want to sell both the display AND the Mac Pro... Macs hold their value nicely!)

To enable 60Hz over DisplayPort ("Multi-Stream Transport") you must enable DisplayPort 1.2 using the monitor's menus. See: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT6008

And to enable (manual) portrait rotation, hold Command and Option while clicking the Displays icon in System Preferences... except, this no longer works for me! It used to.

Oh--and another trick, if the Dell won't wake from sleep, whale on Command-F2 (Detect Displays) over and over. And over. And over. (Which may not work if you're not logged in, so you might want to start by logging in blind.)
 
Last edited:

SaxPlayer

macrumors 6502a
Jan 9, 2007
713
635
Dorset, England
Not surprised by this article. It pretty much confirms what most of us were probably thinking. To be fair to Apple (which is a struggle, but bear with me) they must've had the 5K iMac under development for some time and will have been well aware that the Mac Pro won't be able to support that kind of resolution until technology catches up allowing them to update the hardware.

I'm as disappointed by this as anyone - I bought a nMP and part of the reason I wanted to replace my Mac Pro 1,1 with the new model rather than an iMac was because I felt that retina-like display technology would take a year or two to catch up at which point I could plug it into my machine. Of course at the time I figured this would be 4K but Apple's decision to go to 5K leaves those of us who paid thousands for the new Pro machine with really only one way to go and that's to third party 4K displays.

On the positive side, the 5K iMac may force those third party manufacturers to up their game (and reduce their prices) so all we can hope is that in a few months the 4K options available to us will be cheaper and using better tech (IPS rather than TN at current TN prices).
 

CWallace

macrumors G5
Aug 17, 2007
12,027
10,735
Seattle, WA
Why not two ports? The Pro machines can all do this. rMBPs and Mac Pro trashcans both have 2 or more TB ports.

Per Marco Arment:
It may be possible to use two DisplayPort 1.2 or Thunderbolt 2 cables to power a 5K display, but only if the GPU could treat each port as its own full-bandwidth DisplayPort 1.2 channel, the sum of which represented one logical display, and had the panel combine and properly sync the two at the other end. I don’t think any of the current Macs can do this, including the Mac Pro — MST to run 4K panels at 60 Hz only seems to be supported within individual ports, not spanned across two.

So if he is correct, it's not an option.

You can always get a Dell 5k display, but it's the same cost as iMac.

See above.
 

MacDarcy

macrumors 65816
Jul 21, 2011
1,011
819
Question. Can Current non retina 27" iMacs be used as an external monitor for a MacBook?
 

Glassed Silver

macrumors 68020
Mar 10, 2007
2,096
2,567
Kassel, Germany
tell me one year from those 25 that was better.

In relative dimensions as it was meant to be looked at?

One of them would be 2007, the year of the introduction of the iPhone.

The same year when they built a mid-class computer that was so upgradable so easily that it's still a B-B-BEAST.

Glassed Silver:mac
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto 2014-10-17 um 23.41.39.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2014-10-17 um 23.41.39.png
    57.2 KB · Views: 169
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.