Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thunderbolt is a step backwards. It does not support DisplayPort 1.2

Just like the automobile was a step backwards because there was no way to connect your horse to it? The telephone was a step backwards because you couldn't use it to send telegrams?

Thunderbolt will do everything that DisplayPort did, plus more. DisplayPort can't do everything that can be done through Thunderbolt. They're not compatible, and that may cheese you off, but your claim that it was a step backwards is silly by any means of measuring such things.
 
I wonder how long before Apple starts adding 3 external displays to the BTO options for the Retina MBP? I'm locking my credit card in a safe, just in case.

Thunderbolt doesn't generate any power

What?!? But what if I hook up the flux capacitor to a wire attached to the clock tower at just the right instant.....
 
So how would you hook up two displays that are not thunderbolt?

I remember reading that HDMI has resolution limitations especially for say a dell 30".
 
Regarding the less expensive hookups and monitors, one can get pretty good monitors these days for under $300 each so buying 3 of those is less cost than a single Apple TB display. I have seen USB3 display boxes that support that many displays and I assume but do not know if the Monitors utility in System preferences supports that.

http://www.displaylink.com/usb3/end_users.php
http://www.displaylink.com/technology/common_questions.php

Here's one that uses either MDP or TB though>

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/digital/

http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/displayport/

triplehead2go_displayport.jpg


Rocketman
 
Last edited:
That's actually kind of cool. I've always seen wall street/stock exchange professionals (or whatever they are called) working off of three or more large displays connected to a huge tower that had the GPUs to run them all.

Now they can essentially have the same setup but take it with them from time to time if they don't mind working on a single tiny screen while they are away from their monstrous desks.
 
too much credit for apple

it's Intel, Nvidia and whoever produces the screen that deserves the honor.
apple just packages it all up nice and tidy.., they are bound by their advances in technology.
 
THats great hardware-wise. However, the problem is now software, where Mac OS X fails completely, since a true multidesktop environment is not natively available.
 
Here's a question: If I remember correctly, the "old" 17" macbook pro is capable of driving 2 LED/thunderbolt displays as long as there is a connector between the two displays. Something like this:

MBP (With display on)-->Thunderbolt Display-->Pegasus 4tb Drive --> LED Display

Unless I forgot and the MBP display is actually turned off in this setup, doesn't this mean that it might actually be possible to drive FOUR displays with the new machine?
 
I remember reading that HDMI has resolution limitations especially for say a dell 30".
Resolution limits are directly related to image quality limits. And used versions.

basic HDMI can't drive a 2560x panel if you intend to run it at normal quality levels (60FPS & 24 bit colour)

Updated HDMI (1.3 and beyond) can do that, and the latest can run 4k screens if you cut the refresh rate (FPS) down to 24. (And you can still push the colour quality up to 36 bits)
 
Not when you think about the video editors who rely on the PCI-E interface and the extra three internal storage spaces.

Well obviously for many professions a Mac Pro is required. But if you read my post I was saying that this is now a good option for those that are on a Mac Pro for over 2 screens.
 
I checked with their pre-sales support, unfortunately it is just 1.

This was all so confusing, we had clients asking us if this would work, so we set out to get a definitive answer. I just talked to our local business team and YES it does support 2 external monitors. Here it is from our local Apple Store:

Hi Adam,

The first article you listed is correct. Further we tested it in store and a new 11inch macbook air worked with 2 thunderbolt displays with the display on the macbook air remaining active so effectively 3 displays.

Hope this helps.


[Redacted]
Business Specialist
Apple Store, Market Mall
Phone: (403) 648-4868

That's pretty slick if you ask me.... an 11" driving three monitors (although one tiny one) all at once!
 
Thunderbolt will do everything that DisplayPort did, plus more. DisplayPort can't do everything that can be done through Thunderbolt. They're not compatible, and that may cheese you off, but your claim that it was a step backwards is silly by any means of measuring such things.

Thunderbolt can't do everything that DisplayPort 1.2 does though. DisplayPort 1.2 can drive 21 Gbps of framebuffer bandwidth, Thunderbolt is limited to half.

As far as displays go, DP 1.2 is superior to TB.
 
Well that's pretty cool, especially since Mike says that there was no performance lag while using all the displays. That's impressive. I like.
 
that's awesome.
BUT~
i just can't get over that fact that the battery is glued in and
the hdd has a proprietary connection. (before you bump me
down, yes i know why they did it)
 
This was all so confusing, we had clients asking us if this would work, so we set out to get a definitive answer. I just talked to our local business team and YES it does support 2 external monitors. [...]
That's pretty slick if you ask me.... an 11" driving three monitors (although one tiny one) all at once!

9to5mac.com has a photo of this working.

Edit: "this" being a MacBook Air driving two displays.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.