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.
Two More Studio Display 2 Upgrades Leaked in New Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
Most gaming monitors make trade-offs in sharpness (a proportional measure involving resolution) that’s not acceptable to a great deal of high-end monitor buyers far more affluent and broader than pure gamers.
Accordingly most would much rather have the opposite trade-off of higher sharpness at lower refresh rates towards a baseline of 60hz.
The constraint is the amount of bandwidth available by display standards that forced such compromises until very recently via Thunderbolt 5, HDMI 2.2, DisplayPort 2.2 w/ DSC, and GPMI.
Sharpness or pixel density is also much more expensive, valuable, and harder to secure for a monitor at a standardized high level than fast refresh rates for most computer users.
All that said Thunderbolt 5 (TB5) enables unprecedented no compromised monitors that are sharp and fast with its bandwidth:
Standardized very pixel dense monitors offer a device pixel ratio of ~2 that means 5K minimum on 27” panels and 6K minimum at 32” panels.
That sharpness can now have refresh rates higher than 120hz and even have 12-bit color at the same time with Thunderbolt 5.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
Thunderbolt 5 is also far more versatile offering the highest bandwidth paired with 100W-240W power and daisy chaining multiple monitors with one cable
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
Problem is that the 32" Pro Display is completely unaffordable. It's priced out of reach for the vast majority of mac users.
Veinticinco
macrumors 68020
Just like the Mac Pro, the only thing “flying off the shelves” is the stockroom dust that’s gathering on the XDR boxes.
Like it or not, Apple doesn’t give a flying f… about “prosumer” customers. Their $6000 display is one and done. Sales are minuscule.
Oh and “normies”? 🙄
Apple doesn’t make display panels.
They can only put in their monitors what is available.
If you have a hook up for 32” 6k 480hz displays you should let them know
Or even 27” 5k 480hz. Do those exist?
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…Apple absolutely does as it’s part of their well-regarded and iconic supply chain optimization advantages.
The Pro Display XDR needed to exist to scale up the supply chain as well as R&D for the XDR tech that’s then integrated with lesser and more mainstream prosumer products:
Macbook Pro, iPad Pro, and so on.
Similarly their entire “Pro” line-up, Mac Studio, and even the Studio Display are explicitly for prosumers pointed out in their white papers.
Apple to maximize their supply chain and cash reserves absolutely caters to audiences much broader than modest computer users.
Their quality low-end products makes such users as they grow up and mature with their use of computers be comfortable with Apple to buy prosumer hardware from them
ikir
macrumors 68020
Really few users can enjoy more than 120hz. This is not FulHD there is not 240hz 5K display maybe even 120Hz. Too much bandwidth. And no that crap gaming monitor are not the target
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
Like Nvidia and Dolby, Apple makes products not for the majority of people to maximize their supply chain and to leverage the dollars of higher-end computer users as ideal early adopters of premium tech to enable hard-to-copy premium computing experiences be available to mainstream products sooner.
It’s a well known business strategy of theirs being a design-oriented company. They even typically release their prosumer hardware of several product categories first and trickle release the low-end variants later (just like Nvidia).
You can’t please everyone, and not everyone is willing or want to settle for specs for the least common denominator of computer users in a world full of tech-illiterate and modest computer users.
Premium computing hardware with the most ideal margins also cannot be reliably sold to such people nor such people are ideal early adopters of the most transformative tech for mature and emerging (i.e. spatial computing) computing paradigms that fundamentally can’t be formally people.
In the semiconductor industry at the scale such companies work in, it’s common knowledge you can’t solely develop things solely for the average person to make the most money and soundly be able to adapt to the market fluidly.
Accommodating average person or “normies” could not have prepared tech companies to maximize premium computing tech being suddenly niche more prevalent such as the current surge of hardware optimized for AI and creative professional quality content production.
The Pro Display XDR’s price aged like fine wine amounting to $714 a year (been available for six years) and has yet to be outclassed by any 6K monitor after all this time with its 218 PPI, 1000 sustained nits, 1600 peak nits, and Dolby Vision + HLG HDR after all this time.
Last edited:
TheOldChevy
macrumors 6502a
Seems like the best way to handle that request is a dual Thunderbolt cable solution. One goes to the display, the other goes to the Thunderbolt hub.
According to the rest of the world all Apple displays have always been reasonably priced. Apple wouldn't dominate 5K monitor sector if they weren't, right?
Apple has 90% of lucrative 5K+ display market — could be selling hundreds of thousands Studio Display and Pro Display XDR per year
Report: Apple has 90% of lucrative 5K+ display market — could be selling hundreds of thousands Studio Display and Pro Display XDR per year
Most monitor manufacturers saw declines in shipments last year, but not Apple
Do you have something else than an emoji to back up that claim?
Report: Apple has 90% of lucrative 5K+ display market — could be selling hundreds of thousands Studio Display and Pro Display XDR per year
Most monitor manufacturers saw declines in shipments last year, but not Apple
According to the rest of the world all Apple displays have always been reasonably priced. Apple wouldn't dominate 5K monitor sector if they weren't, right?
Apple has 90% of lucrative 5K+ display market — could be selling hundreds of thousands Studio Display and Pro Display XDR per year
Report: Apple has 90% of lucrative 5K+ display market — could be selling hundreds of thousands Studio Display and Pro Display XDR per year
Most monitor manufacturers saw declines in shipments last year, but not Applewww.techradar.com
they dominate the 5k monitor market because it is a niche macOS resolution. while there are (very few) alternative to the studio display, many Mac users will blindly buy the apple monitor without even investigating other options simply because it is apple
turbineseaplane
macrumors Penryn
And macOS is so bad at integer scaling that 5k is needed for hi dpi to look great.
G5isAlive
Contributor
nothing wrong with brand loyalty when its earned, people can moan about motivation and quality etc, but by and large Apple is the easy choice if you are in their ecosystem, and can afford it (key), because their devices play well together.
But
I did research options before buying my ASD's. And I own cheaper (in comparison) 4k options (LG), but for me the quality of the ASD was its selling point. And let's get off the integer scaling thing, for me the 5k and the color accuracy is key for my photography. The 4k's don't do the job. And when you own camera lenses that are more expensive than a monitor you use every day... shrugs.
Not everyone is the same. choice is good. if people want cheaper options they do exist. don't blindly fault those that want something more.
Vincent Hanna
macrumors regular
And many clueless, entitled forum-dwellers will reflexively fall back on the “Apple customers are sheep” argument to mask their deep ignorance of Apple’s value proposition and business strategy, which have resulted in record profits and record customer satisfaction.
User 6502
macrumors 65816
Why would it? I mean I hope it does but I’m not sure what’s the link
Vincent Hanna
macrumors regular
The idea is the 32” panels get cheaper for Apple if they are used in both a 2nd-gen Pro Display XDR and a new iMac Pro.
It’s not a bad theory, but I still find it unlikely to happen.
It’s not a bad theory, but I still find it unlikely to happen.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…And? 4K beyond 24” panels is not standardized high PPI and it’s blatantly obvious against a 5K and 6K they’re significantly less sharp.
It’s an “ignorance is bliss” thing for gamers who don’t know better or don’t have the option for that level of sharpness and high refresh rates they can get 4K at yet (240hz is when it can be somewhat understandable and potentially out of reach for 5K-8K panels with display standards)
26.5” 4K panels marketed as 27 is a happy medium.
A balanced no compromises monitor will be 5K-8K@120hz with 12-bit color. That’s advantageous and better for far more pictorial content than games. Such pictorial content is what a financially stable and productively secure person will come across far more on their monitors including text.
Gaming is hardly produced at the quality photos and video can not pay nearly as well for creatives as well.
Even adult entertainment is offered at 5K-8K now for that very reason; similarly in-person premium video outlets are now offering 12k-16k such as Cosm at major cities (even the NFL allows them and other partners 12K+ footage now).
Pivotal events such as the Winter/Summer Olympics are filmed at 12-16K with there being HCI-supported value.
4K was always intended to be the new 1080p for modern times and the more ideal levels of sharpness provided that requires higher resolutions have long validated their value on mobile screens now being available beyond such devices now that it’s convenient for manufacturers.
Last edited:
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…Apple deliberately uses at least a device pixel ratio (DPR) of 2 and 200% text scaling and more sophisticated forms of scaling (fractional scaling and downsampling).
Apple doesn’t overly cater to non-high-PPI configurations as a trade-off.
Apple’s approach enables better rendering of most pictures content—especially text (which is a known limitation of Windows regardless of scaling) though that’s an OS-level advantage.
I use the Pro Display XDR on both Windows and Macs as well as other DPR of >2 monitors.
The difference is obvious.
Similar to ray-tracing and SSDs being hard required eventually in the interactive entertainment industry, it’s reasonable to encourage people to be kinder to their eyes with Apple’s bias towards high PPI devices.
Standardized high PPI long embraced on mobile platforms that uses DPR of 2 and above as baseline for more than a decade.
Apple also doesn’t sell low PPI or below average sharpness devices with them valuing sharpness. The Vision Pro is the sole nuanced product in that regard because of the realities of spatial computing (PPD vs just PPI which it has at over 3000+) being among the market leaders in sharpness for a standalone headset regardles offering better sharpness than majority of 5K2K monitors that exist and so on.
Last edited:
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…Apple currently is the market leader of the 5K market similar to why Nvidia dominated the prosumer GPU market:
The other monitor manufacturers merely don’t offer serious alternatives.
The Studio Display is an entry level prosumer monitor that Apple kicked their feet up with no serious alternatives that competed with it.
Their 6K Pro Display monitor enjoys the same benefits. With a price that aged like fine wine with how stagnant other monitor manufacturers have been like AMD not competing with Nvidia’s prosumer (x90 cards).
5K is not a MacOS specific thing: Samsung and others now offer 5K OLEDs as imminent upgrades to status quo because it’s the minimum resolution backed by human-computer-interaction (HCI) computer science that enables a device pixel ratio of 2 and 200% scaling that is sharp on 27” panels.
The equivalent for 32” is 6K.
The level of sharpness provided by 5K and 6K in 27” and 32” is mandatory for large panels of such sizes to match standardized high pixel density (PPI) established on mobile devices many years ago and mandated for software as common as browsers to render pictorial content consistently shared.
This is objective fact. Mobile devices have since moved on from a device pixel ratio of 2 to 3+.
Such standardized high PPI enables features like glasses free spatial content to have more sharpness parity with 2D content that’s a tier of sharpness below what’s achieved for 2D content.
That is actually why 8K was (prematurely) pursued before spatial computing headsets and glasses was viable to support 3D content that looked as good as 2D content at 4K.
Last edited: