Has Apple lost their mind? March 8th Event Disappointment

[tomO2013]

ou can't, at least not with this display, for which there are few, if any, equivalents (ie., 5k retina).
Apple customers are not stupid, they are going to figure this out very quickly.
Some will delude themselves rationalize that basically paying twice as much is OK. People have an incredible ability to selectively choose the "facts" that support what they want to do regardless.

I think to evaluate the ‘value’ (very subjective) we must first take a step back and both accept and agree that the external studio display provides more hardware than typical displays from Dell, BenQ etc…

- An embedded A13 chip in the display facilitates center stage
- The display has an additional 100 nits of peak brightness over the older 27” iMac pro
- Typically Apples displays tend to be relatively color accurate out of box.
- Supports thunderbolt connectivity for single cable (power, data, charging of a laptop etc…)
- It has a pretty beefy sound system built in relative to anything I’ve seen included with other external display manufacturers.
- It has a 12mp web cam integrated and capable of providing center stage experience from the iPad.


Now if you don’t *NEED* or *WANT* all of that ‘stuff’ then obviously you’re paying for stuff that you don’t need so it doesn’t reflect bad value.

For context….

I have a BENQ PD3220U that I have been using for the past year or so.. that is $1500 from memory express here in Canada. It isn’t as bright a monitor and does not integrate with OS X as well (prepackaged calibrated profiles for different output types such as Apple provides with the new Studio display).
It also does not include a web cam - I had to purchase an external Logitech Brio 4k (there is an extra few hundred bucks right there).
All of a sudden …. boom similar price to the Apple Studio Display.

FWIW I do think the display personally (both the BenQ and the Apple Studio) are expensive. But if you are in the creative content space, the color accuracy specs alone may make this a ‘good option for you’.
Obviously if you want the latest neon go-fast RGB , 240Hz display with embossed eagle talons on the back of the monitor an Asus ROG type display is probably better ‘value’. But this is one of these things were I really truly do think that the value of the studio display will be there for some and obviously not for others.

Judgement and batteries not included

Tom.

 

[theotherphil]

In my opinion no, they haven't but I kind feel like you have.

There is nothing about this announcement of new hardware and it's pricing that seems unusual given past Apple announcements. Just because a product doesn't make economic sense to you, doesn't mean there aren't those who will find these new offerings compelling. In fact, given Apple's sales, revenue, and profit, it seems pretty clear they know exactly what they are doing.

-kp

Indeed…it’s the same old crowd who don’t actually need the hardware to make a living, but just want the latest and greatest for bragging rights, who complain about the cost of entry. Whilst there’s nothing wrong with having the latest for bragging rights, it’s an expensive hobby. Give it a couple of weeks, the same people complaining now will be explaining how their super duper, Alderlake desktop with RTX3090 can play games so much faster for cheaper….all whilst coveniently ignoring the fact that an RTX3090 is $3,999 (AU) on it‘s own here in Aus, and still gets blitzed by an M1 Max when it comes to video editing in Resolve, Premiere and FCP, which only costs $3,099 (AU) for the entire system.

This Mac is a bargain for the actual people Apple has aimed it at…..hint: not gamerz.

 

[thadoggfather]

It dawned on me you could put the Mac Studio on the base of the 27" display and have a sort of iMac G4 lamp of sorts. without the cool multi directional arm, of course.

...and forego almost 100% more of your cash than you probably anticipated paying vs a 27" Retina iMac M-Series, however dated the one they just stopped selling, is construed.

I think they nixed 27" iMac because they dont want people with leaner budgets going for it and competing with sales for this new product line... It'll be brought back from the dead in due time. and probably sooner than later such that people who needlessly splurged on this will feel a little burned.

I wish they moved on from M1 naming convention too... and these had proMotion. and cost waaaaay less.

I do like it though. Just not enough to even remotely consider buying. a $2k Mac mini Pro that is of course by nature without a display. No bueno.

 

[Ethosik]

Bad is subjective, for the most part. I dislike Windows 8-10 because it's full of stuff I don't care about, but Windows 7 was reliable and didn't have a lot of bloatware. It's just outdated nowadays.

Two things are true, however: for PC gaming, nothing beats Windows. For creative professionals, the Mac is king.

For programmers, go wild. I have to use a Mac as my primary OS (iOS dev) but I like it, and despite issues it's still my favorite OS considering the alternatives out there.

Yep Windows 7 was my favorite too! And for the reasons you specify is why I use Windows in some cases (except I still prefer development in Windows) and macOS in others. I like all three - Windows, macOS and Linux for various things. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Ethosik]

Am I the only one who remembers the ton of posts saying that they would never buy an AiO and that having the display attached to the computer was pointless?

I was one of those people. I hated the fact that the iMac was the "best" prosumer desktop class computer from Apple. Mac Pro base price was a complete joke and I did not want to add an additional $1,000 or $2,000 to match a topped end iMac in performance. So I unfortunately bought the 2019 i9 iMac. I can never use just one display when I am working, even with laptops my workflow is very limited as I have at least 2 monitors and sometimes 3 connected to all my devices. And the biggest issue for me is matching monitors, so having a unique "monitor" for the iMac with no fully matching monitor for my 2nd and 3rd was a major issue for me.

Plus I prefer high refresh rates over the other features in monitors. I got some nice gaming monitors with good coloring for my work and I spent some time to calibrate it. A nice 144Hz display that looks good too is great. Spending 8 hours a day looking at 60hz display just makes my eye hurt. Higher refresh rate helps a great deal with eye strain.

So I am happy with the new Mac Studio. Its now the performance of the Mac Pro I wanted without being around $8,000.

 

[Thebrochure]

You are essentially correct in every way... but people will pay it. I don't know what the breaking point is with Apple and their pricing, but one look at their earnings tells you they haven't hit it yet, somehow.

 

[Thebrochure]

Be happy the stand is not priced $999.

I'm the type of guy who buys this monitor, then uses a discarded Amazon box as a stand in protest lol

 

[jjcs]

You are essentially correct in every way... but people will pay it. I don't know what the breaking point is with Apple and their pricing, but one look at their earnings tells you they haven't hit it yet, somehow.

It doesn't have to make sense. Like the insanity of paying Apple prices for memory and storage.

 

[Homy]

Mac Studio cheapest option + 1tb SSD = 26 990 NOK
MacBook Pro 14" cheapest option + 1tb SSD + 32gb RAM = 30 990 NOK

So, I missed the estimate with 20 dollars (ie. 320 US dollars difference, using the 12.5:1 conversion in my previous post, taking Norwegian vs US Apple pricing into account). Yes, the Mac Studio has a better default CPU, but in total this is clearly yet another price hike from Apple.

We used to get a new generation of a specific product with improved technology, at a similar price point. Now we have to pay more or more money, for improvements in technology from one generation to the next.

Also comparing this price-wise to Mac Pro is misleading (as some here are doing). Mac Pro uses third party hardware, including Intel Xeon CPUs and ECC RAM, a much more expensive motherboard and metal casing etc. I find it strange how regular consumers feel obligated to shill for a trillion dollar company, but whatever.

What are you talking about? At apple.no there is a 10 000 NOK difference between a MBP 14" M1 Max 24c and Mac Studio M1 Max 24c. Similar here in Sweden, MBP M1 Max costs 9500 SEK more, and at apple.com MBP M1 Max costs $900 more than the base Mac Studio. Check your numbers before complaining.

 

[robco74]

DDR5 is not cheap. Apple's prices actually aren't that outrageous.

 

[leman]

When I look ahead for myself, the upgrade path is very murky. If/when this now 12 year old MacPro5,1 dies, I really am going to be struggling to decide what to do. I have never owned a PC. I hate working on them. And yet... Apple is either pricing their good products too highly, or making products that don't fit my needs. Or both.

Im fairly confident that next iteration of Apple Silicon will bring more product diversification. We will likely have multiple tiers of Mac Mini (M2/M2 Pro), Mac Studio for prosumer/entry-level workstation use, and the Mac Pro for a high-end modular workstation.

 

[dawnrazor]

Okay bare with me here…

So we have the M1, which is now the entry level Silicon SOC. Then we got the M1 Pro and M1 Max which prior to this week were the big boy SOCs… until we got the M1 Ultra…. now thats the big dog… but there is going to be an M1 in the Mac Pro right… whatever thats called it’ll be the new big dog…

My issue is it feels like Apple wasted the Pro moniker way too early in the naming convention. Pro has always been saved for the top echelon, be it the iPhone Pro, the iPad Pro, the MacBook Pro, the iMac Pro, the Mac Pro…. all top of their line items with the Pro name…

But with the M1 chips the Pro name is given to the second slowest iteration of the chip!

Seems like Apple screwed up on the naming conventions of the M1 chips and presumably the M2 and beyond…

Also what the hell are they going to call the M1 that goes into the Mac Pro?

 

[leman]

So we have the M1, which is now the entry level Silicon SOC. Then we got the M1 Pro and M1 Max which prior to this week were the big boy SOCs… until we got the M1 Ultra…. now thats the big dog… but there is going to be an M1 in the Mac Pro right… whatever thats called it’ll be the new big dog…

At this point I think the Mac Pro will get an M2 variant.

 

[dysamoria]

[...]

Anyone else this upset?

I'm almost this upset. Where I'm most pissed is that we have almost no options anymore. If you're worried about needing more RAM and storage in the next few years, you have two choices:

1. Suffer, when you realize the model you chose at purchase time isn't enough, because there isn't any upgrading,

or

2. Spend way WAY MORE on the M1 Ultra on DAY ONE so you can have 128GB of RAM.

Remember: that's SHARED RAM, and software developers always bloat their products to fill the latest "norms" in available RAM...

Apple management know this will happen. This is designed in.

 

[dysamoria]

No. They introduced an insanely fast Mac. Kudos for Apple for continuing to challenge the Intel hegemony. And yes, high end computing comes at a premium price… ’Apple tax’ and all that. Have you tried buying a 16Gb Nvidia RTX 3090 recently??

Nope, because I can't afford to pay the crypto bro tax...

 

[dysamoria]

I think the only point of contention re: Studio vs. xMac is that most wanted the xMac to be user-upgradable.

Your sentiment is spot-on, though!

That's a pretty huge point of contention, seeing as this Mac Studio has ZERO upgrade capacity.

 

[dysamoria]

My hopes did raise a little when the guy mentioned people wanted "modularity", then dropped again when he said that meant a box and a screen. That's about as modular as Apple are going to get, sadly.

Yeah, that was a pretty short period of raised hopes between the phrase "modularity" and the reveal of the "Mac Mini Pro" body of the Mac Studio.

I'm REEEEAAALLLLY curious to see what the Apple Silicon Mac Pro is like. I wont be able to buy one, but I also find this to be a huge issue and want to know if they'll keep doing the same with every machine, or if the Mac Pro will keep true modularity.

 

[Puonti]

That's what prices usually come down to. If you're using the computer to earn a living, well, the cost of the computer is just overhead.

Yes, and that's the easier case to make I think. For personal, never-going-to-recoup-the-cost use as is the case with me, it becomes more a question of what kind of cost-per-day-of-availability I'm looking at for all of my tech purchases combined.

Beyond cost there's of course the base assumption that the tech someone gets meets and exceeds their needs, whether personal or professional, but with longer upgrade cycles that's always going to be a gamble. Needs can change and hardware can fail. In that sense more expensive purchases are a safer bet when they're for professional use where the tool quickly pays for itself.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

This is true… but with Apple now not having to wait on parts from others. They won’t be behind long like they were in the past. Also, we don’t know what the Mac Pro will offer… I wouldn’t be shocked if Apple came out with a discrete graphics card for their machines…

If they freeze out AMD they'll have to. Nobody going to accept Mac Pro with no GPU upgrade path. Non-starter.

What I find amazing is that the M1 architecture is basically Apple’s first shot at creating a desktop-class GPU and they’ve done a pretty awesome job at supplying performant hardware, competing with the best discrete GPUs out there. If your use case requires this kind of power, you can buy it.

Apple’s GPUs are still gaining in performance significantly with each generation, and they’ve done a new deal with Imagination for a very nice set of raytracing technology, which I am sure we will see incorporated soon.

Looking forward to the day I don't have to boot Windows for VR/AR.

 

[bushman4]

Just goes to show you how little your money is worth
The Mac Studio is not for the everyday user or gamer. It’s intended for graphics , app creation etc it’s for the pro user and thus has a high price tag
( outrageous but not if the company is paying for it)
More upsetting is the removal of the 27” iMac without any mention
I’m hoping Apple hadn’t forgotten their loyal customers that want a 27” A.I.O iMac

 

[dysamoria]

Apple was always a premium brand, but under Tim Cook, Apple become a luxury brand and has prices to match. It's funny given how vocal they are about struggling students, artists, and other have nots they advertise to in their advertising campaigns. When these prices even make upper-middle-class people bleed.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that they don't ever show lower class people in any of their product gee-wiz lifestyle advertisements. At least, it doesn't look that way from the stylish and brand new-looking clothing, and the houses, offices/studios, and university-type spaces they show them doing all that gee-wiz lifestyling in. I'd love to be part of the upper-middle-class crowd (I was born into a lower-middle-class family), but I'm just not. I'm on disability and in poverty. I choose Apple products because they're LESS BAD than the competition in general (they've NEVER made a decent mouse), not to make any kind of lifestyle statements or socioeconomic status claims.

 

[JouniS]

Given that it will likely have better speakers and camera than, say, the LG Ultrafine, with a more substantial stand, how much should the LG be?

The LG Ultrafine is expensive, because it's a niche product manufactured in small quantities. A mass market 5k monitor of similar quality should be something like $800.

Roughly speaking, you can get a pretty good 27" 4k monitor for normal desktop use for $400. Add $200 for 5k resolution and $200 for webcam and speakers, and you are at $800. Add another $200 for design and quality, and you would get a quite reasonable $1000 "Apple consumer monitor" for people who buy $1500 Macs.

 

[dysamoria]

Because middle-class people don’t have to buy them. A student who wants to draw can still get a lot of mileage out of an entry level ipad with the Apple Pencil. [...]

I find drawing on a Wacom tablet and 27" iMac FAR more comfortable and natural than on my iPad Pro 12.9". The iPad glass and Pencil tip combination is WAY too hard and smooth. The Apple Pencil slips around terribly unnaturally. I am not going to put a textured screen protector on to try to compensate for that. Apple should have offered a felt-tip style option for the Pencil tip (and an eraser end), and yet, Pencil 2 still has the same hard plastic (and no eraser end).

I tested it out at an Apple store before I bought it, and that just proved to me how uncomfortable I was trying to test something in a loud and crowded space, because I was too rushed to do anything much to test for anything beyond lag (which isn't bad, depending on the app). I thought that being able to draw directly on the screen (instead of looking at a screen and drawing on a tablet) would be such a massive improvement, but the slippery tactile experience totally blows away any benefit of having the stylus directly on the screen.

Further, I find the reflective glass a terrible choice for drawing on a tablet that's sitting on a desk (reflections/glare), and holding it is a PITA when drawing.

I've been SO disappointed by the Apple Pencil experience. I've done way more music on my iPad than art (and barely any photo retouching, because the workflow sucks and the software is more buggy and slower than on my iMac... but I'm on iOS 12.x and the first generation iPad Pro, so maybe things are better with current stuff).

 

[leman]

The LG Ultrafine is expensive, because it's a niche product manufactured in small quantities. A mass market 5k monitor of similar quality should be something like $800.

I agree, but these monitors simply don't exist at this price points. I don't know whether its because there is not enough demand, or whether because display business is mostly about trying to cut corners and push prices down, but that is the sad reality.

Roughly speaking, you can get a pretty good 27" 4k monitor for normal desktop use for $400. Add $200 for 5k resolution and $200 for webcam and speakers, and you are at $800. Add another $200 for design and quality, and you would get a quite reasonable $1000 "Apple consumer monitor" for people who buy $1500 Macs.

Where did you see a good quality 5K display for $800? I've looked at bunch of sub $800 4K displays, and they are generally ok, but lack the premium finish, the brightness is meh at best. A comparable Dell display (UP2720Q) is $1500, and it is 4K, low brightness and lacks the videoconferencing setup.

Mind, I don't disagree with you, I also think that something like the Studio Display should not cost more than $999, but the display market is just a total mess ATM. There are just no good products. I am kind of tempted by U2723QE, it's an obvious step down in image and build quality of course, but for a much more reasonable price.

 

[Abazigal]

I find drawing on a Wacom tablet and 27" iMac FAR more comfortable and natural than on my iPad Pro 12.9". The iPad glass and Pencil tip combination is WAY too hard and smooth. The Apple Pencil slips around terribly unnaturally. I am not going to put a textured screen protector on to try to compensate for that. Apple should have offered a felt-tip style option for the Pencil tip (and an eraser end), and yet, Pencil 2 still has the same hard plastic (and no eraser end).

Fair enough. As a counterpoint, here’s the experience of a girl who illustrated her own book using an iPad Pro.

How the iPad Pro Changed My Illustrating Career

I am a simple 15-year-old who has loved to doodle for as long as she can remember. I adored my first generation iPad mini, so when the iPad Pro came out I decided I could use an upgrade. What an…

the-ipad-artist.com

She also shared what she loved about it. It’s many years old, and still worth a read.