New Mac Pro = New Displays?

[deconstruct60]

I think apple will keep the current 27" Thunderbolt Display, but also make a 30" or 32" 4K display. Who knows if it will be matte or glossy (hoping for matte) but hopefully it will be 16:10 and not 16:9.

The 4K seem doubtful for right now. In a couple of years sure. Right now no.

First, 4K displays are likely to be highly dynamic over the next 1-2 years. They are are $4K now but next year there will be alternatives at lower than that. Year after that lower still. Contrast this will Apple who likes to slap a price on something and just stick with the same single price for years.

Second, it doubtful anyone is going to give Apple "two year into the future" discounts on 4K panels no to erode even faster the potention to get the R&D back they have put into the panels. Perhaps Sharp was desperate, but for Apple is it dubious to push company killing discounts on your supplier. Long term that keeps Samsung in the drivers seat if kill off their competitors for them.

Third , if the 3rd party vendors have displayPort and/or HDMI 4K inputs then they'll just work just fine. Apple doesn't have to sell every display. They currently make no high gamut ones. Why would have make highly specialized 4K video monitors with volatile pricing?


What Apple really more desperately needs is a 21.5" Thunderbolt display at around $499-599. Same derived iMac infrastructure, but at a lower price point. Having two monitor set-ups is far more common among Mac Pros.

2 * $599 ==> ~$1,299 ( or better still 2 * $499 ==> ~$1,000)


goes down alot easier than

2 * $999 ==> ~2,000 ( probably roughly in same ballpark as entry level Mac Pro itself).

Also what Apple needs is to get more honest with product naming (along with obviously the newer iMac bonded lcd panel solution) with the current product transitioned to:

Apple Thunderbolt Docking Station ( with MagSafe connector aimed at laptops )

and add 21.5" and 27" models of :

Apple Thunderbolt Display ( with NO MagSafe connector and a removable TB cord so can use longer ones. ) Throw in two rather than one FW ports and upgrade to USB 3.0 on these models.

So in two monitor set up with 2013 Mac Pro deployed system would have:

10 USB 3.0 ports.
4 FW ports ( and two independent FW controllers )
4 1GbE ports

with no "extra" power cords. That is actually better than current Mac Pro ( 5 USB 2.0 , 4 FW , 2 1GbE )

 

[deconstruct60]

4K poses a really tough decision for Apple.

Retina, or not?

At user-monitor placements of 30-34", the current 21.5" and 27" iMacs are already Retina resolution. Want Retina? .... slide your TB display, iMac back several inches?

Pixel doubling or enabling users to pull the monitors closer? Very marginal trade-offs for the at present dramaitc increase in costs.

Apple is eventually going to track 4K because eventually 4K TV panels will drive down the cost of panel parts and Apple is going to follow the much higher volume and therefore cheaper components. If they can go 4K 21.5" they might even dump the 27" TB display ( like the 17" got dumped for 15" with move to Retina. )

----------

.... Phil said, "Of course you want to hook up the latest third-party displays, and this supports 4K displays." When has Apple ever even recognized that there are displays other than Apple's? And especially at a big media event?

Because they already exist and Apple doesn't have anything. Apple has been out of the monitor market for a while now.

I think the writing is on the wall -- there will be no more Cinema Displays.

But they really aren't displays. They are docking stations, but labeled displays. There is no way Apple is getting out of the docking station business. Especially after they have gone "bet the farm" on Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt's 'sweet spot' exactly is Docking stations. Docking stations with LCD panels built in is about the optimal you can get in alignment with what Thunderbolt provides ( remote 4 way x1 PCI-e switch for standard I/O controllers ( USB 3.0 , FW , 1GbE , DisplayPort video signal for LCD panel , power distirbution network from power supply needed for LCD panel anyway).

The last true primarily display product Apple did was back in 2008-2009. Everything since that has tried about as hard to be a docking station ( weaved in MagSafe connector) as it put into being a display.

 

[derbothaus]

What Apple really more desperately needs is a 21.5" Thunderbolt display at around $499-599. Same derived iMac infrastructure, but at a lower price point. Having two monitor set-ups is far more common among Mac Pros.

I would think 23" 1920x1080 as there are more choices in the market. All the 21" 1920 panels worth anything are not worth anything. Nice tight pixels, crap performance. Not doing 1080p would be a strange side step for them. Not having the 23-24" range has been a sore point for tons of people I know. Their 24" LED was great save for all the lemons they churned out. And they had the 23" 16:10's forever.

 

[thekev]

Not having the 23-24" range has been a sore point for tons of people I know. Their 24" LED was great save for all the lemons they churned out. And they had the 23" 16:10's forever.

24" actually works out to a very proven vertical height. The 16:10 24" displays work out to roughly the same height as the 21" 3:4 types that came way way earlier and held out for a long time. 16:9 is also close enough. It's just easy to scan visually. It's not too much space to navigate quickly with a mouse. I could see why a lot of people would like it.

 

[deconstruct60]

I would think 23" 1920x1080 as there are more choices in the market.

But that is going in the direction of bigger pixels.... a complete 180 from Apple's Retina campaign.

You are thinking they want to be in the monitor business. They don't. They want to be in the docking station business and push iMac component costs down business.

If the smaller iMac goes to 23" (and better ppi ) fine. Not sure it is going to be able to do that and keep the iMac costs exactly the same. But if iMac doesn't move I suspect there is a very slim chance Apple does not match the iMac. They may just ignore this altogether ( just one size docking station). That would fit with their "we work as as small a number of products as possible" philosophy.

The core issue is whether the desktop line deserves their own variant of a docking station. Apple can just pass out kool-aid to claim that the laptop variant works just fine for desktops.

All the 21" 1920 panels worth anything are not worth anything. Nice tight pixels, crap performance.

If they found a 21.5" that was worth anything the iMac line-up could use it too. ;-)

 

[potatis]

Maybe a curved display to match the Mac Pro?
http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u69/Curved_Display.jpg

 

[LongSticks]

The 4K seem doubtful for right now. In a couple of years sure. Right now no.

First, 4K displays are likely to be highly dynamic over the next 1-2 years. They are are $4K now but next year there will be alternatives at lower than that. Year after that lower still. Contrast this will Apple who likes to slap a price on something and just stick with the same single price for years.

Second, it doubtful anyone is going to give Apple "two year into the future" discounts on 4K panels no to erode even faster the potention to get the R&D back they have put into the panels. Perhaps Sharp was desperate, but for Apple is it dubious to push company killing discounts on your supplier. Long term that keeps Samsung in the drivers seat if kill off their competitors for them.

Third , if the 3rd party vendors have displayPort and/or HDMI 4K inputs then they'll just work just fine. Apple doesn't have to sell every display. They currently make no high gamut ones. Why would have make highly specialized 4K video monitors with volatile pricing?


What Apple really more desperately needs is a 21.5" Thunderbolt display at around $499-599. Same derived iMac infrastructure, but at a lower price point. Having two monitor set-ups is far more common among Mac Pros.

2 * $599 ==> ~$1,299 ( or better still 2 * $499 ==> ~$1,000)


goes down alot easier than

2 * $999 ==> ~2,000 ( probably roughly in same ballpark as entry level Mac Pro itself).

Also what Apple needs is to get more honest with product naming (along with obviously the newer iMac bonded lcd panel solution) with the current product transitioned to:

Apple Thunderbolt Docking Station ( with MagSafe connector aimed at laptops )

and add 21.5" and 27" models of :

Apple Thunderbolt Display ( with NO MagSafe connector and a removable TB cord so can use longer ones. ) Throw in two rather than one FW ports and upgrade to USB 3.0 on these models.

So in two monitor set up with 2013 Mac Pro deployed system would have:

10 USB 3.0 ports.
4 FW ports ( and two independent FW controllers )
4 1GbE ports

with no "extra" power cords. That is actually better than current Mac Pro ( 5 USB 2.0 , 4 FW , 2 1GbE )

For me I'd just like Maverick to support this little beauty in 2&4 screen set up and I could get away from a double monitor set up again! It's IPS and only £420 ($660)!

http://www.lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-29EA93

 

[tdar]

No, I will suggest something quite different.

During the Mac Pro reveal, Phil showed a photo with three displays hooked up to the Mac Pro. None of them were Apple displays. I just went back and watched that segment of the reveal. Phil said, "Of course you want to hook up the latest third-party displays, and this supports 4K displays." When has Apple ever even recognized that there are displays other than Apple's? And especially at a big media event?

I think the writing is on the wall -- there will be no more Cinema Displays. It will go the way of the LaserWriter. I'm sure Tim wants to trim down the Pro line to the barest minimum, and I would bet most people who buy a Mac Pro use third-party displays with it anyway, aside from companies like ad agencies that lease Mac products en masse.

If it wasn't for the huge market for ACDs to compliment Apple notebooks, I might agree. I'm of the opinion that there will be TB ACD displays as long as there are Apple notebooks with TB ports on them. Now, if you said Apple was not building displays for the Pro market... that... I'd agree with. The length of the interconnect cables on the current ACDs should be enough to convince anyone of that.

I'd agree with both of you here. There will be a new Thunderbolt Display that matches the look and size of the new iMacs for the laptops, the iMacs +minis , but Pros will be expected to use 3rd party displays as Apple does not want to enter that high end market and as you said most pros use someone else's display anyway.

 

[deconstruct60]

, but Pros will be expected to use 3rd party displays as Apple does not want to enter that high end market and as you said most pros use someone else's display anyway.

At least one 3rd party display in multiple monitor setups. But I think Apple has an expection that a decent fraction of the multiple monitor set-up to get some traction with Thunderbolt docking station/displays.

While the TB "display" may have a short cord, Apple has now firmly placed the Mac Pro on top of the same desktop as where the display will go. Need a FW port ? docking station provides one. Need more USB sockets for software license USB dongles? docking station provides several. The new Mac Pro design leads many people toward buying a docking station to flush out ports for legacy equipment. Apple only sells ones of those right now.

They would be almost asleep at the wheel not make some docking station adjustments when they release the Mac Pro.

Not everyone is going to go multi-monitor to pick up docking station abilities but I don't think Apple expects there to be a 1:1 ratio of Apple monitors and Mac Pros sold. That has never been the case. Not gong to be that way now either.

 

[iJawn108]

I honestly doubt there will be new displays, I noticed in the keynote "You can use it with your favorite third party displays"

 

[Eriamjh1138@DAN]

But if Schiller said anything but 3rd party displays when referring to 4K, everyone would have assumed that Apple was releasing new 4K displays in the future. While he wouldn't want to give anything away, he was clearly noting that Apple does not make a 4k display.

A 30" apple 4k display would be awesome. However, an Apple 5120x2880 would be awesome in any size!

 

[TyPod]

By the time the Mac Pro ships the 4K displays will be announced.

Agreed. I think this makes a lot of sense, and would work out well for Apple if they released a new display to compliment the new Mac Pro.

 

[LongSticks]

Apple iTV?

But if Schiller said anything but 3rd party displays when referring to 4K, everyone would have assumed that Apple was releasing new 4K displays in the future. While he wouldn't want to give anything away, he was clearly noting that Apple does not make a 4k display.

A 30" apple 4k display would be awesome. However, an Apple 5120x2880 would be awesome in any size!

Do you think that if they ever do release the much fabled "iTV" that they may add TB connectors to give the option of driving a 4k from say the new Mac Pro if you so desired! Assuming that the new iTV is 4k obviously.

Would be a neat solution and kill 2 birds with.....?

 

[kunia]

Would make sense.. it's time  replace the crappy 27" Thunderbolt display with a 30+" professional display without that hideous glass in front.

Most likely black to match the new black trash can?

Matte display from Apple?
Nah...you're not getting it. The mirror on your super cool thunderbolt display allows you not only to edit your amazing pictures (somewhat) but also make sure you're hairstyle (or makeup) is all in check when you are about to facetime with your pro-friends - saves you a trip to the bathroom...
See...two birds with one stone

 

[tuxon86]

Personnaly, my next setup will probably be a 27" iMac with a 23" rotated to portrait mode, one on each side. I'll then have my canvas on the 27" with the toolbars on the side monitors.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I'd like to see 4k TBolt displays when they can cost the same price (or lower) as the current ones. The $1000 you pay is already a bit high for most just needing a monitor.

The refurbished prices of $800 are much closer to reasonable. Add USB 3.0 and two or three TBolt ports and I am good to go.

Two of those with a new Mac Pro (I have an iMac, so it's a step up) and I am golden.

 

[deconstruct60]

Do you think that if they ever do release the much fabled "iTV" that they may add TB connectors to give the option of driving a 4k from say the new Mac Pro if you so desired! Assuming that the new iTV is 4k obviously.

Probably not 4K because it would be too expensive. Apple isn't going to sell a TV hardly anyone can afford.

Probably not Thunderbolt. Maybe two HDMI ports. ( which do work with a Mac Pro) and perhaps a Ethernet port. Look at the back of the current AppleTV device. That is the primary set of ports that will be on a AppleTV-with-integrated-screen. I doubt it is iTV. Probably something like AppleTV 42" or AppleTV 32" (tag it with the screen size and screen size zero is the headless model) or AppleTV Pro 42" ....

 

[goMac]

This is the Kid
http://www.asus.com/News/L9xTPmmMwTlPMq5l

Wow! That looks nice, I wonder how much that will co...

The PQ321 features a 3840 x 2160 Sharp IGZO panel and will sell for $3799.

: spit take :

I think the writing is on the wall -- there will be no more Cinema Displays. It will go the way of the LaserWriter. I'm sure Tim wants to trim down the Pro line to the barest minimum, and I would bet most people who buy a Mac Pro use third-party displays with it anyway, aside from companies like ad agencies that lease Mac products en masse.

Very very doubtful. Apple's displays work with more than just the Mac Pro, you know.

 

[thekev]

Agreed. I think this makes a lot of sense, and would work out well for Apple if they released a new display to compliment the new Mac Pro.

It actually makes very little logical sense. The price is still quite high. Just enabling drivers for it means that you have a wider range of compatible products when prices start to come down. If only a small number of devices will even run it, that wouldn't make sense. Sharp and others need to recoup a lot of R&D that goes into this kind of thing. They won't do that by eating margins right away. Even 2 years from now, you won't see more than one intermittent mac pro revision. I wouldn't expect a replacement model any earlier than 2015. If they pull the same silliness and skip the first set of chips in favor of something like 1600s parts only with boosted core counts due to the next die shrink, that would push it even further out. I don't think they'll do that again, but there's no reason not to support bleeding edge technology that may come down in price over the usable lifespan of the computer. Pushing 4k support out further is ridiculous when driver support is feasible today.

Besides that, I don't see displayport going anywhere for a while.

 

[deconstruct60]

I'd like to see 4k TBolt displays when they can cost the same price (or lower) as the current ones.

I'd like to go on lunch date with Halle Berry.

The $1000 you pay is already a bit high for most just needing a monitor.

$1k is high? 4K display cost around $4K. Apple would have shave $3K off the going price just to sell it at $1K. ( which according to you is too high).

Eventually the costs will come way down. Not this year though.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I'd like to go on lunch date with Halle Berry.

And I Monica Bellucci

$1k is high? 4K display cost around $4K. Apple would have shave $3K off the going price just to sell it at $1K. ( which according to you is too high). Eventually the costs will come way down. Not this year though.

Yes, it is for a 27" IPS glossy display. Most in that realm cost $800 and give a few more options. Although they aren't LED backlit.

Of course a 4k version would cost more, hence the reason I say I'll wait until the price comes down a good deal. At $4k I might as well save up a few more pennys and have $6,000 to start getting at more options.

At least give us a 32" for around $2,000. This HDTV is $1500 albeit from a company I trust.

 

[barmann]

Not everyone is going to go multi-monitor to pick up docking station abilities but I don't think Apple expects there to be a 1:1 ratio of Apple monitors and Mac Pros sold. That has never been the case. Not gong to be that way now either.

This is where I think you are being too optimistic .
Apple is completely out of the pro range display market .

The first alu ACDs got away with decent technology at the time and desirable design, but the later stuff has been developed for a very different clientele .
Trust me on that, Apple displays don't get a second glance from anyone shopping for workstation displays, be it main, second or third monitor .

The way TB daisy chaining works, at least with current Apple displays, one is well advised to avoid them re. extensions .

A few geeks use them with MPs, but they really are made for consumer laptops only .

 

[Moccasin]

There have been TB displays in the UK refurb store consistently for a month or two now. Previously they never had them. My feeling is that new displays are due and will be released to accompany the Mac Pro. Would love something smaller than 27" - would then get a Mac Mini. Otherwise, it'll have to be a 21" iMac.

 

[goMac]

The way TB daisy chaining works, at least with current Apple displays, one is well advised to avoid them re. extensions .

What's wrong with TB daisy chaining?

 

[deconstruct60]

This is where I think you are being too optimistic .
Apple is completely out of the pro range display market .

Apple isn't in the general display market. They are in the docking station market.

That said ... .

Apple displays don't get a second glance from anyone shopping for workstation displays, be it main, second or third monitor .

A large factor in that is not the technology, it is the glass. The new iMac largely solves that problem. There is little to no reason to think Apple is not going to transition that solution over to a revised Thunderbolt docking station/display.

The underlying LCD panel in the 27" models is used in alot of other vendors designs that people do buy.

Newer mind that not everyone buys Mac Pros either. There are folks doing professional work on 2012 iMacs (and other Macs).

The way TB daisy chaining works, at least with current Apple displays, one is well advised to avoid them re. extensions .

"fastest TB device closest to host" won't make as much of a difference for two factors.

a. stationary ones don't really matter if drop TB display after as that subset of daisy chain is pragmatically stable and fixed.

b. TB v2.0 smooths out the bandwidth so all the TB devices on a single network can get a more even x4 PCI-e worth of bandwidth. So "closest" won't matter as much.

A few geeks use them with MPs, but they really are made for consumer laptops only .

Minor changes ( option that looses the Mag Safe connector and add a port or two of USB 3.0 and/or FW all coupled to the new iMac fused display ) and it would be easy to ship minor variant that was much more effective. The basic LCD panel is OK.