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.
Will the New M4 Chip Bring OLED to MacBooks?
- Thread starter aditya1503
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you think it's possible that apple releases all these Al features only on iOS and iPadOS?
MacBooks may not get much for macOS this year
MacBooks may not get much for macOS this year
Maybe macOS also will get AI features. Who knows? Or do you think they won't become because of the M4?
I wouldn't call a $100 price jump "significant". The starting price is higher, but that's because Apple discontinued 128GB models of the iPad Pro, so the starting point is now 256GB. When you look at M2 vs M4 models with the same storage, it's $100 more expensive at each storage tier. While nobody here has access to Apple's production costs, I would wager that the combined costs of the new displays plus a new SoC to handle them would constitute the majority of that $100 price difference.
Developers still overwhelmingly use the Mac over an iPad or iPhone, and that's where a lot of the AI focus has been over the last few years. With the growth of AI tools on the Mac including MacGPT and AI capabilities added into VS Code and related apps, that is where the push will begin rather than on the consumer level. WWDC next week should shed some much needed light on Apple's plans regarding AI going forward.
I'd hardly call almost 100% NTSC/sRGB/Pantone, whatever, "crappy'. While brightness may not be the same, they are super-bright and more than anyone needs and the colors are accurate and spectacular (and 120+ hz). So feel free to spend an additional $1000+ for an OLED MacBook for next to nothing on advantages.
They will probably come in 2026 or 2027, when both the quality and production yield meet Apple's demands for MacBook Pro displays. The M4 and M5 MBPs will most likely be spec bumps.
Lack of brightness means they lack true HDR 10 and I do consider that crappier than Apple’s current Pro displays.
Whether a MacBook is worth the cost over a PC is of course a much larger discussion than just display technologies.
You do realize that Apple's own Studio Display is only 600 nits? I guess Apple's own $1500 "PRO" display is crappy and makes your stance somewhat bewildering.
You do realize it’s literally not branded a Pro display? I assume you must know since you know the name of it 😂
The Pro Display XDR does handle HDR 10.
And here I thought the "Studio" branding was the next level UP from "Pro" branding? Am I incorrect and all this time "Studio" isn't for Pro's?
If in your world, one needs to spend $5000 on a "Pro" display, god help us when it comes to OLED in a Macbook.
… is the Mac Studio or the Mac Pro the higher end?
Is the Studio Display or Pro Display XDR the higher end?
Well my Pro Display XDR works very well with my Studio ultra. Without doubt it is just a beautiful display. And we have a Samsung OLED TV but it is nowhere as good as the XDR.
Last edited:
You do realize we are talking about Macbooks, right? You said, and I paraphrase, that Apple will release an OLED display in a MacBook when it can properly do HDR10 (1000 nits, you said). Now, you're talking about $10,000 worth of "Pro" equipment as a comparison as the only Apple equipment that can meet those specs.
Sorry, but I stick with my original premise -- it's not rocket science. If Apple is happy with a 600-nit display in it's $1600 monitor that is obviously targeted to creative professionals, then it should be happy with a 500-600 nit OLED in it's $1600 MacBook. The fact it will take them two years to put existing (and affordable) technology in their MacBook is puzzling. Remember the MacBook Air? Does it also need an ultra expensive, ultra-bright HDR10 screen also or is there a good reason there isn't a normal OLED screen in the Air by now?
If we are only talking about MacBooks, then we shouldn't be talking about "Studio" branded stuff at all, since there are no MacBooks with that brand. But you were the one that first made the comparison to the Studio Display 😂
I would love for the MacBook Air to get one of these new 600 nit OLEDs. We can only guess why they haven't - cost, market segmentation, etc. Apple wants to hit a price point with the Air and obviously the OLEDs don't fit into that picture right now, but I'd be very happy if they did.
Otherwise, for the MacBook Pros, I stick with my original premise as well. Apple has decided it is important for them to support HDR 10 and they do not seem to be willing to go back on that. You may not agree with Apple's priorities, but that's inconsequential. Your entire argument seems to stem from my claim that non-HDR 10 displays are "crappier." Sure, that was harsh language, but the point stands - if the display can't do it, then Apple has decided that it's not yet time to move in that direction. With Apple's design priorities, clearly a display that can't meet that standard of 1,000/1,600 nits is indeed crapper/worse/less capable/missing an important feature/however you want to say it.
My guess is that it’s going to be several more years before OLED makes it to the MBA because Apple uses display technology to push people to buy more expensive, pro models. Surely the MBP will get OLED within a couple years. The tandem OLED on the M4 iPad Pro is awesome. It’s the primary reason I got it, along with having Face ID. Apple likely realizes this happens often. If I could get OLED, ProMotion and Face ID on the iPad Air, I would have gotten it. I don’t need the power of the M4.
I also don’t need the power of the MBP, but I really prefer the nicer screens and speakers.
I also don’t need the power of the MBP, but I really prefer the nicer screens and speakers.
I'm curious how you are so sure of your facts about Apple and OLED? Do you work for Apple and have insider information that makes you so sure of Apple's reasons for holding out on OLED and what their requirements and plans are for it?
FWIW, my mention of the Studio display was as an example of a professional Apple display device with sub-1000 nit brightness (which was a claim made by you that Apple needed 1000 nits to be HDR10 which "Pros" need), not anything MacBook since I never claimed MacBook Pro would need a 1000 nit display, you did. In any case, I'm getting dizzy by all this going round-and-round in circles. 'Nuff said.
This may seem hard to believe but the $1600 monitor is more geared toward casual and office users. It's the $5000 display that's geared toward creative professionals.
Hence why one is "Pro XDR Display" and the other is just "Studio Display".
Source: I do know someone at Apple who confirmed this.