or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor - Page 2

post #41 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

Wait till May:

 

They'll bring out something similar in the foris or CG lines at some point. You should note that it's typical to see higher resolution from medical displays. Some of the highest resolution displays available at 21-23" were made for medical use, as they can take advantage of any available resolution.

post #42 of 110

It's an exciting time to be in computers, we are seeing things that have been fixed for years finally changing: SSDs replacing HDs, very high resolution displays coming in, and Apple seems to be leading the way.

post #43 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

 

They'll bring out something similar in the foris or CG lines at some point. You should note that it's typical to see higher resolution from medical displays. Some of the highest resolution displays available at 21-23" were made for medical use, as they can take advantage of any available resolution.

 

I'm well aware the medical deals in higher pixel depth, density and resolution.

post #44 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I want a 4K monitor but there's no point if it's 32", because then it's not Retina.

Who cares if it's actually considered "Retina" or not? That's just a marketing term.

4K at 32" is still an amazing resolution... and it would be quite an upgrade from the monitor you have now 1wink.gif
post #45 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


Who cares if it's actually considered "Retina" or not? That's just a marketing term.

4K at 32" is still an amazing resolution... and it would be quite an upgrade from the monitor you have now 1wink.gif

It's undoubtedly a beautiful screen, but the monitor I have now is a 15" 2880x1800, and once you have experienced such high pixel densities you never want to go back.

post #46 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post
 

It's undoubtedly a beautiful screen, but the monitor I have now is a 15" 2880x1800, and once you have experienced such high pixel densities you never want to go back.


That is true, but it's not exactly the same. You don't view a 32" display as close as you might a 15". I don't think you would be disappointed. What I find a little difficult is switching between my 24" 1920x1200 display and the 15" rmbp at times. I always wanted the 24" to be higher in resolution, but that makes it a bit obvious. Notebooks in general have outpaced desktop displays on resolution gains for years. Prior to the Dell announcement, your choices in a 24" were either 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 depending on aspect ratio. There wasn't anything higher.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
 

 

I'm well aware the medical deals in higher pixel depth, density and resolution.


Yeah I was just thinking how NEC had a 21" a few years ago comparable in resolution to the 27" thunderbolt display. I always wanted that resolution in one of their PA displays.

post #47 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

It's undoubtedly a beautiful screen, but the monitor I have now is a 15" 2880x1800, and once you have experienced such high pixel densities you never want to go back.

I withdraw my previous statement!

That's insane PPI 1biggrin.gif

Good luck finding a large desktop monitor to fit your needs.
post #48 of 110
This means nothing in regards to if or when Apple might revamp their display or the specs. All it MIGHT indicate is that they are willing to diversify their offerings in displays.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #49 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


I withdraw my previous statement!

That's insane PPI 1biggrin.gif

Good luck finding a large desktop monitor to fit your needs.

That's just what the Macbook Pro is these days. But I think the Dell 24" 3840x2160 would be good also.

post #50 of 110

I don't think Apple is willing to sell their display for $4K, so will probably release one when they can get it priced at something a bit more reasonable. It's still a very niche technology that has not hit the price-curve that Apple typically jumps in at. 

post #51 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by BNZ V3 View Post

saw this coming from a mile away. Always wondered why people kept asking "where are the Apple 4k Displays" as if there weren't other options available.

Why is absurd to think Apple will make displays? You are aware they have a long history of not funding display manufacturers to progress the state of the art, but also make their own branded displays that are discreet from the "PC"?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #52 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

I don't think Apple is willing to sell their display for $4K, so will probably release one when they can get it priced at something a bit more reasonable. It's still a very niche technology that has not hit the price-curve that Apple typically jumps in at. 

That' what I'm expecting. Perhaps they will pull of the display market the way they did with Xserve but I think the more likely answer is what you state.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #53 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post

"Shut up! Get out troll!"

The UltraSharp 32 UltraHD uses an IGZO display.

TS, I think you had that one coming.

Dell's UltraSharp line is quite nice, panel-wise. From what I've read Dell's typical factory calibration for their UltraSharp line isn't Apple-level, but it's solid, and if you need the best color recreation you really should the equipment to configure your own monitor anyway.

I understand how Dell's 28" UHD display (which isn't UltraSharp) is under $1000, but I don't get why the 24" UltraSharp UHD monitor is only $1400 when the 31.5" UltraSharp UHD monitor is $2100 more. That's a huge jump in price for the same numbers of pixels in a much denser panel and what I assume is the same quality panel.

Unless the look of the casing really irks you they seem like a great fit for someone wanting a quality 4K display at a decent price point.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #54 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

No IPS and no IGZO, that’s the main thing. Also, Dell, which tells you pretty much all you need to know.

Ah I wasn't going to respond to this one, but I dislike the insulting response above mine. Dells are probably the most popular out of the budget range displays, and they aren't bad. They're nowhere near the limit of what is available, but the U2711s had a strong following. Where some of the higher end displays have maintained differentiation is in the form of features to help compensate for drift, improve warmup time to the point of stable colors, compensate of lcd panel uniformity issues, and correlate multiple displays against each other and secondary reference targets. Apple's market isn't in having the best displays. As I mentioned they market a decent display with matching aesthetics that has some amount synergy with their primary Mac products.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


That' what I'm expecting. Perhaps they will pull of the display market the way they did with Xserve but I think the more likely answer is what you state.


Huh? They already have to a degree. They don't really differentiate it so much as a display now. They need something to use in the imac, and that design can be leveraged into a separate display, which gives them an extra sale with notebooks and prior to the update a matching display for an imac. I mean they don't market it in the same way as displays that are just sold as displays.

post #55 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Huh? They already have to a degree. They don't really differentiate it so much as a display now. They need something to use in the imac, and that design can be leveraged into a separate display, which gives them an extra sale with notebooks and prior to the update a matching display for an imac. I mean they don't market it in the same way as displays that are just sold as displays.

They don't market it the same way, but they also don't market their Mac Pros the same was as their more consumer-focused products. They also have a long history of letting their displays languish at higher prices than would be expected. It's like they have it at the bottom item of each meeting and only get to it once every couple years.

Note that they used to have a 30" ACD and have never had a 30" iMac. I think they also have used multiple panels that were very different from their iMac line over the years. But that does bring up an interesting point. When will Apple finally make the move to make their iMacs "Retina" which would be a unique retinafying compared to all their other doubling resolution solutions as it would be exactly 1.5x the resolution if they go 4K in the 27" iMac.

Would they go 4K in the 24" iMac, too or use something that is also 1.5x the resolution. They already have the Scaling option in Display Settings to go halfway between 2x so I'm guessing that would be the new native for these machines. But when would Apple offer it? Seems like it will be a long wait if we are waiting for quality panels in that size at the current price points. We still don't have the MBA as Retina but I'm guessing that will happen with the next update.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #56 of 110
Th
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Good catch! I've kinda been expecting a Mini rev and a small cube like that could produce an impressively compact computer. Out one of those PCI Express SSDs in there and the machine would rock. Well rock for normal usage, I'm not convinced that a Mini would ship with the GPU horse power to drive a 4K display.

The current gen 5k card is capable to output 1 4k screen, so it's "might" happen.
post #57 of 110
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post
Who cares if it's actually considered "Retina" or not? That's just a marketing term.

 

Oh boy, here we go…

 

Originally Posted by st88 View Post

The UltraSharp 32 UltraHD uses an IGZO display.

 

Huh. Couldn’t find it on the page. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #58 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


They don't market it the same way, but they also don't market their Mac Pros the same was as their more consumer-focused products. They also have a long history of letting their displays languish at higher prices than would be expected. It's like they have it at the bottom item of each meeting and only get to it once every couple years.

Note that they used to have a 30" ACD and have never had a 30" iMac. I think they also have used multiple panels that were very different from their iMac line over the years. But that does bring up an interesting point. When will Apple finally make the move to make their iMacs "Retina" which would be a unique retinafying compared to all their other doubling resolution solutions as it would be exactly 1.5x the resolution if they go 4K in the 27" iMac.
 

I'm aware they never had a 30", but the older displays were definitely marketed to a different audience. Part of that was the price points chose the buyers to a degree. You should also remember that the imac covered a different audience at the time. It is suitable for a far greater range of tasks today where performance requirements have been outpaced by hardware improvements in some areas. Anyway during the era of the 30" display, it wasn't the only one. They had something like a 20", 23" later replaced by a 24", and a 30" display. They folded all of them into a 27" cinema display. It appeared to me as if they were trying to to maintain a profitable item through consolidation there. I did take note of the resolution disparity. My thoughts were that they would would start from something that could be doubled, not necessarily what we have today. There are 1080 27" displays. I've never looked at one close up, but I suspect it would be a doubling of that or a small change in dimensions, much like what brought about the current 27" panels. Take 25.5" panel (often marketed as 26" during its respective time example). Widen from 16:10 to 16:9. There's your 27" :). I mean that I could see a small shift one way or the other, and there is a current basis for doubling, even if it's not one that Apple currently uses. If you have more familiarity with them than me, you can let me know if they look horribly out of scale. I'm just saying the doubling doesn't necessarily have to be in relation to what they have now. There's always some kind of range.

 

Quote:

 

Would they go 4K in the 24" iMac, too or use something that is also 1.5x the resolution. They already have the Scaling option in Display Settings to go halfway between 2x so I'm guessing that would be the new native for these machines. But when would Apple offer it? Seems like it will be a long wait if we are waiting for quality panels in that size at the current price points. We still don't have the MBA as Retina but I'm guessing that will happen with the next update.

It's possible that prices will come down faster than I thought. I didn't mention this one previously due to its oddball nature, but Dell is bringing out a 28" around $1000. That goes against the trend of bigger= more expensive, so I'm not sure what to say there. Bigger is typically more difficult to manufacture without defects, and they do incur a bigger loss on any of A- grade and below. If they hadn't redesigned the imac recently, it might have looked like an option. There are also signs that they are running into cost barriers relative to their desired margins. As for the mba, I think the 13" rmbp covers that well enough that people have an option in a very light/compact machine at that kind of resolution. The rmbp display is a considerable step up in terms of viewing angles too.

post #59 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

As for the mba, I think the 13" rmbp covers that well enough that people have an option in a very light/compact machine at that kind of resolution. The rmbp display is a considerable step up in terms of viewing angles too.

I think they will go Retina with the MBA but I think the rumors of a 12" make a lot of sense. Basically get it down to one model that is partway between the 11" and 13" and keep it smaller than the 13" MBP to help differentiate the sizes a little more.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #60 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Oh boy, here we go…

The comment I was replying to was saying he didn't want this 32" 4K display because it wasn't "Retina"

I said it's still a healthy amount of pixels... even if some people say it's not "Retina"

3,840 x 2,160 is an amazing resolution. At that point... who cares if it's "Retina" enough? 1biggrin.gif
post #61 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


TS, I think you had that one coming.

 

He's actually easy to address if you just sort of ignore the initial hyperbole. There are plenty of other clueless display comments. It's one of the less understood areas for whatever reason. I only learned about it due to the need to assist artists in getting their own pipelines up and running.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


 Basically get it down to one model that is partway between the 11" and 13" and keep it smaller than the 13" MBP to help differentiate the sizes a little more.


That would make sense. I mean the 13" rmbp is not that much different. There are situations where every ounce counts, but not that many. For some reason the concept of a very light computer reminds me of my desire to hike overland trails. There's a 6 day hike in Tasmania that I intend to do one day. Unfortunately others I know do not share my desire to trek through mountains with known erratic weather patterns (sometimes snows in summer there).

post #62 of 110

I am thinking prices will come down very fast. They have been making the high density displays for iPhone and iPad for years now, and for 15" laptops for a year. The tech is not some research project any more. The desktop computers are the next logical step, Sharp and Dell are making the first move, but lets see what the 2014 iMac looks like.

post #63 of 110
1smoking.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrogusto View Post

Ha ha, it's even worse! The price is in Euros, which in USD is $5,479!

 


Good for you mentioning that Euro conversion. I was going to, plus add on the tax as well. 1oyvey.gif
post #64 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshA View Post

Good for you mentioning that Euro conversion. I was going to, plus add on the tax as well. 1oyvey.gif

You need to read the thread before commenting. Really.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #65 of 110
Deleted, not worth arguing with him.
Edited by Evilution - 12/7/13 at 3:25am
post #66 of 110
Isn't 800:1 contrast a bit low for such a mighty screen?
post #67 of 110

What about the 

Seiki 39" Class 4K 120Hz LED Ultra HDTV - SE39UY04 - TVs & Electronics - Televisions - All Flat Panel TVs

which is priced at between 500$ & $600 at various stores?

post #68 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HARRISAM View Post

What about the 




Seiki 39" Class 4K 120Hz LED Ultra HDTV - SE39UY04 - TVs & Electronics - Televisions - All Flat Panel TVs
which is priced at between 500$ & $600 at various stores?




A TV panel is completely different from a computer monitor.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #69 of 110

Why? You can use this as a monitor.

post #70 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HARRISAM View Post

Why? You can use this as a monitor.

No one is saying that it can't be used as a monitor and note that TVs are just monitors with TV tuners in them. Ask yourself why you would want a 39" monitor on your desk. Now ask yourself why you even a 4K monitor to begin with if the accuracy of the display when sitting less than 2 feet away is going to be poor. Finally, ask yourself why computer monitors cost so much more than a much larger TV monitor of the same resolution. We're talking a huge number of issues like input lag, refresh rate, color accuracy, gamut, and on and one. If the only thing you want to use your computer for is for a Paul Walker movie marathon then go for it but for real computer use i's not going to be a great experience.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #71 of 110
Thank you Sol for explaining this in detail. When I got to the part "a huge number of issues like input lag, refresh rate, color accuracy, gamut, and on and on" I thought you were describing my ex there for a minute. Happy weekend.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #72 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Thank you Sol for explaining this in detail. When I got to the part "a huge number of issues like input lag, refresh rate, color accuracy, gamut, and on and on" I thought you were describing my ex there for a minute. Happy weekend.

That's the problem with exes, she'd think I was describing you.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #73 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That's the problem with exes, she'd think I was describing you.

Nailed it
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #74 of 110
Apple is not really supporting the professional user base anymore. They just spent a fortune basically in marketing, which is the greatest value Apple gets from supporting pros. They are a consumer company now. So why on earth would they sink more money in R&D building a display that only a fraction of their loss-leading pro user base is going to buy anyway?

When all of their products support 4K then Apple will deliver a branded 4K display.
post #75 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Apple is not really supporting the professional user base anymore. They just spent a fortune basically in marketing, which is the greatest value Apple gets from supporting pros. They are a consumer company now. So why on earth would they sink more money in R&D building a display that only a fraction of their loss-leading pro user base is going to buy anyway?

When all of their products support 4K then Apple will deliver a branded 4K display.

They have been pumping the new Mac Pro for months now. If that's not a professional machine then I don't know what is. I also consider their MBP line to be professional machines.

As for sinking money into display R&D they do plenty of this. You only have to loom at them offering Retina IPS displays on nearly all their products as proof.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #76 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppeX View Post

You have it wrong. Just get any matte display and you will see that they have no glare.

I detest matte for their nasty diffused glare that destroys contrast and color.
post #77 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

I don’t think so. The Apple TV will eventually have support for 2K displays. ;) 

 

Why do people call it 4K? It’s 2K. We measure from the short distance, not the long. What, they think they can magically change it now and no one will notice? Or maybe people are TOO STUPID to understand that 2K would have 4x the pixels of 1080p, so we have to call it “4K” because “4 is four times 1”. :no:

At least to me the 4K notation makes more sense.  You're assuming the ratio of height and width will stay the same.  What if they start making monitors with a wider width?  Are you going to call 6K pixel monitor with 2K lines of resolution a 2K monitor?

post #78 of 110
We have tested this monitor at 4K with both the latest MacBook Pro Retina 15" (using its built-in support for 4K over HDMI 1.4), and at the end of a Thunderbolt 2 chain using a Sonnet Technologies' Thunderbolt 2 Echo Express PCIe Expansion Chassis (using Display Port in Multi-Stream mode). The image is impressive.
post #79 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Apple is not really supporting the professional user base anymore. They just spent a fortune basically in marketing, which is the greatest value Apple gets from supporting pros. They are a consumer company now. So why on earth would they sink more money in R&D building a display that only a fraction of their loss-leading pro user base is going to buy anyway?

When all of their products support 4K then Apple will deliver a branded 4K display.

 

As opposed to…when? Apple has always been a consumer company. iPod. Pippin. QuickTake. Newton. Flower Power iMac.

If you're going to set the bar for "professional" at 4K, then by that definition, Apple has never been a professional company until now.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #80 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by socalart View Post

We have tested this monitor at 4K with both the latest MacBook Pro Retina 15" (using its built-in support for 4K over HDMI 1.4), and at the end of a Thunderbolt 2 chain using a Sonnet Technologies' Thunderbolt 2 Echo Express PCIe Expansion Chassis (using Display Port in Multi-Stream mode). The image is impressive.

Great, thanks for sharing this. Does it run at 60Hz on the rMBP and is it smooth enough at scrolling, UI animations etc?

On the subject of the Echo Express, a lot of the PCIe boxes are reviewed as having noisy fans and they are all expensive. Have you considered perhaps using larger, slower fans, maybe mounted between cards rotating length-wise like a water-mill or liquid-cooling that is sealed away from the cards? Also, is the price of those just down to the small demand or does it cost a lot to manufacturer these? When whole PCs with PCIe cards cost $500, $800 for just the slots seems excessive.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › In lieu of a Retina Thunderbolt Display, Apple now selling 4K IGZO Sharp LED monitor