If I'm spending money to get a 4K display, I'm definitely not going to get an all-in-one. I would rather spend that money on a fantastic monitor and a separate computer (mac mini or pro) which can be upgraded over time. I just can't see upgrading a 4K display for a looooong time.
So just keep using the display after the hardware is obsolete.
Personally, I'm liking a few of the 21:9 displays that I've been reading about from a few different manufacturers. Those seem pretty cool.
I have a 21:9 LG 34" thunderbolt monitor (34UM95) with my 27" iMac. The screen height is exactly the same. I created a little stand for the LG and now everything is level. It's nice to have to much screen to throw windows over. I'm wondering if my iMac will run another one.
I have a 21:9 LG 34" thunderbolt monitor (34UM95) with my 27" iMac. The screen height is exactly the same. I created a little stand for the LG and now everything is level. It's nice to have to much screen to throw windows over. I'm wondering if my iMac will run another one.
Is yours the curved one?
Besides the extra wide space for additional workspace, it must be nice to see a real movie on a 21:9 display.
16:9 is basically TV format, and virtually all real movies ever made are 21:9 or even wider.
The readily available LCD glass out there seems to be the 28"TN and 32"IPS @ 3840 x 2160. I've seen both TN and IPS panels on a number of occasions, and for a desktop monitor (not for photo/video pro), even the 28"TN is pretty good. You can get those~$430. The 32" IPS is definitely better, but then you are in the $2,000 range. Not saying Apple wouldn't use 5K in the iMac, but I'm afraid it might be expensive. That Dell 27" 5K is supposed to be ~$2,500 all by itself. If going with a 3840 x 2160 LCD is required to keep prices in line with current product, that wouldn't be horrible--it would still be a very nice upgrade. Then again, if Apple can figure out how to offer a 27" iMac w/5120x2880 display without a big price increase, well, so much the better.
I think folks are getting a bit too hung up on video (4K) and not seeing other uses for a 5K display.
Photography! When editing massive images, nice to see more pixels on the screen.
Software development: The height of the iOS simulator window for the iPhone 6 Plus is very tall. While a real device is 1080 x 1920 pixels tall, the actual size used by the simulator is 1242 x 2208. So that would not allow you to view a 100% sized simulator on a 4K monitor.
While you can adjust the scaling of the simulator (50%, 75%, 100%) it gets annoying.
A 5K monitor is still too small to display a 100% sized Retina iPad in the simulator though. Still, more devices being able to be viewed at 100% would be a nice win.
I'm sure there are many other cases where one would want the extra resolution.
Furthermore, it makes sense to keep the 27" form-factor and simply double the pixels in each dimension. Exactly what was done for iPhone and iPad as they transitioned into their Retina versions. The display would then have an easy "2x" scaling factor applied to it. Fonts and other content would display in the same physical size, yet have 4x the detail.
I told you why. Thunderbolt? Well, maybe, but that does cost transmission time. Remember that while Apple has 6 thunderbolt ports, there is only 3 true thunderbolt chips. So only 3 independent Thunderbolt lanes. This would take quite a chunk out of that. So while it could happen, I'm not so sure Apple would want to go that route. And what would be the purpose of such a resolution? Dell just came out with one. But there are no panels for this resolution.. Dell was forced to use two panels, and put them together, which REQUIRES two Displayport connections. No way that I know of to link two panels together into one port, Thunderbolt or not.
If the "Accidental Tech Podcast" guys are to be believed, a single Thunderbolt port doesn't have enough bandwidth for a 5K monitor either, but it doesn't matter anyway, because, as someone else pointed out - on an iMac it is all internal, so who cares.
If they come out with a 5K Apple Cinema Display, then they have to start worrying about Thunderbolt bandwidth
Not sure how you got there ...? I was replying to this post which is pretty specific.
"Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post
I am not interested, i want a Mac Pro machine.
… Then i will save for a 4K."
Since we're talking about a possible 5K monitor, I thought that was what you were referring to, when responding to his post, meaning that the 5k would be better for video editing than the 4 k one. Sorry if I misinterpreted.
Comments
So just keep using the display after the hardware is obsolete.
You’re basically like the Moon landing deniers at this point.
With a 5K display Apple might offer a beefier GPU than usual on this update.
Imbedded Apple TV SOC included…
So just keep using the display after the hardware is obsolete.
That's a good point. I keep forgetting you can do that with the iMac.
Personally, I'm liking a few of the 21:9 displays that I've been reading about from a few different manufacturers. Those seem pretty cool.
I have a 21:9 LG 34" thunderbolt monitor (34UM95) with my 27" iMac. The screen height is exactly the same. I created a little stand for the LG and now everything is level. It's nice to have to much screen to throw windows over. I'm wondering if my iMac will run another one.
I have a 21:9 LG 34" thunderbolt monitor (34UM95) with my 27" iMac. The screen height is exactly the same. I created a little stand for the LG and now everything is level. It's nice to have to much screen to throw windows over. I'm wondering if my iMac will run another one.
Is yours the curved one?
Besides the extra wide space for additional workspace, it must be nice to see a real movie on a 21:9 display.
16:9 is basically TV format, and virtually all real movies ever made are 21:9 or even wider.
The readily available LCD glass out there seems to be the 28"TN and 32"IPS @ 3840 x 2160. I've seen both TN and IPS panels on a number of occasions, and for a desktop monitor (not for photo/video pro), even the 28"TN is pretty good. You can get those~$430. The 32" IPS is definitely better, but then you are in the $2,000 range. Not saying Apple wouldn't use 5K in the iMac, but I'm afraid it might be expensive. That Dell 27" 5K is supposed to be ~$2,500 all by itself. If going with a 3840 x 2160 LCD is required to keep prices in line with current product, that wouldn't be horrible--it would still be a very nice upgrade. Then again, if Apple can figure out how to offer a 27" iMac w/5120x2880 display without a big price increase, well, so much the better.
I think folks are getting a bit too hung up on video (4K) and not seeing other uses for a 5K display.
Photography! When editing massive images, nice to see more pixels on the screen.
Software development: The height of the iOS simulator window for the iPhone 6 Plus is very tall. While a real device is 1080 x 1920 pixels tall, the actual size used by the simulator is 1242 x 2208. So that would not allow you to view a 100% sized simulator on a 4K monitor.
While you can adjust the scaling of the simulator (50%, 75%, 100%) it gets annoying.
A 5K monitor is still too small to display a 100% sized Retina iPad in the simulator though. Still, more devices being able to be viewed at 100% would be a nice win.
I'm sure there are many other cases where one would want the extra resolution.
Furthermore, it makes sense to keep the 27" form-factor and simply double the pixels in each dimension. Exactly what was done for iPhone and iPad as they transitioned into their Retina versions. The display would then have an easy "2x" scaling factor applied to it. Fonts and other content would display in the same physical size, yet have 4x the detail.
I wonder if iTunes will get 4K movies at the same time?
Now that's news worth following; not that butt-**** ugly AppleWatch.
it hurts, doesnt it? deep down.
Worry not; now that SJ is gone, "clumsy" is the new black for Apple.
odd, i would have guessed "record profits" or "record stock price" or "extensions" or "multiple screen sizes".... those come to immediate mind.
Yeah, but… Thunderbolt.
If the "Accidental Tech Podcast" guys are to be believed, a single Thunderbolt port doesn't have enough bandwidth for a 5K monitor either, but it doesn't matter anyway, because, as someone else pointed out - on an iMac it is all internal, so who cares.
If they come out with a 5K Apple Cinema Display, then they have to start worrying about Thunderbolt bandwidth
Disagree totally on both points.
That's what I said earlier.
Since we're talking about a possible 5K monitor, I thought that was what you were referring to, when responding to his post, meaning that the 5k would be better for video editing than the 4 k one. Sorry if I misinterpreted.
Remember that this isn't MacInsider. Everything Apple does is important.