It angers me that Apple doesn't make their monitors with multiple inputs like every other monitor manufacturer. Until this changes I will never buy another Apple monitor. I have multiple computers on my desk, both mac and PCs and they all need to share the same monitors.
It angers me that Apple doesn't make their monitors with multiple inputs like every other monitor manufacturer. Until this changes I will never buy another Apple monitor. I have multiple computers on my desk, both mac and PCs and they all need to share the same monitors.
Why does it "anger" you? Nike doesn't make a shoe in my size but it doesn't anger me...I just buy something that fits my needs.
You only mentioned one monitor with thunderbolt technology.
Should have pointed out, LGs 34UM94-P or 34UM95-P .. both with Dual Thunderbolt 2, 3 USB 3.0 ports, HDMI, and Display ports.
According to the reports, Thunderbolt is being removed from the future MacBook Air line. Thunderbolt connectivity isn't really much of a feature at this point.
Yeah, that'll go well. Remember the last time Apple engineered their own display connector standard? They still had to have an alternative, and that'd be the case today.
Apple...................WAKE UP! How long has the new MacPro been on the market without a complementing Apple UHD Thunderbolt monitor? Cannot even begin to understand the thinking behind this neglect.
I think it's pretty simple. They will be going to 5K with the next cinema display, but using dual thunderbolt to hook things up is a hack. It would be better to wait for a single cable solution with the next DisplayPort upgrade. Also, they may simply have issues satisfying demand on the Retina 5K Mac. If you're not able to get manufacturers to produce a product in the quantity and quality demanded, why would you put it on sale? My guess is that it's coming. I think they want to be able to pixel double at 5K for Retina resolution with a single cable rather than use 4K (which is actually less than 4K anyway). Otherwise UI components great REALLY small.
I think it's pretty simple. They will be going to 5K with the next cinema display, but using dual thunderbolt to hook things up is a hack. It would be better to wait for a single cable solution with the next DisplayPort upgrade. Also, they may simply have issues satisfying demand on the Retina 5K Mac. If you're not able to get manufacturers to produce a product in the quantity and quality demanded, why would you put it on sale? My guess is that it's coming...
Exactly. The most economical answer is that IGZO production is still very limited, and Apple is not likely to offer a non-oxide-backed panel, no way, no how.
Last I heard, OSX still doesn't suport 10 bit, making you look like you want to use that under Windows 7 or 8. Something I cannot phantom...
It's a matter of consumer available 10-bit RGBA per channel monitors becoming more common. HP and others will help this happen in 2015.
Before it was reserved for monitors starting at $2k-$3k from Eizo and others. A monitor less expensive than the TB Display and you can bet Apple will make the support, system-wide as part of an update.
10-bit LED has taken forever to arrive at consumer price levels.
The problem of a 5K display is that you need a computer which is compatible with the DisplayPort 1.3 standard. Very few computers are capable of this since the standard only came out in September 2014.
In fact when Apple released the 5K iMac, there was NO HARDWARE CHIPS available to any manufacturer to connect the GPU to the 5K screen. Apple had to custom build its own hardware chip to create the 5K iMac.
The way 5K displays work without a DisplayPort 1.3 cable is to use TWO DisplayPort 1.2 PORTS on your computer and act as if it was two monitors glued into one. This is how the Dell 5K Monitor works. Thus on any Mac, you have to use BOTH Thunderbolt Ports to run the 5K display or use One Thunderbolt Port and the HDMI Port to run the 5K display.
Every Mac that has an HDMI Port can already use the 4K displays. And every Mac can use a Thunderbolt to DisplayPort adapter to connect to the 4K display also.
Thunderbolt 2 isn't compatible with DisplayPort 1.3. So we have to wait for Thunderbolt 3 - which Intel hasn't released yet.
The progress of monitors has outstripped the ability of computer manufacturers to connect to these monitors since the manufacturers are in a race to the bottom since the industry has very little profit.
Apple can't really update the Thunderbolt Monitor since Thunderbolt 3 isn't yet available. It wouldn't make sense to release a Thunderbolt 2 Monitor which is 4K since that would be a stop-gap measure and would have less resolution than the 5K iMac.
Note that Apple generally isn't going to release a product unless it is best in its class since cheaper alternatives would be available. The Thunderbolt Display use to be best in class.
Current Macs already can run 4K displays which are cheap.
To run a 5K display, Apple has to wait on Intel for Thunderbolt 3 - or upgrade its HDMI port to handle DisplayPort 1.3. But if the HDMI port is upgraded to DisplayPort 1.3 - which it will - there would be no need for a Thunderbolt 3 Monitor. This is why there is no upgraded Thunderbolt 3 Monitor yet.
The last time Apple depended on a single vendor it got screwed big time (PowerPC) - so what happens when Intel also disappoints?
Not much. Everyone else basically relies on Intel too. If Intel ships a given CPU architecture late (e.g., Broadwell), it affects all of their partners, not just Apple.
My guess is that Apple has a handful of prototype machines running AMD CPUs in a lab, probably some Macs running their own ARM-based Ax CPUs.
It's truly puzzling -- and disappointing -- that Apple has not done a significant display upgrade for a few years now. One would think that this might have been a low-cost no-brainer initiative, given what they already have in place.
Comments
It angers me that Apple doesn't make their monitors with multiple inputs like every other monitor manufacturer. Until this changes I will never buy another Apple monitor. I have multiple computers on my desk, both mac and PCs and they all need to share the same monitors.
I'm waiting for 11-bits.
Why does it "anger" you? Nike doesn't make a shoe in my size but it doesn't anger me...I just buy something that fits my needs.
The price of that Dell 5K monitor demonstrates how much of a bargain the iMac retina is.
Name an alternative to Intel.
If Apple can put a 5K display on an iMac for this price, I would wait for the next Thunderbolt Display.
Time will tell.
Name an alternative to Intel.
Apple.
Are any of them available for purchase yet?
I tried to move to a 30" monitor, much taller. Turns out that taller is not better, our eye's are designed to go side to side.
Last I heard, OSX still doesn't suport 10 bit, making you look like you want to use that under Windows 7 or 8. Something I cannot phantom...
Yeah, that'll go well. Remember the last time Apple engineered their own display connector standard? They still had to have an alternative, and that'd be the case today.
Apple...................WAKE UP! How long has the new MacPro been on the market without a complementing Apple UHD Thunderbolt monitor? Cannot even begin to understand the thinking behind this neglect.
I think it's pretty simple. They will be going to 5K with the next cinema display, but using dual thunderbolt to hook things up is a hack. It would be better to wait for a single cable solution with the next DisplayPort upgrade. Also, they may simply have issues satisfying demand on the Retina 5K Mac. If you're not able to get manufacturers to produce a product in the quantity and quality demanded, why would you put it on sale? My guess is that it's coming. I think they want to be able to pixel double at 5K for Retina resolution with a single cable rather than use 4K (which is actually less than 4K anyway). Otherwise UI components great REALLY small.
Exactly. The most economical answer is that IGZO production is still very limited, and Apple is not likely to offer a non-oxide-backed panel, no way, no how.
It's a matter of consumer available 10-bit RGBA per channel monitors becoming more common. HP and others will help this happen in 2015.
Before it was reserved for monitors starting at $2k-$3k from Eizo and others. A monitor less expensive than the TB Display and you can bet Apple will make the support, system-wide as part of an update.
10-bit LED has taken forever to arrive at consumer price levels.
--------------------------------------------------
The problem of a 5K display is that you need a computer which is compatible with the DisplayPort 1.3 standard. Very few computers are capable of this since the standard only came out in September 2014.
In fact when Apple released the 5K iMac, there was NO HARDWARE CHIPS available to any manufacturer to connect the GPU to the 5K screen. Apple had to custom build its own hardware chip to create the 5K iMac.
The way 5K displays work without a DisplayPort 1.3 cable is to use TWO DisplayPort 1.2 PORTS on your computer and act as if it was two monitors glued into one. This is how the Dell 5K Monitor works. Thus on any Mac, you have to use BOTH Thunderbolt Ports to run the 5K display or use One Thunderbolt Port and the HDMI Port to run the 5K display.
Every Mac that has an HDMI Port can already use the 4K displays. And every Mac can use a Thunderbolt to DisplayPort adapter to connect to the 4K display also.
Thunderbolt 2 isn't compatible with DisplayPort 1.3. So we have to wait for Thunderbolt 3 - which Intel hasn't released yet.
The progress of monitors has outstripped the ability of computer manufacturers to connect to these monitors since the manufacturers are in a race to the bottom since the industry has very little profit.
Apple can't really update the Thunderbolt Monitor since Thunderbolt 3 isn't yet available. It wouldn't make sense to release a Thunderbolt 2 Monitor which is 4K since that would be a stop-gap measure and would have less resolution than the 5K iMac.
Note that Apple generally isn't going to release a product unless it is best in its class since cheaper alternatives would be available. The Thunderbolt Display use to be best in class.
Current Macs already can run 4K displays which are cheap.
To run a 5K display, Apple has to wait on Intel for Thunderbolt 3 - or upgrade its HDMI port to handle DisplayPort 1.3. But if the HDMI port is upgraded to DisplayPort 1.3 - which it will - there would be no need for a Thunderbolt 3 Monitor. This is why there is no upgraded Thunderbolt 3 Monitor yet.
The last time Apple depended on a single vendor it got screwed big time (PowerPC) - so what happens when Intel also disappoints?
Not much. Everyone else basically relies on Intel too. If Intel ships a given CPU architecture late (e.g., Broadwell), it affects all of their partners, not just Apple.
My guess is that Apple has a handful of prototype machines running AMD CPUs in a lab, probably some Macs running their own ARM-based Ax CPUs.