Next year has the potential to be a big one for Apple computers. Skylake, USB-C, and most likely redesigns for the iMac and MacBook Pro. I would imagine a 5K Thunderbolt display will be on the way due to Thunderbolt 3/Display Port 1.3. Being I don't need a 27" screen, I would like to see Apple bring back a smaller version (23 or 24 inches would be ideal) but not holding my breath.
Speaking of third party suppliers, USB-C peripherals are far and few between, and Thunderbolt 3 peripherals are non-existent, AFAIK. So as much as I'd like you to be right, I just can't see Apple using the iMac to introduce this tech. Sure, they could ship it with adapters, but I just don't see them wanting to do that.
There will be an event next year where Apple introduces the next generation of displays (better color) and Thunderbolt 3 into the Pro line. The first product in this next generation is already on the way, the iPad Pro. Remember the focus on color tech in that presentation -- a sign of things to come.
I seriously doubt Apple's put off upgrading their line of pro displays for the last 5 years because they were in search of better color.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
I seriously doubt Apple's put off upgrading their line of pro displays for the last 5 years because they were in search of better color.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
I'm pretty sure those high-end delays are because of TB3 bandwidth which will get here with Skylake. Once that's out the MBPs and MP I would expect to see a modern, 5K (or higher) external display from Apple.
I seriously doubt Apple's put off upgrading their line of pro displays for the last 5 years because they were in search of better color.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
"But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates."
I don't think the 27" uses IGZO, not that it really matters.
Apple calls it "oxide TFT" (thin-film transistor),the oxide being the indium-gallium-zinc oxide of IGZO.
Look at the "Design" page of the 5K iMac brochure on the Apple web site, and/or watch the video with Dan Riccio.
The thing for us to keep in mind (I know it's hard) is that the iMac shell couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons unless there was the 30% reduction in power usage due to shrinking the wiring and transistor matrix backing the pixels by using "oxide" conductor material. This is why Apple spent hundreds of millions with Sharp to develop the production of this breakthrough in powering LCDs, and why they still don't have 4K or 5K standalone monitors, or retina Macbook Airs, etc.—short supply still.
So yes, it does matter that the 5K iMac was, and the 21.5" iMac will be, oxide TFT. If that doesn't mean IGZO, they they snuck another oxide in without anyone knowing. Unlikely.
As much as I prefer a 24" iMac as well, I think it would effectively kill the 27" model.
21.5" is a tad small...reduce the bevel and give us 22.5" or 23".
23 inch would hit the sweet spot, just perfect to have the edges in your peripheral vision. The immersive experience of the 27 inch is too intimidating to me. I'd love to see the boundaries.
I've personally found the 21.5" screen size to just be a little on the small side in this day and age. However a 4K display would make it more compelling. I still think there's a missing product at 24" but maybe it's just not worthwhile with the 27" available.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
Less than two years ago (December 2013), when the Mac Pro was released, the best they could have offered was a 4K monitor, like the $3600 32" Sharp that they still, to this day, carry in the (online) Apple Store for it. The 27" Dell 5K didn't ship until a year later, and Apple's 5K iMac forced Dell to lower its price even before it shipped.
When I talk about "better color" -- I'm talking about part of how they are going to market the next year's Pro line as the latest and greatest thing. I'm not saying it was a factor back in 2013 when they made the decision to not come out with their own large 4K Thunderbolt 2 Display along with the Mac Pro redesign.
As for a standalone Apple 5K, its price would have been deeply undercut by Dell shortly after it shipped. I also don't know if the Late 2013 MacBook Pro could have driven such a display. Apple sells a lot of Thunderbolt Displays to MacBook Pro owners -- a 5K display that only worked with the Mac Pro would be a non-starter, I would think.
Sorry for hijacking this "new iMac!" thread. I just meant to lament the likelihood that Apple's (apparently) quiet rollout of this new machine means Thunderbolt 3 and the Pro line will have to wait until next year.
It is not odd that Apple did not synchronise with the release of El Capitan. That makes sense. Ever since Tim Cook has taken over, the computer lines have been updated in waves. For example the iMac, they have been updated in increments. All the machines had processor upgrades earlier this year, then a few months later, a 27" 5K iMac was introduced. A few months later, a lower end 21" iMac was released for about $1,100. Now a 4K version of the 21" iMac. No real consistent thought here. The notebooks have really been updated in a haphazard manner as well. First the Macbook Air, then the 13 inch Macbook Pros, then a new Macbook and finally the 15 inch Macbook Pros. But they all do not have the same processors (13" vs 15" MBP). No real rhyme or reason. You would think an across the board upgrade all at the same time would be easier??? Who knows, not the Apple sales force if you ask them. So why should this announcement surprise anybody.
I've had similar thoughts, however Tim Cook and crew must be doing it for some reason. It certainly gets people like us paying attention to whats happening. The majority of the market doesn't know and couldn't care less.
I've had similar thoughts, however Tim Cook and crew must be doing it for some reason. [...]
Just changing technology and changing competition? Sometimes you can innovate and stay out in front, but other times you have to respond to the competition.
The Air line (LOL, no pun intended) seems like a response to competition from Google -- battery life, weight, durability, and so on. The Pro line is more about innovation -- Apple isn't really all that interested in the specs of the latest PC. It's about OS X and what it can do, and what software developers can do with it.
The consumer line -- iPad, iMac, MacBook -- is a bit about both, doing the most they can at their chosen price points. The 5K iMac, where Apple basically out-maneuvered everyone else, was about that. This new 4K iMac follows suit.
I wonder sometimes whether an "iMac Pro" is likely in a year or two. These two Retina iMacs (refreshed, with USB-C) stay as the low end, while even better display technology and Thunderbolt 3 appear in new "Pro" iMacs. The lineup would then be:
Let me keep it simple: I have been waiting forever for Apple to update its computers to Skylake CPUs. Other companies already have them shipping, some for months now.
Even though our office desperately needs some new iMacs, if no Skylake, NO SALE!
How about a standalone 4K 21inch or 24 inch monitor for us Mac Pro users?
Pure speculation, and honestly I doubt it, but it wouldn't be completely crazy to think there might be both a lower-end 4K 24" and a higher-end, larger 5K Thunderbolt "Pro" Display coming next year. Especially if they really are changing over to a new, improved LED phosphor material for backlighting, as rumored here:
I still tend to doubt this currently-rumored new iMac 4K will have the KSF phosphor material (assuming Apple is planning to use it). This feels like a sibling of the current iMac 5K, positioning them both for a long run as the rest of the all-in-one industry works to catch up.
Apple calls it "oxide TFT" (thin-film transistor),the oxide being the indium-gallium-zinc oxide of IGZO.
Look at the "Design" page of the 5K iMac brochure on the Apple web site, and/or watch the video with Dan Riccio.
The thing for us to keep in mind (I know it's hard) is that the iMac shell couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons unless there was the 30% reduction in power usage due to shrinking the wiring and transistor matrix backing the pixels by using "oxide" conductor material. This is why Apple spent hundreds of millions with Sharp to develop the production of this breakthrough in powering LCDs, and why they still don't have 4K or 5K standalone monitors, or retina Macbook Airs, etc.—short supply still.
So yes, it does matter that the 5K iMac was, and the 21.5" iMac will be, oxide TFT. If that doesn't mean IGZO, they they snuck another oxide in without anyone knowing. Unlikely.
That is a very interesting speculation. I'm not sure whether it couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons, but that is certainly feasible. Heat doesn't only impact logic board components. It also impacts the colors displayed. It's one of the reasons why you should allow your display to warm up before profiling it (for those who do so).
A 21.5" should in fact be easier. Density isn't any higher. They would use the same doubling in each dimension, as they have with every mac up to this point and several idevices. Keep in mind that regardless of whether Sharp is involved, LG still makes panels for Apple including the 27" 5K. This isn't going to change, given that they make virtually all IPS panels destined for this type of display. A number of the others (including Hitachi, which invented the technology) dropped out a long time ago.
I'm curious what you mean by "I know it's hard." I don't assume it's an actual dig on my post, but the context doesn't really explain it.
Comments
Next year has the potential to be a big one for Apple computers. Skylake, USB-C, and most likely redesigns for the iMac and MacBook Pro. I would imagine a 5K Thunderbolt display will be on the way due to Thunderbolt 3/Display Port 1.3. Being I don't need a 27" screen, I would like to see Apple bring back a smaller version (23 or 24 inches would be ideal) but not holding my breath.
Ha Ha!
Speaking of third party suppliers, USB-C peripherals are far and few between, and Thunderbolt 3 peripherals are non-existent, AFAIK. So as much as I'd like you to be right, I just can't see Apple using the iMac to introduce this tech. Sure, they could ship it with adapters, but I just don't see them wanting to do that.
There will be an event next year where Apple introduces the next generation of displays (better color) and Thunderbolt 3 into the Pro line. The first product in this next generation is already on the way, the iPad Pro. Remember the focus on color tech in that presentation -- a sign of things to come.
I seriously doubt Apple's put off upgrading their line of pro displays for the last 5 years because they were in search of better color.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
I'm pretty sure those high-end delays are because of TB3 bandwidth which will get here with Skylake. Once that's out the MBPs and MP I would expect to see a modern, 5K (or higher) external display from Apple.
I do believe it's all about the supply of IGZO at this point. No IGZO, no retina. Is that worth a refresh?
I don't think the 27" uses IGZO, not that it really matters.
No Skylake, no buy. Dudes.
There's a lot of us just holding onto old hardware. No reason to shell out cash for useless incremental changes.
I seriously doubt Apple's put off upgrading their line of pro displays for the last 5 years because they were in search of better color.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
"But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates."
Actually, yeah it does.
Apple calls it "oxide TFT" (thin-film transistor),the oxide being the indium-gallium-zinc oxide of IGZO.
Look at the "Design" page of the 5K iMac brochure on the Apple web site, and/or watch the video with Dan Riccio.
The thing for us to keep in mind (I know it's hard) is that the iMac shell couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons unless there was the 30% reduction in power usage due to shrinking the wiring and transistor matrix backing the pixels by using "oxide" conductor material. This is why Apple spent hundreds of millions with Sharp to develop the production of this breakthrough in powering LCDs, and why they still don't have 4K or 5K standalone monitors, or retina Macbook Airs, etc.—short supply still.
So yes, it does matter that the 5K iMac was, and the 21.5" iMac will be, oxide TFT. If that doesn't mean IGZO, they they snuck another oxide in without anyone knowing. Unlikely.
As much as I prefer a 24" iMac as well, I think it would effectively kill the 27" model.
21.5" is a tad small...reduce the bevel and give us 22.5" or 23".
23 inch would hit the sweet spot, just perfect to have the edges in your peripheral vision. The immersive experience of the 27 inch is too intimidating to me. I'd love to see the boundaries.
The 21 stopped being perfect when the 24 became the baseline across the industry. The 27"-35" are the large screens today.
To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't upgrade the Thunderbolt Display to modern specs when the Pro came out in late 2013. But to hamstring a new Mac Pro because of "better color" tech coming two years down the road doesn't really sound like how Cupertino operates.
Less than two years ago (December 2013), when the Mac Pro was released, the best they could have offered was a 4K monitor, like the $3600 32" Sharp that they still, to this day, carry in the (online) Apple Store for it. The 27" Dell 5K didn't ship until a year later, and Apple's 5K iMac forced Dell to lower its price even before it shipped.
When I talk about "better color" -- I'm talking about part of how they are going to market the next year's Pro line as the latest and greatest thing. I'm not saying it was a factor back in 2013 when they made the decision to not come out with their own large 4K Thunderbolt 2 Display along with the Mac Pro redesign.
As for a standalone Apple 5K, its price would have been deeply undercut by Dell shortly after it shipped. I also don't know if the Late 2013 MacBook Pro could have driven such a display. Apple sells a lot of Thunderbolt Displays to MacBook Pro owners -- a 5K display that only worked with the Mac Pro would be a non-starter, I would think.
Sorry for hijacking this "new iMac!" thread. I just meant to lament the likelihood that Apple's (apparently) quiet rollout of this new machine means Thunderbolt 3 and the Pro line will have to wait until next year.
It is not odd that Apple did not synchronise with the release of El Capitan. That makes sense. Ever since Tim Cook has taken over, the computer lines have been updated in waves. For example the iMac, they have been updated in increments. All the machines had processor upgrades earlier this year, then a few months later, a 27" 5K iMac was introduced. A few months later, a lower end 21" iMac was released for about $1,100. Now a 4K version of the 21" iMac. No real consistent thought here. The notebooks have really been updated in a haphazard manner as well. First the Macbook Air, then the 13 inch Macbook Pros, then a new Macbook and finally the 15 inch Macbook Pros. But they all do not have the same processors (13" vs 15" MBP). No real rhyme or reason. You would think an across the board upgrade all at the same time would be easier??? Who knows, not the Apple sales force if you ask them. So why should this announcement surprise anybody.
I've had similar thoughts, however Tim Cook and crew must be doing it for some reason. It certainly gets people like us paying attention to whats happening. The majority of the market doesn't know and couldn't care less.
I've had similar thoughts, however Tim Cook and crew must be doing it for some reason. [...]
Just changing technology and changing competition? Sometimes you can innovate and stay out in front, but other times you have to respond to the competition.
The Air line (LOL, no pun intended) seems like a response to competition from Google -- battery life, weight, durability, and so on. The Pro line is more about innovation -- Apple isn't really all that interested in the specs of the latest PC. It's about OS X and what it can do, and what software developers can do with it.
The consumer line -- iPad, iMac, MacBook -- is a bit about both, doing the most they can at their chosen price points. The 5K iMac, where Apple basically out-maneuvered everyone else, was about that. This new 4K iMac follows suit.
I wonder sometimes whether an "iMac Pro" is likely in a year or two. These two Retina iMacs (refreshed, with USB-C) stay as the low end, while even better display technology and Thunderbolt 3 appear in new "Pro" iMacs. The lineup would then be:
iPad, iPad Pro, iPad Air
MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air
iMac, iMac Pro
Mac Pro
Thunderbolt Pro Display
Let me keep it simple: I have been waiting forever for Apple to update its computers to Skylake CPUs. Other companies already have them shipping, some for months now.
Even though our office desperately needs some new iMacs, if no Skylake, NO SALE!
How about a standalone 4K 21inch or 24 inch monitor for us Mac Pro users?
Pure speculation, and honestly I doubt it, but it wouldn't be completely crazy to think there might be both a lower-end 4K 24" and a higher-end, larger 5K Thunderbolt "Pro" Display coming next year. Especially if they really are changing over to a new, improved LED phosphor material for backlighting, as rumored here:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/09/03/new-imac-displays-said-to-improve-color-saturation-via-led-phosphor-sales-could-reach-1m-this-quarter
I still tend to doubt this currently-rumored new iMac 4K will have the KSF phosphor material (assuming Apple is planning to use it). This feels like a sibling of the current iMac 5K, positioning them both for a long run as the rest of the all-in-one industry works to catch up.
Apple calls it "oxide TFT" (thin-film transistor),the oxide being the indium-gallium-zinc oxide of IGZO.
Look at the "Design" page of the 5K iMac brochure on the Apple web site, and/or watch the video with Dan Riccio.
The thing for us to keep in mind (I know it's hard) is that the iMac shell couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons unless there was the 30% reduction in power usage due to shrinking the wiring and transistor matrix backing the pixels by using "oxide" conductor material. This is why Apple spent hundreds of millions with Sharp to develop the production of this breakthrough in powering LCDs, and why they still don't have 4K or 5K standalone monitors, or retina Macbook Airs, etc.—short supply still.
So yes, it does matter that the 5K iMac was, and the 21.5" iMac will be, oxide TFT. If that doesn't mean IGZO, they they snuck another oxide in without anyone knowing. Unlikely.
That is a very interesting speculation. I'm not sure whether it couldn't handle a retina display for heat reasons, but that is certainly feasible. Heat doesn't only impact logic board components. It also impacts the colors displayed. It's one of the reasons why you should allow your display to warm up before profiling it (for those who do so).
A 21.5" should in fact be easier. Density isn't any higher. They would use the same doubling in each dimension, as they have with every mac up to this point and several idevices. Keep in mind that regardless of whether Sharp is involved, LG still makes panels for Apple including the 27" 5K. This isn't going to change, given that they make virtually all IPS panels destined for this type of display. A number of the others (including Hitachi, which invented the technology) dropped out a long time ago.
I'm curious what you mean by "I know it's hard." I don't assume it's an actual dig on my post, but the context doesn't really explain it.
Originally Posted by TenThousandThings
The lineup would then be:
iPad, iPad Pro, iPad Air
MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air
iMac, iMac Pro
Mac Pro
Thunderbolt Pro Display
Maybe, except I think you can kiss the Air goodbye. We might see a Skylake refresh at most; after that it's EOL.