For the market it would be aimed at...it doesn't matter how much it costs. It wouldn't be aimed at a consumer even though they will be bitching up a storm about how expensive it is.
you take yourself too seriously.
No, I'm just realistic. Too many here live in a fantasyland and then bitch and whine when their fantasy didn't come true. You included!
DisplayPort 1.4 has a max resolution of 7680x4320 at 60Hz.
So with that resolution DisplayPort 1.4 could potentially go up to 8K. Too bad we are going up to 6K next. Would any existing eGPUs support a 6K monitor? How about the "BlackMagic eGPU Pro"? Since Apple helped make that eGPU, and Apple knew 6K was coming, perhaps it's capable of 6K?
A lot of them will support that. It just depends of how. These GPUs support two to three 4K displays now. With DisplayPort 1.4, it shouldn’t be a problem to support one 6k and one 4K display together.
Well, I was saying that these new Mac Pros would be upgradable. But for some reason, there are people who don’t understand that modular means upgradable, however it’s done.
my questions have to do with what Apple is waiting for here. Is it PCI 4 (no, we won’t see PCI 5 until at least late 2020). Is it TB 4, considering that the next TB upgrade is running somewhat late. I expect 60Gb/s for the next version. Remember that intel said that in a decade we would have TB 100Gb/s. I hope that continues to be the goal, even if the timing is off by a couple of years.
otherwise, I can’t understant what the long wait is all about. If it isn’t for new tech that’s not quite available yet, as DisplayPort 1.4 wasn’t, then what is it?
Exactly - will this be yet another proprietary 'bag of hurt' from Apple like the 5K displays ?
My vote would be for 40" 4K @ 110 dpi and 40" 8k at 220 dpi pro retina - this would tie in with cinema, thunderbolt, scaled retina, apple tv 4k (8k?) and so much more... After using the former (40" 4k) I find 27" anything surprisingly ineffective and inefficient in comparison.
I look forward to an effective upgrade to the 17" mbp, hopefully @ 4k...
...and please a mini that has a discrete gpu to match the upgraded cpu, and all with flexible internal industry standard upgradable storage & ram options... 'Pro' computers 'for the rest of us'...?
I guess time will tell...
The display sounds like Apple is using the same DPI from their 5K display and applying it to a 31.6” monitor, which will end up to be pretty to close to 6000x3000 pixels.
The rumored 31.6” monitor is a rather precise number. Sounds like Kuo found who is making the display, if true.
...exactly - is this simply more of the same proprietary incompatibility with the rest of the planet...?
While it will probably be connected by the not-proprietary Thunderbolt 3, DisplayPort 1.4 has a max resolution of 7680x4320 at 60Hz.
The last proprietary connector on an Apple display was ADC.
"A 6K3K display refers to standard 6K resolution of 6,144 x 3,072
which at a 31.6-inch diagonal size will yield a pixel density of roughly
217 ppi."
So scaled to other Apple monitors (Cinema/Thunderbolt) @ ~50% (roughly 110dpi size if 220 res) will the 31.5" size only be an effective 3k monitor @ 3072 x 1536 ... ?
At 4K scaling does that represent only ~175 dpi resolution, and for those migrating a 5K workflow even less ?
When I use the terms proprietary incompatibility it includes scaling and working with others like the TB Display, less than 3 years out of production.
Would it be useful to some to be able to connect more than one computer, and an Apple TV as well?
Why I stiil ask if both 4K & 8K options in larger physical size makes more sense ?
This monitor needs to be WIDE IMHO if it's aimed at pros. That way you can have one monitor on your desk instead of two. Supporting multiple inputs on the two halves would be very compelling as well.
I was a big fan of the iMac Pro but very disappointed they didn't make it widescreen... I thought that would have been a nice separation between the consumer and professional line.
This monitor needs to be WIDE IMHO if it's aimed at pros. That way you can have one monitor on your desk instead of two. Supporting multiple inputs on the two halves would be very compelling as well.
I was a big fan of the iMac Pro but very disappointed they didn't make it widescreen... I thought that would have been a nice separation between the consumer and professional line.
For the market it would be aimed at...it doesn't matter how much it costs. It wouldn't be aimed at a consumer even though they will be bitching up a storm about how expensive it is.
It still needs to be within the scope of reason for small businesses and individuals trying to make some kind of living working from home as a one-person business.
For the market it would be aimed at...it doesn't matter how much it costs. It wouldn't be aimed at a consumer even though they will be bitching up a storm about how expensive it is.
It still needs to be within the scope of reason for small businesses and individuals trying to make some kind of living working from home as a one-person business.
the iMac pro was not.
The iMac Pro is a computer, not just a high-end display. Two totally different things here.
For the market it would be aimed at...it doesn't matter how much it costs. It wouldn't be aimed at a consumer even though they will be bitching up a storm about how expensive it is.
It still needs to be within the scope of reason for small businesses and individuals trying to make some kind of living working from home as a one-person business.
the iMac pro was not.
The iMac Pro is a computer, not just a high-end display. Two totally different things here.
I am talking about the costs for equipment at a so-called “professional” level of functionality.
Since Thunderbolt 3 comes from the motherboard, is it such a good idea to use as your main display connection instead of DP or HDMI which can come directly from the GPU?
The Thunderbolt protocol encapsulates DisplayPort- so any display you hook up to a TB3 port is indeed using the GPU (MacBook Pros *only* have TB3 ports, so it'd be a bummer t'were that not the case). In fact because TB3 uses DP1.4 those ports can drive higher resolution displays than say the HDMI 2.0 port on the new Mac mini (5k vs. 4k).
For the market it would be aimed at...it doesn't matter how much it costs. It wouldn't be aimed at a consumer even though they will be bitching up a storm about how expensive it is.
It still needs to be within the scope of reason for small businesses and individuals trying to make some kind of living working from home as a one-person business.
the iMac pro was not.
Exactly why I ask about ~110 dpi 4K /8K (scaled retina) options - allow those on a budget into full sized workflow... Apple usually has very good reasons for what they do, yet like the mini without a discrete GPU questioned by so many, do questions often remain without a rationale or marketing push...? Would a BTO Vega 16/20 in the new mini offer a pro mac alternative to the HP Z2 for example ? If not, why not...? Of course this thread is all based on rumour... https://www8.hp.com/us/en/workstations/z2mini.html
A new upgradable Mac Pro is too late. Many professionals have given up on Apple's pro line, as the company focused more and more on consumers and prosumers.
Death of Pro products - xserve (killing this, harmed the 1U render farm) . I used to run a render farm using these 1Us . Also another VFX company with 500 artists used 1U supermicros with PCoIP cards to display their linux/Windows workstations to Vancouver. Not having a 1U also hampered the ability for PCoIP options for VFX houses. - xsan - xraid - MacPro , upgradable graphics card silver chassis with 4 bays - MacOSX server - Aperture (killing this was fine and ceding this market to Adobe) - The debacle from FCP 3 to FCPX (they didn't listen to their pro customers when removing features in the first iterations). Many move to Avid or Adobe because of this. - Apple Cinema Display. Not replacing it with a Pro display that can use a Thunderbolt3 bus, have 10/1 gigabit ethernet (pseudo-docking station) Not having a matte display option for professionals. Lack of fine control (RGB sliders) on the hardware monitor to color calibrate, not just in software.
Speaking from experience from an all Apple VFX shop in 2010-2012. After that it was hard to convince ANY VFX shop to be all Apple. It was nearly impossible.
All that is true, but many professionals are also sticking with Apple. I run the creative production department at a major corporation and we are upgrading all of our 5K iMacs to iMac Pros for our video studio. They are working out great and I know our editors will love having some 6K monitors to work Davinci Resolve and Premier. I’m not saying that what we do is on par with the VFX companies that you worked at, but there are a lot of professional studios where these products are going to be a great fit. We also work with a lot of outside vendors and they all carry MacBook Pros to run the video trucks and edit on the go. I’ve yet to see anyone carrying anything but a MacBook at a prepro. That said, Apple got off its a** just in time, as even we were contemplating moving to PC recently given the disaster of the trash can Mac Pro and the inexcusable stagnation of the Mac line in general until the last couple of years.
- xserve (killing this, harmed the 1U render farm) . I used to run a render farm using these 1Us . Also another VFX company with 500 artists used 1U supermicros with PCoIP cards to display their linux/Windows workstations to
Nobody is stupid enough to build a render farm out of Xserves, that's never been true.
Comments
A lot of them will support that. It just depends of how. These GPUs support two to three 4K displays now. With DisplayPort 1.4, it shouldn’t be a problem to support one 6k and one 4K display together.
my questions have to do with what Apple is waiting for here. Is it PCI 4 (no, we won’t see PCI 5 until at least late 2020). Is it TB 4, considering that the next TB upgrade is running somewhat late. I expect 60Gb/s for the next version. Remember that intel said that in a decade we would have TB 100Gb/s. I hope that continues to be the goal, even if the timing is off by a couple of years.
otherwise, I can’t understant what the long wait is all about. If it isn’t for new tech that’s not quite available yet, as DisplayPort 1.4 wasn’t, then what is it?
the iMac pro was not.
https://www8.hp.com/us/en/workstations/z2mini.html
Nobody is stupid enough to build a render farm out of Xserves, that's never been true.