Pro Display XDR update with Apple Silicon one of many in-development monitors

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited December 2022
Apple's next monitor releases will include an update to the Pro Display XDR, with multiple screens allegedly in development that will use Apple Silicon to improve performance.

Apple's Pro Display XDR
Apple's Pro Display XDR


When Apple introduced the Studio Display, it included an A13 chip to handle features such as Center Stage and Spatial Audio processing. For Apple's follow-up monitor launches, it will employ the same principle.

Apple has multiple new external displays in development, so says Mark Gurman in his "Power On" newsletter for Bloomberg, with the list including an update to the Pro Display XDR. While details of the model's specifications aren't mentioned, Gurman does admit it is possible the screen could ship after the launch of a new Apple Silicon Mac Pro, as the computer is further in development.

The Pro Display XDR launched in 2019 at the same time as the current Intel-based Mac Pro.

The new monitors will include Apple Silicon in some form, the newsletter continues, in the same fashion as the Studio Display. The chip handles processing of display-related tasks, taking part of the workload off the connected Mac, as well as enabling some extra features.

In the Studio Display, this included handling Center Stage, a feature that automatically zoomed and reframed the built-in webcam's video feed for FaceTime calls, so that the user was always in frame.

Earlier rumors about the Pro Display XDR successor propose it having a 7K resolution, and that it could use a 32-inch screen.

Along with a new Pro Display XDR, the Studio Display could be joined by the previously-rumored Studio Display Pro, which is speculated to have a 27-inch display using mini LED and ProMotion. However, while it was speculated in May to launch in October, that launch did not materialize, making early 2023 more plausible.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 9
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,808member
    It would be nice if Apple could just make a decent regular 4K display for around $1000. It doesn't need to have speakers, cameras, mics, etc. Just a simple nice 4K panel in an aluminum enclosure. 
    bjlawrence11watto_cobralkruppbobolicious
  • Reply 2 of 9
    macxpress said:
    It would be nice if Apple could just make a decent regular 4K display for around $1000. It doesn't need to have speakers, cameras, mics, etc. Just a simple nice 4K panel in an aluminum enclosure. 
    A thousand times this. My old LG Ultrafine 4Ks are dying. They won't hold brightness or refresh rate settings whenever they get put to sleep because they take too long to wake up and Mac OS gets confused.

    All I want at at this point is the 4.5K display from the M1 iMac in a standalone, metal enclosure. I'd buy 2. Today. And probably a third one later.
    macxpresswatto_cobralkrupptenthousandthings
  • Reply 3 of 9
    The Studio Display was a disappointment - to me, not because of the webcam and such, but because it wasn’t a “Liquid Retina…” micro-LED screen. Even at its 5K it would have beaten the XDR Pro Display with its finer luminance resolution. To me $1500 was a travesty to charge that much for a display based on the 5 year old iMac Pro/regular AIO systems screens.

    The next XDR Pro needs to be at least 8K to support the next generation of cinema production, so $5K for that would be logical. Then offer a 30” Liquid Retina with micro-LED for the “lesser” professionals. I’d personally love to see a 6K2.5K widescreen mini-LED display (similar to LG’s 5K2K display I own) for AE/PremierePro video/cinema production.
    watto_cobralkrupp
  • Reply 4 of 9
    6k 30 inch iMac would be awesome. 

    7-8k 32-36 inch Pro Display XDR with mini led and promotion would be fantastic as well. 

    Replace the beleaguered studio display with a mini led promotion version with an actual great webcam at the same price point. 

    Recipe for success. 
    lkrupp
  • Reply 5 of 9
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    macxpress said:
    It would be nice if Apple could just make a decent regular 4K display for around $1000. It doesn't need to have speakers, cameras, mics, etc. Just a simple nice 4K panel in an aluminum enclosure. 
    With none of that what would distinguish it from every other ‘decent regular 4K display’? Nothing, just the Apple logo and it would still be priced more than the others. That’s not how Apple operates. Why can’t you understand that after all these years? 
  • Reply 6 of 9
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    And read between the lines if this rumor is true. You can kiss a large screen iMac goodbye. It will be the Mini/Studio/Pro paradigm with a choice of monitors to suit.
    tenthousandthings
  • Reply 7 of 9
    lkrupp said:
    And read between the lines if this rumor is true. You can kiss a large screen iMac goodbye. It will be the Mini/Studio/Pro paradigm with a choice of monitors to suit.
    Yes, definitely.

    All three of Apple's current desktop displays are Retina: 218 pixels per inch: the 23.5" iMac; the 27" Studio Display; and the 32" Pro Display XDR. Only one of these is a standard resolution, the so-called "5K" which is precisely 4x 720P resolution.

    I think the Studio Display stays at the low end. Beyond that, maybe they go to Liquid Retina (254 pixels per inch) for the new ones? So at the high end, you get a 6x 720P (7680x4320, a.k.a. "8K") Liquid Retina at around 32 inches (basically 4x the MacBook Pro 16" but with a 16:9 aspect ratio, instead of 16:10). In the middle, the so-called "6K" Liquid Retina at around 28 inches (basically 4x the MacBook Pro 14" but with a 16:9 aspect ratio, instead of 16:10).
  • Reply 8 of 9
    lkrupp said:
    macxpress said:
    It would be nice if Apple could just make a decent regular 4K display for around $1000. It doesn't need to have speakers, cameras, mics, etc. Just a simple nice 4K panel in an aluminum enclosure. 
    With none of that what would distinguish it from every other ‘decent regular 4K display’? Nothing, just the Apple logo and it would still be priced more than the others. That’s not how Apple operates. Why can’t you understand that after all these years? 
    The 27" Thunderbolt display was $999 and high quality, with features like ambient light and color adjustment as well as build quality to 'distinguish' them...

    everymac.com/monitors/apple/thunderbolt/specs/apple-thunderbolt-display-27-inch-specs.html

    I have long asked if two displays @ 40" (curved) in 8K (pro) + 4K (tv-ish) offering 220/110 dpi resolutions, as well as suggested a revamp of the 27" display in 4K with USB-C would optimize the options...?
  • Reply 9 of 9
    lkrupp said:
    macxpress said:
    It would be nice if Apple could just make a decent regular 4K display for around $1000. It doesn't need to have speakers, cameras, mics, etc. Just a simple nice 4K panel in an aluminum enclosure. 
    With none of that what would distinguish it from every other ‘decent regular 4K display’? Nothing, just the Apple logo and it would still be priced more than the others. That’s not how Apple operates. Why can’t you understand that after all these years? 
    The 27" Thunderbolt display was $999 and high quality, with features like ambient light and color adjustment as well as build quality to 'distinguish' them...

    everymac.com/monitors/apple/thunderbolt/specs/apple-thunderbolt-display-27-inch-specs.html

    I have long asked if two displays @ 40" (curved) in 8K (pro) + 4K (tv-ish) offering 220/110 dpi resolutions, as well as suggested a revamp of the 27" display in 4K with USB-C would optimize the options...?
    I'll guess there is a workspace issue that affects sales once you start getting into extra large displays like 40-inch and even 36-inch. Not everyone has room for that. I have one desk where an extra large display could be employed, but there are two other workspaces where 32 inches is about the maximum. I also think 32 inches is the sweet spot for easy vertical rotation.

    So that's why I have speculated above about going to Liquid Retina (254 ppi) versus Retina (218 ppi), to keep the overall sizes down. Note that Dell's pioneering 8K is 31.5 inches and 280 ppi.

    $999 in 2011 dollars is more than $1299 in today's dollars. The Studio Display is priced more than slightly higher, but that's because of the included Apple Silicon. It's maybe overpriced by $100 in my book. That wasn't enough to stop me from buying it. The Thunderbolt Display was 2x 720P. The Studio Display is 4x 720P. I don't see Apple going backwards to "4K" (which is 3x 720P). They've invested in being ahead of the curve in terms of display quality. It's part of their brand. Even the iMac is now better than 4K. I think they expected the industry to try to keep up, but instead it has settled on 4K as the standard. I think Apple is thrilled with that. They still hold the premium-display position with a standard they introduced more than eight years ago! 
Sign In or Register to comment.