Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
I run a corporate video department. We have reference monitors, etc. so I get who the new Apple monitor is aimed at why it costs what it does. However, I agree with the other posters that Apple should have come out with a range of monitors that included the new high-end one, but also a reintroduction of their 24” and 27” displays that are aimed at business users (as well as home users and prosumers) that don’t need the very best monitor, but still need something reliable with great color and Apple’s design and build quality.
I know the question becomes “why don’t you buy a good third-party monitor”? Well obviously that is what we have been doing since Apple discontinued their monitors, and the results have been pretty mixed to unsatisfactory. Despite researching reviews and specs, we have had difficulty getting the same color calibration results that we achieved with Apple’s Cinema and Thunderbolt displays, and still achieve easily with the built-in iMac/iMac Pro displays. In addition, nearly all of our users have two monitors. It used to be a no-brained to order an iMac and an Apple display to go with it as a second-monitor and easily match color across the span. Now this is a huge problem.
Could you list some of the reference monitors that compare to the XDR? I've heard about the high-end Sony's and Eizo's but know nothing about them or this market.
Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
He wants a cheap monitor with an Apple logo on it. Not going to happen.
Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
He wants a cheap monitor with an Apple logo on it. Not going to happen.
Apple have sold displays for less than $5000 previously.
Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
He wants a cheap monitor with an Apple logo on it. Not going to happen.
Apple have sold displays for less than $5000 previously.
Yes, they have. Much lower resolution. How many people want another 1920x1080p display for $1,000?
I run a corporate video department. We have reference monitors, etc. so I get who the new Apple monitor is aimed at why it costs what it does. However, I agree with the other posters that Apple should have come out with a range of monitors that included the new high-end one, but also a reintroduction of their 24” and 27” displays that are aimed at business users (as well as home users and prosumers) that don’t need the very best monitor, but still need something reliable with great color and Apple’s design and build quality.
I know the question becomes “why don’t you buy a good third-party monitor”? Well obviously that is what we have been doing since Apple discontinued their monitors, and the results have been pretty mixed to unsatisfactory. Despite researching reviews and specs, we have had difficulty getting the same color calibration results that we achieved with Apple’s Cinema and Thunderbolt displays, and still achieve easily with the built-in iMac/iMac Pro displays. In addition, nearly all of our users have two monitors. It used to be a no-brained to order an iMac and an Apple display to go with it as a second-monitor and easily match color across the span. Now this is a huge problem.
Could you list some of the reference monitors that compare to the XDR? I've heard about the high-end Sony's and Eizo's but know nothing about them or this market.
I don’t know if they are comparable per se, but we use Flanders Scientific.
I run a corporate video department. We have reference monitors, etc. so I get who the new Apple monitor is aimed at why it costs what it does. However, I agree with the other posters that Apple should have come out with a range of monitors that included the new high-end one, but also a reintroduction of their 24” and 27” displays that are aimed at business users (as well as home users and prosumers) that don’t need the very best monitor, but still need something reliable with great color and Apple’s design and build quality.
I know the question becomes “why don’t you buy a good third-party monitor”? Well obviously that is what we have been doing since Apple discontinued their monitors, and the results have been pretty mixed to unsatisfactory. Despite researching reviews and specs, we have had difficulty getting the same color calibration results that we achieved with Apple’s Cinema and Thunderbolt displays, and still achieve easily with the built-in iMac/iMac Pro displays. In addition, nearly all of our users have two monitors. It used to be a no-brained to order an iMac and an Apple display to go with it as a second-monitor and easily match color across the span. Now this is a huge problem.
Oh, come on. You’re expecting me to believe that the NEC graphics line isn’t good enough? Or the Eizo? Please, those are used in graphics departments everywhere. I’ve used them.
i’m not denying that a monitor in aluminum with the Apple logo isn’t appealing, for the purpose of marketing when clients come calling.
There is no need to be snarky. But to answer your question what I liked about the earlier Apple monitors is that it made the purchase decision easy. As I said I could just spec an iMac with Thunderbolt Display to our purchasing department and be confident that we would get a workstation where I could calibrate both displays to match each other. Now it is always a question as to which monitor we should get to go with it. And as I mentioned in another post we use Flanders Scientific for the guys doing color grading. But no everyone needs those, including my photo retouching stations. I was just talking to our post department and even they said that they don’t need the XDR monitors.
I know and i agree that the Apple XDR is something different from the monitor presented here; it is something so specific that if you do not need it, you do not understand its value.
The problem is that the online press, and even a bit Apple itself, alimented the ambiguity, presenting the Mac Pro and the teh XDR together as if the XDR is the preferred monitor for the new Mac Pro. It is not, it is a tool for professionals in visual arts.
I know and i agree that the Apple XDR is something different from the monitor presented here; it is something so specific that if you do not need it, you do not understand its value.
The problem is that the online press, and even a bit Apple itself, alimented the ambiguity, presenting the Mac Pro and the teh XDR together as if the XDR is the preferred monitor for the new Mac Pro. It is not, it is a tool for professionals in visual arts.
I run a corporate video department. We have reference monitors, etc. so I get who the new Apple monitor is aimed at why it costs what it does. However, I agree with the other posters that Apple should have come out with a range of monitors that included the new high-end one, but also a reintroduction of their 24” and 27” displays that are aimed at business users (as well as home users and prosumers) that don’t need the very best monitor, but still need something reliable with great color and Apple’s design and build quality.
I know the question becomes “why don’t you buy a good third-party monitor”? Well obviously that is what we have been doing since Apple discontinued their monitors, and the results have been pretty mixed to unsatisfactory. Despite researching reviews and specs, we have had difficulty getting the same color calibration results that we achieved with Apple’s Cinema and Thunderbolt displays, and still achieve easily with the built-in iMac/iMac Pro displays. In addition, nearly all of our users have two monitors. It used to be a no-brained to order an iMac and an Apple display to go with it as a second-monitor and easily match color across the span. Now this is a huge problem.
Oh, come on. You’re expecting me to believe that the NEC graphics line isn’t good enough? Or the Eizo? Please, those are used in graphics departments everywhere. I’ve used them.
i’m not denying that a monitor in aluminum with the Apple logo isn’t appealing, for the purpose of marketing when clients come calling.
There is no need to be snarky. But to answer your question what I liked about the earlier Apple monitors is that it made the purchase decision easy. As I said I could just spec an iMac with Thunderbolt Display to our purchasing department and be confident that we would get a workstation where I could calibrate both displays to match each other. Now it is always a question as to which monitor we should get to go with it. And as I mentioned in another post we use Flanders Scientific for the guys doing color grading. But no everyone needs those, including my photo retouching stations. I was just talking to our post department and even they said that they don’t need the XDR monitors.
I’m being a bit snarky because you’re saying something that makes no sense. You do not need a monitor with an Apple logo. In the price class that most will be buying, the alternatives are perfectly viable, and I find it hard to believe that you don’t know that.
i don’t know the class of work you people are producing, so I can’t say whether or not they need a real broadcast, or motion picture quality monitor. But if they say they don’t need the new XDR, then it’s clear that they do not. Which again brings us back to Eizo and NEC. Those are two of the most popular, moderate priced professional graphics monitors on the market, and both are VERY popular in that space. You could standardize on one model of those and be just as happy.
Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
He wants a cheap monitor with an Apple logo on it. Not going to happen.
Apple have sold displays for less than $5000 previously.
Yes, they have. Much lower resolution. How many people want another 1920x1080p display for $1,000?
The Thunderbolt Display was 2560×1440, and I'm sure Apple could make improvements to it and still meet a $1,000 price point.
Can we all agree that it would be nice if Apple had another display model for those of us who do not need the pro features, and don't want to pay the pro price?
Hopefully that'll come along soon enough, and maybe will reap some benefits from what Apple has learned by making the Pro Display XDR.
This is a absolutely what Apple should do. They can pander all they want to the pro level designers who will eat up the XDR, but Apple will not make a lot of money on the XDR, as 99% of those non-Pros looking for a nice 5K or above monitor will not buy the XDR. For the rest of us 99%, we need Apple to release a non-Pro 5K monitor. I would love a 27” 5K monitor in an aluminum enclosure for $1,000, which Apple can absolutely deliver with a 35% margin built in. And no, I don’t want to buy cheap plastic crap that other vendors are offering.
Pander? Are you serious? Pander would be better described as someone like you, not professionals who actually need these products. You want a cheaper monitor? There are a lot available. Buy one and be done with it. You want what you think is the prestige of having a monitor with an Apple logo on it, but don’t want to pay for it. Why should Apple accommodate That? Why should they pander to you?
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
He wants a cheap monitor with an Apple logo on it. Not going to happen.
Apple have sold displays for less than $5000 previously.
Yes, they have. Much lower resolution. How many people want another 1920x1080p display for $1,000?
The Thunderbolt Display was 2560×1440, and I'm sure Apple could make improvements to it and still meet a $1,000 price point.
Ok, you’re right, it was a bit higher. But it’s really annoying when people are so sure that a company can do something for the price they want it for. You don’t know what Apple can do. Apple is not going to build a cheap plastic monitor. Whatever they do, if they do it, is going to be something above the aesthetic offering of the competition, and that alone will have it cost more.
i also don’t understand the big deal is about an Apple branded monitor, unless Apple makes something special that competitors can’t, or won’t make. When there were no ?Thunderbolt monitors, Apple’s was unique, and therefor, of value (though a lot of people complained it too, was too expensive). But that’s no longer true, and apparently, Apple feels that offering LG’s models, which Apple contributed to, is sufficient.
when Apple does, or does not, release a product, they’re talking to us through that introduction, or non introduction. When they sell other companies products in their retail operations, they’re talking to us as well. They’re telling us what they think they can make and sell in sufficient numbers to make what they think is a worthwhile product, or not.
when LG came out thithe there recent monitors, Apple said that these are the monitors they recommend, and that they would sell them. Now maybe they’re a topgap measure until they come out with their own, but why the delay? These are pretty good, fairly high performance models. If you want better, I’ll say again, that bothe NEC and Eizo make excellent, well selling graphics monitors that are fairly modest in prices for what they do. Eizo has more expensive models too, up to the new Apple monitor pricing.
so why again do we need another monitor in the class with the Apple name on it, because I really don’t understand what that need is.
Comments
and as if you actually know what you’re talking about when it comes to manufacturing and oricing products. Get over it.
Maurizio
Maurizio
i don’t know the class of work you people are producing, so I can’t say whether or not they need a real broadcast, or motion picture quality monitor. But if they say they don’t need the new XDR, then it’s clear that they do not. Which again brings us back to Eizo and NEC. Those are two of the most popular, moderate priced professional graphics monitors on the market, and both are VERY popular in that space. You could standardize on one model of those and be just as happy.
i also don’t understand the big deal is about an Apple branded monitor, unless Apple makes something special that competitors can’t, or won’t make. When there were no ?Thunderbolt monitors, Apple’s was unique, and therefor, of value (though a lot of people complained it too, was too expensive). But that’s no longer true, and apparently, Apple feels that offering LG’s models, which Apple contributed to, is sufficient.
when Apple does, or does not, release a product, they’re talking to us through that introduction, or non introduction. When they sell other companies products in their retail operations, they’re talking to us as well. They’re telling us what they think they can make and sell in sufficient numbers to make what they think is a worthwhile product, or not.
when LG came out thithe there recent monitors, Apple said that these are the monitors they recommend, and that they would sell them. Now maybe they’re a topgap measure until they come out with their own, but why the delay? These are pretty good, fairly high performance models. If you want better, I’ll say again, that bothe NEC and Eizo make excellent, well selling graphics monitors that are fairly modest in prices for what they do. Eizo has more expensive models too, up to the new Apple monitor pricing.
so why again do we need another monitor in the class with the Apple name on it, because I really don’t understand what that need is.