4 ms·

I read in one review that, in addition to the non-upgradeability of the new iMac Pro, there is one real coup de grace: the beautiful integrated screen is not ca

I read in one review that, in addition to the non-upgradeability of the new iMac Pro, there is one real coup de grace: the beautiful integrated screen is not capable of being used as an external display for any future computer. If true, doesn't this strike you all as truly unnecessarily egregious? Why should an iMac Pro stuffed full of chemicals to show beautiful 5K images, never be capable of being used as just a display? Is there a good reason Apple customers have to buy brand new displays? This is worth asking because, unlike the components in the new machine, the display will probably be state of the art for a while.

prawn 9y ago
Isn't this already true of recent iMacs? I don't think you have been able to use them as dumb displays for at least 1-2 generations?
- malchow 9y ago
  I think you're right. But just as insane in that situation. Think of the work necessary to prevent that screen from ever being used to display a nasty video signal from –– gasp! –– another computer. It's just such an insult to customers. Am I crazy here? And isn't Apple supposed to be a company of environmentalists?
  - userbinator 9y ago
    Think of the work necessary to prevent that screen from ever being used to display a nasty video signal from –– gasp! –– another computer. It's just such an insult to customers. They just didn't bother adding the circuitry for "video in", due to cost; there is no active opposition here. For many years now, you can buy "LVDS converter" boards[1] which will let you use any display panel as a monitor. I'm sure demand will mean such boards appear for the iMac Pro displays soon, if the existing ones aren't already compatible. I haven't looked too closely at this but the display might even be eDP or similar, which means only a physical converter is necessary if you want to connect a DP output to it. That's been done with iPad displays before[2] [1] http://www.ebay.com/bhp/lvds-hdmi http://www.ebay.com/bhp/lvds-hdmi [2] https://hackaday.com/2013/04/22/connect-a-retina-display-to-a-regular-computer/ https://hackaday.com/2013/04/22/connect-a-retina-display-to-...
  - wool_gather 9y ago
    I understood this to be a technical limitation of Thunderbolt 2: it can't push enough data fast enough to drive the 5k displays. One would have hoped that Thunderbolt 3 was sufficient. This is the key thing that's keeping me on my 2012 (!) iMac. I was really looking forward to the Pro until I heard this.
- felipelemos 9y ago
  The iMac G4 from 2002 had the same problem.
ec109685 9y ago
Wouldn’t it be more cost effective to sell your iMac Pro, buy a monitor and pocket the difference? Surely a computer + monitor is more valuable than just used monitor.
- macintux 9y ago
  I recall when the 25" iMac was first released, it was effectively the same price as a standalone monitor, although that calculation was probably somewhat influenced by the fact that only 1 or 2 such displays existed in the consumer space at the time.

prawn 9y ago

Isn't this already true of recent iMacs? I don't think you have been able to use them as dumb displays for at least 1-2 generations?

malchow 9y ago
I think you're right. But just as insane in that situation. Think of the work necessary to prevent that screen from ever being used to display a nasty video signal from –– gasp! –– another computer. It's just such an insult to customers. Am I crazy here? And isn't Apple supposed to be a company of environmentalists?
- userbinator 9y ago
  Think of the work necessary to prevent that screen from ever being used to display a nasty video signal from –– gasp! –– another computer. It's just such an insult to customers. They just didn't bother adding the circuitry for "video in", due to cost; there is no active opposition here. For many years now, you can buy "LVDS converter" boards[1] which will let you use any display panel as a monitor. I'm sure demand will mean such boards appear for the iMac Pro displays soon, if the existing ones aren't already compatible. I haven't looked too closely at this but the display might even be eDP or similar, which means only a physical converter is necessary if you want to connect a DP output to it. That's been done with iPad displays before[2] [1] http://www.ebay.com/bhp/lvds-hdmi http://www.ebay.com/bhp/lvds-hdmi [2] https://hackaday.com/2013/04/22/connect-a-retina-display-to-a-regular-computer/ https://hackaday.com/2013/04/22/connect-a-retina-display-to-...
- wool_gather 9y ago
  I understood this to be a technical limitation of Thunderbolt 2: it can't push enough data fast enough to drive the 5k displays. One would have hoped that Thunderbolt 3 was sufficient. This is the key thing that's keeping me on my 2012 (!) iMac. I was really looking forward to the Pro until I heard this.
felipelemos 9y ago
The iMac G4 from 2002 had the same problem.

ec109685 9y ago

Wouldn’t it be more cost effective to sell your iMac Pro, buy a monitor and pocket the difference? Surely a computer + monitor is more valuable than just used monitor.

macintux 9y ago
I recall when the 25" iMac was first released, it was effectively the same price as a standalone monitor, although that calculation was probably somewhat influenced by the fact that only 1 or 2 such displays existed in the consumer space at the time.