3 ms·

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 sig

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.