Apple Says It's Out of the Standalone Display Business (macrumors.com)

The launch and marketing push of the 27-inch 5K UltraFine Display made in partnership with LG all but confirms that Apple is out of the standalone display business. Previously, it was rumored Apple was working on its own branded Thunderbolt Display powered by an integrated GPU, but with the launch of LG's display it appears to indicate Apple gave up those plans. The Verge's Nilay Patel also confirms the news, tweeting: "Good notes by @jsnell. I can add that Apple told me it's out of standalone display biz." 9to5Mac reports: The two new LG displays, which will be available later this year, feature Thunderbolt 3 connectivity for an easy one-cable-solution for new MacBook owners. Apple will sell both displays, a 4K model for $699.95 and a 5K model for $1299.95, on its online store. Back in June, Apple officially discontinued its lone company-branded monitor, the Thunderbolt Display, after it had languished for a period of time without a substantial update. Apple's statement on the discontinuation made it appear as if it may be the last of the Apple-branded display, and this has been seemingly confirmed: "We're discontinuing the Apple Thunderbolt Display. It will be available through Apple.com, Apple's retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers while supplies last. There are a number of great third-party options available for Mac users," said an Apple spokesperson.

Comments

The margins are just too low

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't sell a monitor for $2K these days. Only the most dedicated suckers would buy it.

The old Thunderbolt Display just proved that the product line wasn't worth the trouble..

Re:The margins are just too low

[saloomy]

The Thunderbolt Display was a fantastic monitor, and sold at $1k. I bought two of them back in 2012 and they have served me well, functioning as my primary displays for years. I feel I certainly have had my use of them, and they are no where near the end of their useful life. They have Thunderbolt, USB, Gig-e ports, and pretty good speakers.

Besides, doing design work, programming, web design, and handling a massive amount of information, long code blocks, huge CSV files, etc... etc... $1K was really not a lot for this display. If you were to buy 2 displays and a mac pro to boot, you would be out maybe $6k. That setup would last you for at least 3 years, and Mac's keep going. Especially the desktops. To spend $2k/year on the tools that earn you a really good six-figure salary is pretty stellar.

I don't really understand why people complain about Apple's prices so much. Yes, they are more expensive when you compare the components bit-by-bit, but the whole package is a value proposition that I believe can't be beat. You never have to worry about drivers. Your stuff works perfectly together. Each piece, like the magic trackpad (and trust me, compared to a trackpad on some random PC Laptop, it is magic), or the displays, the backup to time-capsule... it all works so well together. Billing out at $150/hour, you really need to be productive, and not constantly work on being your own Sysadmin. That is who apple makes these devices for, since the high-end highly integrated workstation market pretty much collapsed. You used to be able to get workstations from Sun, etc. Not anymore. Now, only Apple make a truly workstation-class computer. Everyone else just assembles PCs and throws Windows on it.

It sucks to see them back away from that market. Maybe they feel the unit volume they spend is not worth the time, or the market has really caught up with the bar they set. You can still bank on the performance engineering they put into their systems. I remember reading an article a while ago, that benched a MacBook Pro as the fastest Windows Laptop (if you change the OS, obviously).

Re:The margins are just too low

[Bongo]

I like the point about not being your own sysadmin. If someone is willing to pay, I'll suggest a Mac laptop, simply because it'll be less hassle for them.

Much as I respect people's technical skills with fixing stuff, that time is wasted if the thing didn't need to break in the first place. And I say that as a guy who mostly admins a Mac shop, with other stuff where needed.

It's actually a problem I have with Siri on AppleTV and iPhone and now macOS. It fails more often than not. For me it somewhat ruins Apple's brand, in the critical "do I feel good relating to this device" dept. Siri more often makes me feel stupid for even trying.

At some point, I think it would be fair to say that Apple isn't just about putting a brain in a box, it is about also having great tits and arse.

IOW, the device is useful but also aesthetically a joy. But Siri adds a stupid annoying personality to it.

 

"all but confirms"

[tlambert]

"all but confirms"

So in other words, it's not confirmed, it's just speculation and rumor, right?

And nothng of value was lost.

[SeaFox]

Apple's monitors (featuring panels obviously not made by them) were nice, but not nice enough to justify their patented Apple-brand pricing. They weren't kept up to date technology-wise either compared to competitors.

The strongest reason to get an Apple display for your Mac was so it wouldn't be connected to a monitor that said "Dell" on it.

Re:And nothng of value was lost.

[thecombatwombat]

I disagree. I'm typing this on a Fedora desktop attached to an Apple Cinema Display. I've had this 27 inch cinema display since whenever they came out six or seven years ago. It's still going strong. If you wanted a large monitor you'll use for a long time, it was a great option. Mine still has great picture, awfully good speakers, a web cam, useful ports, the best laptop connectivity around, and a metal and glass frame that's really nice. It cost around $1000 but considering how long it's lasted and probably will last yet, I have no regrets.

I figure that's the real reason they're getting out. Few people buy them, and they last forever. I think I'm on my fourth iPhone in the time I've owned this monitor, and it will probably outlast my current one..

Apple Abandons Yet Another Market Segment.

[Bing Tsher E]

How soon before they announce they will no longer make Desktop or Desksite workstation boxes?

They nearly already have. The Mac Pro is a boutique computer in a novelty case.

They're making fewer MacBooks lately, too. Mobile Gadgets are where the money is, it seems.

That's what Wall Street often refers to Apple as these days. "Apple, the gadget maker..." Check it out, you see stock-market oriented journalists referring to Apple as a gadget maker all the time.

Re:Apple Abandons Yet Another Market Segment.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Apple makes more revenue and profit on its services (which are driven by iOS devices) than it does on the Mac line. Macs are around 10% of the total revenue stream for Apple, and it's a shrinking stream at that.

finally, 30 bit color panels

[maynard]

I have confirmed that 30-Bit color is working on a 27-inch iMac. A 16-Bit greyscale ramp was used to test. Applications which support this capability are quite sparse. At the time of my testing Preview worked and Pixelmator did not. It is likely that applications need to optin to use this feature. The standard 24-Bit pipeline is indicated with Pixel Depth: 32-Bit Color (ARGB8888). New 30-Bit color pipelines will show Pixel Depth: 30-Bit Color (ARGB2101010) or Pixel Depth: CGSThirtyBitColor. I have also been able to get 30-Bit color working on my Dell U2713H via DisplayPort. Support seemed sparse and intermittent in earlier versions, but as of 10.11.3 everything works well in my experience.

http://www.astramael.com/

The apple website notes these LG panels are P3 color gamut compliant. Which is a smaller color space than Adobe RGB, but probably sufficient for 10bit per channel. While the OS has supported 10 bit since a recent update to El Capitan, there are almost no Mac applications that make use of this. Unlike on Windows, where 10 bit color support and display panels have been available for several years. And note, the latest MacBook Pro panel still doesn't support real 10 bit. And if you want to use wide color with a secondary panel, you'll need to buy a laptop with a secondary GPU.

On the PC side, it's much easier to get the right hardware and get Adobe tools to display a wide color space. Apple is still far behind on what has become absolutely necessary for photographers and filmmakers.

Apple has made this tradeoff before

[laird]

Apple's done this many times before. The introduce Apple-branded products (printers, monitors, digital camera, networking, etc.) where they do so to make a dramatic improvement over the state of the art, then they're willing to kill off their Apple-branded products in order to get third parties to support Apple.

For example, Apple's LaserWriter was the first consumer networked printer, with Postscript, and they also had a highly profitable line of lower-end printers. Apple killed off their entire line of printers because they got all the major printer manufacturers to support the Mac, so even though it cost Apple $1B/year in printer sales revenue, broader industry support ultimately benefitted the Mac platform's growth.

Apple introduced the first easy to use consumer digital camera, which triggered competitive innovation in the industry, which was Apple's goal, after which they killed their camera product and sold partner cameras.

Heck, they had the first cheaply and easily networked computer, and they killed off their proprietary technology in favor of Ethernet as soon as it was possible. Same with USB replacing their proprietary keyboard and mouse connectors.

They just replaced their Thunderbolt with USB (specifically, USB-C with the latest USB bandwidth), now that it's finally fast enough to drive monitors well.

I'm impressed that Apple is willing to innovate ahead of the marketplace, and then to kill off their innovations when, years later, the marketplace catches up. Even more, Apple usually actively works to advance the state of the art in order to be able to kill off their proprietary innovations, because it's ultimately best for customers.