Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

5k Retina iMac

Oh, hi Jeff, you posted while I was writing, that last post wasn't aimed at you.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Funny thing is that TB was originally pitched with the ability to stack and bond connections into higher aggregate bandwidth. They did it again with TB2, but have never enabled production software/ firmware to allow it. Thunderbolt 3 is supposed to use a different connector, moving away from the mini-DisplayPort connector. Even rumors saying that they may take another look at the universal, reversible USB interface. Connection of DisplayPort and legacy TB devices can be made with simple, inexpensive passive adaptors.
Click to expand...

Ohh great, not another interface change. I thought there was something fishy a while back. Apparently the USB group knocked them back before, and they weren't allowed to use it. They now have a new USB interface socket, so maybe that is something related to this. USB has been a thorn for years, it stalled FireWire's penetration and now TB.


As far as display connections go, I would really like to see an interface spec that is future-thinking. There is no reason why HDMI 2.0 could not have been this. Go ahead and design an interface that is capable of supporting 360Gbps for 18K resolution in full 3D at 240Hz paired with 64 audio channels. Of course display and component manufacturers don't have to utilize all that bandwidth and all those features, but make it so they all play within the designated sandbox of that specification. Then in 15 years from now when 8K TV's are normal, no one has to swap out cables and matrix switching hardware and AV receivers may not offer all the new bells and whistles, but they would still be able to route and pass compatible signals.
Click to expand...

Yep, we know, but my rule is, if somebody else is doing it let them. TB will do what I want and I can leverage device support and parts, while I concentrate on other things. I'm looking into wireless and some new techniques to maybe produce a new low overhead protocol in future that can make better use of airways. Hmm, my spellchecker is down, it is after 2am, sorry for the spelling folks.

You could start an open specification to use TB like this sandbox, then it would be up to hardware manufacturers to use TB like this.


IMO, DisplayPort has most of it right in terms of being able to carry multiple video and audio streams over one interface. The problem is they only beef up their spec once display and component hardware demand it. Instead, they should be designing a spec to aspire to. Go the extra mile and design active electronics like Thunderbolt or RedMere that can be incorporated as optional to provide long-run cabling or transport over alternative infrastructure like UTP cable installed everywhere.
Click to expand...

I hear you, just one of those things. But what is to stop say Nividua and a few display.manufacturers from using TB anyway they like, with whatever colorspace, bit depth etc they want. Once somebody specs this and people start using it, the official standard will probably be more motivated to make their own version. In my opinion, HDMI 3 should be TB based.

Using interfaces and cabling as a means to pace market development, which is what has been going on for some time now, holds back innovation and competition. It becomes a structured advance that is dictated by the big few who always seem to be in control of the new interface specs. If that factor is removed from the equation, then competition should increase and more disruptive technology will emerge.
Click to expand...

That is right, having an open optional spec like above would enable anybody to complete, probably as an national spec on Chinese equipment.


And don't get me started on remote control and automation systems. That whole industry and sub culture is an insult to human intelligence and common decency. With a business model that still reeks of 1970's photocopier salesmen and custom setups that should have died along with the 8 foot satellite dishes.
Click to expand...

Isnt there some remote standard in DLNA? I agree, been interested in this for a while.

How about WiFi? My WiFi has to drop on my phone to use WiFi direct or mobile hotspot and the configuration issues. A real mess, it just doesn't work easily. It annoys me I'm going have to wade through so much documentation on these competing standards (not to mention DLNA docs and security standards) to write wireless firmware and system layers, I could write an whole OS in that time. I'm looking at side stepping this.
 
Standards to serve who exactly...

Standards to serve who exactly...

Jeff Kilgroe said:
(snip) As far as display connections go, I would really like to see an interface spec that is future-thinking. There is no reason why HDMI 2.0 could not have been this. Go ahead and design an interface that is capable of supporting 360Gbps for 18K resolution in full 3D at 240Hz paired with 64 audio channels. Of course display and component manufacturers don't have to utilize all that bandwidth and all those features, but make it so they all play within the designated sandbox of that specification. Then in 15 years from now when 8K TV's are normal, no one has to swap out cables and matrix switching hardware and AV receivers may not offer all the new bells and whistles, but they would still be able to route and pass compatible signals.

IMO, DisplayPort has most of it right in terms of being able to carry multiple video and audio streams over one interface. The problem is they only beef up their spec once display and component hardware demand it. Instead, they should be designing a spec to aspire to. Go the extra mile and design active electronics like Thunderbolt or RedMere that can be incorporated as optional to provide long-run cabling or transport over alternative infrastructure like UTP cable installed everywhere.

Using interfaces and cabling as a means to pace market development, which is what has been going on for some time now, holds back innovation and competition. It becomes a structured advance that is dictated by the big few who always seem to be in control of the new interface specs. If that factor is removed from the equation, then competition should increase and more disruptive technology will emerge. (snip)
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. I would add that there is also an environmental benefit available if we can stop the constant cable/connector replacement madness. The CE companies seem to believe that if they give the consumer "too much" then they'll stop buying new devices to replace the old ones - changing the interconnect standards frequently appears to be an extension of that strategy. I guess actually making better products is too much work…

Cheers - #19
 
Mike Garrick said:
So the big question for a non techno guy like me. Will this new iMac deliver similar/lesser or better performance than the "trashcan" with dragon footage for editing ?
Click to expand...

Best performance is still a 2010 12 core tower with a Titan - beats any trashcan and costs less than any of these. Trashcan is ludicrously overpriced.
 
He, he. Blair. They (whoever and nobody in specific) don't want to retool or make new production lines until sales falls off and sell cheap stuff at maximum profit, which just leads to crashes in the market from manipulation. It is an nearly century old deliberate policy by market manipulators of designed obsolescence. See the video "Addicted to Money" I think. They do this instead of giving what is possible at the moment for a premium price. A $100k 80-100 inch 8k TV would have been acceptable in 2007 (maybe they could have gone 16k for that price). A 4k TV for $20k and such forth, 2k for $4k, real markets (the sizes at 4k and 2k for the price can be different).

As far as official law and government policy though, this is not free and open market, not level playing field, Any contract that statistically results in less product advancement/availability for more price is worth taking to advocacy and government groups for possible challenge and prosecution.

We should have had the mode infrastructure for professional level use at whatever resolution years ago, and if anything doesn't line up several years down the track as physical signalling standards are developed, it can be changed again, but always with the potential not to be changed. Things are that simple, because the market is for some reason not enough authentic.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Running a single 5K display is the same as running FOUR 2560x1440 displays. That is going to need 40Gbps of bandwidth -- that is TWO Thunderbolt 2 ports, or TWO DisplayPort v1.2 ports as the case may be.

The 2013 Mac Pro will in fact run the Dell 5K monitor that should start shipping next month. I'm getting conflicting information though about TB2 and DP1.2 data allocation... It takes two TB2 ports out of commission for sure, but it may actually cancel out 4 of them depending on when and where the DP bandwidth enters and exits the pipeline. There's 6 ports, but driven by 3 headers, each header capable of 20Gbps. Technically less in terms of PCIe bandwidth, but that's another line of discussion.

That said, I don't expect to see a stand-alone 5K display from Apple until they can provide a single cable connection via DisplayPort v1.3 or Thunderbolt 3.
Click to expand...

Apple must have sorted something out as a freind of mine tested a 5k stand alone display 8 months ago now via his laptop through thunderbolt. Cant say more than that as he was ND claused to the max. ( leaked it out to a bunch of us under the influence and regretting it) ...
So I'm hoping it wasn't just drunken bullshit. But he was testing the apple tube 6 months before it saw light of day for Apple. So he is connected some what. Fingers crossed.
 
Question for Jeff

Question for Jeff

Jeff -- I've heard one reason (apart from lower sales) that Apple killed the 17" MBP was that they could not produce retina screens affordably for it at that time. And carrying around a huge 5lb non-retina brick wasn't appealing to many people.

But now that this iMac is out and affordable, it makes me wonder whether a super thin, 17" 4k MBP could see the light of day.

Perhaps there isn't enough of a market for it, but I feel like if they got the weight/thickness down, a 17" MBP would be the ultimate mobile pro computer and sell pretty well. Even non film/photo pros like writers would love the large 4k screen they could take anywhere.

And with Broadwell and larger battery, could see 7-10 hour battery life on that beast.

Damn, probably wishful thinking but I really hope 17" comes back on the next MBP redesign.
 
Mark Toia said:
Apple must have sorted something out as a freind of mine tested a 5k stand alone display 8 months ago now via his laptop through thunderbolt. Cant say more than that as he was ND claused to the max. ( leaked it out to a bunch of us under the influence and regretting it) ...
So I'm hoping it wasn't just drunken bullshit. But he was testing the apple tube 6 months before it saw light of day for Apple. So he is connected some what. Fingers crossed.
Click to expand...

Well, there's not much they can get sorted out as there's only so much data that can be passed through a Thunderbolt port and cable. That said, a DisplayPort 1.2 port, or Thunderbolt 2 port in this case, can drive a 5K screen at full resolution up to 30Hz. But yeah, seems obvious that a 5K cinema display is coming from Apple.

AnthonyFlores said:
Jeff -- I've heard one reason (apart from lower sales) that Apple killed the 17" MBP was that they could not produce retina screens affordably for it at that time. And carrying around a huge 5lb non-retina brick wasn't appealing to many people.
Click to expand...

They killed the 17" more than two years before launching the retina MBP in late 2012. They cited low sales along with difficulties in transitioning the larger design to their new unibody process as reasons for its discontinuation. I don't really think the retina screen had anything to do with it at the time. And the introduction of the retina 15" screen did a lot to ease the lingering demand for the 17".

But now that this iMac is out and affordable, it makes me wonder whether a super thin, 17" 4k MBP could see the light of day.
Click to expand...

There's no question that they could get the screens made. There are a couple 17" UHD 3840x2160 screens available that would fit the bill. Apple makes a lot of their configuration choices based on the overall package of form, function and market appeal. A 17" model would give us more pixels and a numeric keypad, probably a good case for an improved GPU, although that would probably be necessary just to maintain a similar level of performance since an UHD screen would have 38% more pixels. But you're not going to squeeze more CPU power out of it and battery life is still going to work out about the same as in the past -- bigger battery, but it's driving a bigger screen and GPU. I think they know there's a market for this, but unless they think the market is big enough to invest in the production lines to build it, we won't see one.

Personally, I prefer the 17" when I'm working on it. OTOH, the 15" is more practical when carrying it around all the time. I'd love to see them replace the current 15" rMBP with a new 16" model that has roughly the same external dimensions with a thinner screen bezel and full 3840x2160 pixel resolution. And there's actually some credible info and rumors out there that this may in fact happen.

It's all speculation at this point.
 
When my spell checker went down late the other night, playstore stopped in the background and a few other things and my phone was running hot with high battery drain again. I suppose they are checking up what I am typing. Its being happening a lot lately, particularly Google maps secretly running in the background and crashing, which I am not using either, nor do I have any position tracking feature on, seriously not good.

Seriously, these sort of things are a 'PERFECT' advertisement for Firefox OS.
 
Thanks Jeff. Actually I've heard (no connections) that with the refreshed MacBook Air Retina at 12" -- they could bump the pros to 14" and 16" -- which would make sense and be fantastic. So I'm with you there 100%. Also agree about lugging around the 17", though I too loved working on it. on

Bring on the 16" 4k MBP!
 
Eric Bowen said:
Y But hey you get a shiny new 5K screen.
Click to expand...
...that is wasting the - already poor - resources of a mediocre, low bandwidth mobile GPU on resolution, which isn't help you get your work done.

Sorry, but a 5k UI monitor that slows my work down, isn't really appealing to me.
Why would I want my UI at 5k?
Since I have to upscale the whole UI to what it is on a 1920 screen, so I can actually read what it says and use the buttons, I don't gain screen estate anyway.

But hey, I'm an old fart and my eyes aren't getting any better, so I can't barely see single pixels on a HD monitor - but your mileage may vary.
 
Last edited:
Correct, the Panel is an LG.
 
Don't know, have not tested offcourse but I see the Imac 5k as a pretty good option for running FLAME ASSIST 2015 on, no? Really nice to be able to have a full UHD image at 1:1 and still be able to have the liberary and timeline all on one screen... but yes, a 12 core trashcan with a 5k screen would beat it for speed so the option is to buy now and be sorry later or opposite I guess :)
 
So, why don't we buy a 32 inch LG 5k instead?

Time to look at HP again for new models.
 
http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/20/retina-imac-review/ - This guy GUSHES... clearly he REALLY likes the new iMac... really.

I do think it's pretty clearly the best All-In-One on the market at any price... and I don't think it'll be possible to build a comparable machine for less any time soon (I'm sure any forthcoming 5k PC monitors will be >$2k). The fully loaded machine will be very fast at most tasks with a good i7 and ssd, though I wish they'd used non-mobile graphics (I understand the need to keep heat generation to a minimum on these machines), it leaves me a bit concerned for 4K editing though the initial feedback is that it's smooth at full-res.
 
Given, this little system is not perfect. It very well may be outdated with Broadwell in 2Q 2015...but as it sits, its a perfectly great stop gap computer...especially if your target is set on a system being released in 2016. I am sure, for those looking for an inexpensive system and a high res screen...this is a great way to go if your goal is to invest into a more capable system in 2016.

Personally...I normally upgrade every few years anyway...and give the wife my old computer. Then we donate her old computer to charity. Keeps the workflow moving along. I am sure this will be a nice little system that will fit into that workflow. Really though...my target is set for the iMac of 2016 which I hope out performs the current nMP. By purchasing this iMac for 4 grand and saving some money to invest in the future, I think it will be worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top