Thunderbolt Monitor = paper weight in a few years?

[SamQuint]

I was just thinking about this. I was asked if you could run the HDMI out of a Windows PC and connect it somehow to the Thunderbolt port on the back of a newer iMac. That way you could use the iMac as a secondary monitor for the PC. Sounds like from the conversation above that you cannot convert HDMI to TB.

 

[SamQuint]

By the way I always thought the thunderbolt display was useless anyways. Why not have a bunch of inputs so you can connect several devices? Seems like every other monitor has multiple HDMI, VGA, and DVI.

 

[Blackjack200]

I was just thinking about this. I was asked if you could run the HDMI out of a Windows PC and connect it somehow to the Thunderbolt port on the back of a newer iMac. That way you could use the iMac as a secondary monitor for the PC. Sounds like from the conversation above that you cannot convert HDMI to TB.

If you mean the retina iMac, I don't believe it supports target display mode.

By the way I always thought the thunderbolt display was useless anyways. Why not have a bunch of inputs so you can connect several devices? Seems like every other monitor has multiple HDMI, VGA, and DVI.

It was designed as a virtual docking station for macbooks. The power cable and thunderbolt connector were physically tethered together so you plug each into your macbook and then you have all the ports in the back, ethernet, etc.

There's no reason they couldn't have added more ports, but it was not priced to compete with other displays that were only panels.

 

[Childs]

If you mean the retina iMac, I don't believe it supports target display mode.



It was designed as a virtual docking station for macbooks. The power cable and thunderbolt connector were physically tethered together so you plug each into your macbook and then you have all the ports in the back, ethernet, etc.

There's no reason they couldn't have added more ports, but it was not priced to compete with other displays that were only panels.

Yeah, plus the built in camera and mic. Much cleaner having all the devices to go the display, then one thin cable going to your Mac.

 

[ViRGE]

By the way I always thought the thunderbolt display was useless anyways. Why not have a bunch of inputs so you can connect several devices? Seems like every other monitor has multiple HDMI, VGA, and DVI.

Multiple inputs are really for compatibility purposes anyhow; you don't know what a host device might have. Being able to hook up several devices is just an unintended side benefit. In Apple's case every device has TB, so there's no need to offer other inputs.

 

[Ichinisan]

Multiple inputs are really for compatibility purposes anyhow; you don't know what a host device might have. Being able to hook up several devices is just an unintended side benefit. In Apple's case every device has TB, so there's no need to offer other inputs.

...but the brand new MacBook doesn't have Thunderbolt, hence why the OP is concerned about the future usefulness of the Thunderbolt Display.

 

[ViRGE]

...but the brand new MacBook doesn't have Thunderbolt, hence why the OP is concerned about the future usefulness of the Thunderbolt Display.

Oh the current TB display is at the end of its lifetime for sure. Any successor to it will need to take into account the new MacBook, and probably allow for enough bandwidth for 4K/5K displays as well.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

To me the Thunderbolt display is a really cool item as long as you meet its usage model (i.e., you have a TB-compatible laptop). It is a very specialized item, though, in that it requires that in order to be used at all. I wish they had designed it to work with DisplayPort, HDMI, DVI, or pretty much any other digital video connector as well, so it wouldn't risk becoming a paperweight. Frankly I don't expect to replace a monitor anywhere near as often as a laptop - if I buy an expensive 27" monitor I am planning to use it for at least ten years.

 

[Blackjack200]

Frankly I don't expect to replace a monitor anywhere near as often as a laptop - if I buy an expensive 27" monitor I am planning to use it for at least ten years.

I think a lot of people think that way, including me not long ago, but it might not be appropriate anymore.

10 years ago my entire office used CRTs. Today there is not a CRT in the building. The flat panel displays that replaced them have improved markedly in that time, and now there are 4k and even 5k displays to supplant those. A thuderbolt display purchased five years ago was cutting edge, but can't hold a candle to today's high resolution panels. Right now it seems like display technology is moving almost as fast as computer technology.

I suppose eventually displays might reach a end point WRT pixel density and size. For example, if I'm driving twin 30 inch diplays with 600 ppi resolution and 60hz referesh rates, and they're thin and run cool, then I'm not sure that more pixels or more size is really even desireable at that point. Maybe at that point the industry will settle a bit and we'll go back keeping displays much longer than CPUs.

 

[Childs]

Frankly I don't expect to replace a monitor anywhere near as often as a laptop - if I buy an expensive 27" monitor I am planning to use it for at least ten years.

I don't either. Also why I won't buy an iMac. Seems like just a waste. Yeah yeah, target display mode, but its not really the same.

 

[lucia]

Thunderbolt
Lightning
USB-C

one of the above needs help with branding

The USB-C port will be the sole reason I won't buy the new macbook. I'll stick with the rmbp.