If it can run apps, it's probably worth it to have some storage for future use cases. For the reference, 1 hour of 4k video apparently uses ~7GB of space. It doesn't seem unreasonable for a streaming video player to cache the movies you started watching.
It can't run apps. Yet anyways. It has an A13 and runs iOS to do camera processing and monitor stuff but there's no app store or Apple TV features. Apple sells Apple TVs with less storage.
I don't think they will. They are in the brain market, not the screen market.
TVs are basically a home appliance. People rarely replace them, and when they do, it's often the cheapest 4K display at their desired size.
Apple is not about any of that. Yes, they could easily build a super premium TV, but what kind of a margin they could squeeze if they make it a top-of-the-line TV with all the features you can imagine? It'd likely be a product with a 5 figure price tag (or $9999, because it's just 4 figures!) with an unacceptably low margin for them.
They have no doubt flirted with that idea, but I can't see how they can execute on it. all TVs basically look the same, because the only 2 things the vast majority of people care about when buying a new TV is 1. price, 2. bezel size.
Before the iPhone and the >500€ price tag, the mobile phone market was like the screen market you describe. Computers were also boring before the iMac. It takes some magic to change that, but it's highly possible that Apple could try it.
Apple is now a pivoting to be a company that sells services. They will sell a premium TV if it means they can get more subscribers and tie its users more into their ecosystem.
It looks like a missed opportunity to put a faceID capable sensor to support motion gestures within a tvOS offshoot standalone app environment, plus authentication.
I don't think there's anything to see here. It's just because that's the component they have lying around. The economy of scale likely means it makes more sense for them to reuse what they already have than to manufacture something new with lower storage.
It seems like the cheapest way to make "centre stage" work without having to make a completely new target device. It sounds like a pragmatic way to keep the device supported at minimum cost.
If this thing gets a jailbreak, it's poised to be a legendary display. It's essentially really powerful computer embedded into a display.
By processing the stream, many interesting stuff can be done. Maybe it can detect guns, faces or human figures in games and help game players? Maybe it can be used to record, stream or manage the screen?
Of course, I assume it has access to the image delivery. Maybe it cannot access it due to DRM stuff.
> It's essentially really powerful computer embedded into a display.
If by "really powerful computer" you mean "couple year old cellphone" then yes.
I wonder if the iOS device is connected to the display at all or if it just there to run the camera and some peripherals?
If it is connected to the display, I wonder if the future game plan is to allow for a wireless display using something similar to Sidecar. Totally laggy for some, totally convenient for others who may wish to wirelessly dock a smaller screen iOS device to it.
No I mean really powerful computer. iPhone 11 can handle quite complex tasks, people do real time face/expression tracking and mesh modelling, image processing, video editing and all kind stuff on this device.
Obviously I don't mean it's a cell phone. Look at this thing, where do you put the sim card? I mean really powerful computer identical to one inside the iPhone 11 apparently.
Well, it may be overkill but it’s at least a step up from the flash that many monitors use which is a type with a relatively low number of writes. Even if this thing gets dozens of software updates and the user is tweaking settings constantly, the phone-grade flash isn’t going to wear out any time soon.
The Apple Studio Display is a very Tim Cook sort of product. Cook is the supply chain and logistics wizard who saw Apple into the behemoth era, and the mentality he brings to the company is all over this device.
The 27" panels from the now discontinued iMac in that size meet the A13 Bionic at end of life, and the same front-facing camera they put on everything else. The Studio Display is a bit like a restaurant serving chicken soup a few days after featuring roast chickens.
I'm surprised they didn't ship it with FaceID immediately, but I presume they have to iron out the kinks since it's never been used on the Mac before, and everything is there for them to turn it on in an update.
I can get a lot more display for $1500 (MSI Prestige 5k2k), and I'm left with a hunch that Apple's third modern display is going to be the first one I find at all compelling.
What Apple has done here is provide an obvious purchase for someone who would have gotten a 'big' iMac or iMac pro: the Mini for the former, the Studio for the latter, and the Studio Monitor. If you want the monitor to have great color range and accuracy, and good speakers, and a better webcam than a laptop which won't look up your nostrils, it strikes me as a reasonable price, I happen to just want my monitor to be a monitor.
I haven't heard of that monitor, but looked it up as looked interesting - people say it has burn in, that it randomly turns off when using M1 Mac Mini, that you can't get full resolution on some Macs (though maybe they used wrong cables) and that can only update the firmware via Windows.
I think this is where Apple 'just does stuff right' - you know if you buy the Studio Monitor that it will just work, having built in webcam is really nice, I presume it will charge a laptop etc.
All IPS displays have some "burn in" but it's not permanent. It's image persistence. It was also commented on a lot with the first IPS MacBooks. It's a bit annoying but not a serious issue like (or CRT) burn in. And we have a good existing way of preventing it, the screen saver. Even if it does happen it goes away in a couple hours.
I think the studio display is really poor value though as previously you would get a whole computer included for pretty much the same price. The little extras really have to be in your corner to be worth it.
This is one area that Apple definitely does not "just do stuff right". Display Stream Compression has been broken (for Intel Macs) - and by broken I don't mean 'suboptimal', but "completely nonfunctional" ever since the first beta of Big Sur, and is to this day - is a well-known, documented issue (many users, multiple GPUs, differing monitors), though Apple has yet to acknowledge it.
My 2019 Mac Pro cheesegrater could, under Catalina, drive 4K monitors in 10 bit HDR at 144Hz.
As soon as Big Sur was installed, your options became HDR@60Hz or SDR@95Hz. Turn off DSC in the monitor and you get the DP1.2 bandwidth.
Apple would not introduce functionnality like Face ID in an update. That is not how they operate. As a matter of fact, I'm not so sure they have every single sensor required for Face ID in that display.
Universal Control is a software feature. Face ID is irrevocably married to very specific hardware sensors, so it's a bridge too far in my opinion. And honestly, just like Macs don't have touch screens, it's possible Apple has deemed Face ID not useful on Macs.
*for my gig as a software developer who does a bit of video
The extra width is key, and the density and brightness are acceptable. The qualities are a vector more than a scalar, and someone less presbyopic and more AV focused might give those different weights.
I recommend doing it as a side-by-side though, I did this with the monitor in question and the iPad Pro before choosing the former.
Agree with you. But in my case I use a MBP as a desktop 80% of the time so wanted a zero hassle monitor that will charge my MBP and take over some of the ancillary functions built into the laptop. It does that perfectly so I bought one and I love it already.
The price is high but it's not unreasonable for the overall quality and it comes with decent service and support unlike all other vendors in the UK which hire third party repairers who are hell to deal with.
Edit: really interested to see a teardown of this display appear. Not sure if anyone will do one though :(
> Agree with you. But in my case I use a MBP as a desktop 80% of the time so wanted a zero hassle monitor that will charge my MBP and take over some of the ancillary functions built into the laptop. It does that perfectly so I bought one and I love it already.
Sounds like the old Apple Thunderbolt Display... which is built a lot simpler than the new model. Basically it's nothing more [1] than a PSU and a TB controller exposing eDP to the panel and PCI Express to deal with network, firewire, USB and audio. Dead simple.
The new one just reeks of needless over-engineering, similar to the Lightning-to-HDMI adapter [2]. Why the fuck does a monitor need an embedded OS?!
> The price is high but it's not unreasonable for the overall quality and it comes with decent service and support unlike all other vendors in the UK which hire third party repairers who are hell to deal with.
Oh yeah, that's a scourge on the industry and not exclusive to the UK. I had the "pleasure" of dealing with a carrier-bought Samsung tablet which as it turns out had a broken screen which made its bootloader refuse to boot. At the last second I read the T&C of the repair shop the carrier had contracted with, which stated that device erasure was mandatory which also meant I'd lose all content on the encrypted SD card. Had them bail out on literally the last second and send them back the device, so I could do the repair myself - at my own expense, to add insult to injury.
I had one and abandoned it the moment I got a Retina MBP because I couldn't bare to stare at 1440p screens any more. I paid £899 for it when it came out. That's £1165 now with inflation.
Applying that to the Studio Display now, I paid £330 more for the Studio Display, gain a charger, 5k screen, decent speaker system, decent webcam and a warranty. And it looks really nice sitting in front of me.
I'm really not bothered.
As for the OS, I don't care if it's got an imp with a paintbrush drawing the pixels on the inside of the glass as long as it works.
> I had one and abandoned it the moment I got a Retina MBP because I couldn't bare to stare at 1440p screens any more.
Apple laptops are like heroin for eyes: experience it once and you can't go back.
Just this weekend my s/o needed a new laptop - unfortunately, she's more or less locked into the Windows world, and needs some serious-ish GPU offering. Apple was unfortunately out of the question because the M1 can't run Windows... so we looked around, and there was literally no offer that had an aluminium case, a decent GPU/CPU/RAM combo and a screen with a better resolution than 1080p at a reasonable price!
We settled on an Acer Swift X in the end and made the compromise at the display.
> Why the fuck does a monitor need an embedded OS?!
They've explained this. It's so that features like Center Stage and spatial audio can work when connected to Macs that don't have Apple Silicon. Also to run the camera's ISP.
> Why the fuck does a monitor need an embedded OS?!
I doubt this is new. The Dell U2718Q I am using right now can "crash" so that video input still works but none of the buttons do until I yank the power cord and plug it back in.
The XDR and the upcoming mid range monitor seem to be what Apple wants to do, but there was a dearth of good, professional monitors for the Mac. The Studio Display is a nice work monitor for lots of people.
> Like much in the technology space, monitors have become a race to the bottom price-wise.
I suspect that this is because computers monitors are using the same aspect ratios as televisions. I was at Costco the other day looking at televisions, and the smallest TV they had was 55". So basically, computer monitors are using panels coming from fully depreciated manufacturing lines. The "innovation" in panel manufacturing is happening at 75" (if you look at what is on offer at Costco). That's completely useless for computer monitors.
What Apple should do is diverge from the television market. Focus on a 3:2 or 4:3 aspect ratio - or something else. Give up the profit margin in the short term to build up an innovation pipeline that delivers high margins later on. Microsoft is building some laptops in 3:2, so Apple wouldn't even be the only one that is willing to buy them. The two of them together would pull the rest of the players along.
There's folks in this thread talking about why FaceID is lacking from this display given there is presumably just an iPhone 11 logic board in this display and I think they are missing the bigger picture here. I'm not certain FaceID will ever come to a non-iOS device, here's why...
With your iPhone/iPad - the OS knows you want to be authenticated because you pick up the device and the device uses that pickup/accelerometer to indicate when to trigger FaceID.
But on your laptop or Studio Display, they are stationary devices while in use. So what would macOS use to trigger when FaceID should be initiated? If the trigger event is you pushing a key on your keyboard, then how is that any better than you pushing the TouchID button?
EDIT: as a total aside, I still don't understand why my biometric is my "password". Shouldn't my biometric be my "username".
>So what would macOS use to trigger when FaceID should be initiated?
The equivalent system on another OS? At least when talking Android that should be easy since accelerometer(/gyroscope w/o gravity) are already available from the OS side. When talking windows/linux that's arguably harder but not impossible. The only major caveat is required hardware for that. But this situation is somewhat similar to Microsoft Hello, except we're not talking entirely about cameras.
These are just wishful ideas though, and you are right: we know Apple will never open their face ID implementation ever, let alone give users outside their ecosystem the possibility of using Face ID for any of their services/products. To that end, I don't even know if there's a use case where someone could need Face ID on a non-Apple device.
I use this with a Mac Mini but I don't love it. Most of the time when I lock my computer at home it's because I don't want my cat to be able to walk across the keyboard and type things into whatever window happens to be active.
Unfortunately using unlock with Apple Watch means that I can be reading in a chair on the opposite side of the room, and when the cat walks across my desk the computer helpfully goes "lemme unlock that for you so we can type in this important sdxvi90weraklxczkopk."
If Apple sold a webcam with FaceID built into it as an alternative to their keyboard with TouchID, I would definitely buy it. I don't like the keyboard options, it's either $150 for the too small one (I like having full size arrow keys and the isnert/home/etc block), or $180 for the too big one (numpad puts the mouse unnecessarily far away).
I'm quite happy with a tenkeyless layout but I don't see Apple adding a "just right" keyboard size in between their existing models.
This was more of a problem in my previous apartment where the computer desk was in a nook behind the living room couch. Sitting on the couch would only put you about 4' away from the computer.
Not positive if it's still happens in my current layout, I got in the habit of pushing the keyboard back below the monitor when I get up so that the cats won't walk across it.
Just add a $400 watch to your $1500 display to go with that $2000 computer. Oh and you better grab a $430 iPhone SE or perhaps a $800 iPhone 13 to replace your Android phone and actually use your watch.
What's better is you can use it with a different keyboard. Apple's external keyboards with TouchID are fine but they're not universally preferred. Some people want their longer throw clicky mechanical keyboard, some people want a particular keyboard layout that Apple doesn't offer, some people want their Kinesis Advantage for wrist issues, etc.
This is how FaceID works already on the iPad Pro. If you use it with a keyboard there's no TouchID on the keyboard. Any key press wakes it up and it does a FaceID scan to check who's trying to wake it up.
The part that isn't covered is activating FaceID other than on wake up. On the iPad it still has you double click the wake button, they'd need a button on the side of the monitor or something if keeping a separate hardware activation button is required.
I don't think this argument makes much sense. Windows Hello has logged me in by face for years on my Surface Pro. It works well, and there's no onerous trigger or precise button-pushing needed. Sit down, tap the mouse/keyboard any way you like, and you're logged in.
How is that a better experience than on macOS where you "Sit down, tap the [touchID] key ... and you're logged in"?
One concrete example. When working at my desk I have my MacBook plugged into a screen/keyboard/mouse and stashed away to the side with the lid closed. In this state the touchID key is not accessible and so touchID cannot be used. While Windows Hello works with the webcam I have over my screen.
> With your iPhone/iPad - the OS knows you want to be authenticated because you pick up the device and the device uses that pickup/accelerometer to indicate when to trigger FaceID.
Actually, this description is not quite accurate. The phone doesn’t depend on the accelerometer alone. Keep your iPhone on a desk or table and just peek over it (from above) to have it unlock. The trigger here could be a touch on the display to wake it up, or a notification that turns on the display and your face happens to be above it (or close enough with you looking at it if attention is turned on) to unlock and show the notification details (if setup that way). It’s the display turning on that’s a major trigger to keep FaceID ready to go.
The larger reason why FaceID may not make it to Macs is because they’re or could usually be shared devices, whereas iPhones and iPads are usually personal devices attached to one user account (I don’t have inside knowledge of Apple’s views on this, so this is just another speculation).
The finding means that, overall, the Studio Display contains the exact same 2.65GHz A13 Bionic chip, 12MP Ultra Wide front-facing camera setup with Center Stage, and 64GB base configuration of storage as the ninth-generation iPad .
After reading that sentence, the only thing that came into mind was "do you know how much (surveillance) video can fit in 64GB?"
65 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 138 ms ] threadTVs are basically a home appliance. People rarely replace them, and when they do, it's often the cheapest 4K display at their desired size.
Apple is not about any of that. Yes, they could easily build a super premium TV, but what kind of a margin they could squeeze if they make it a top-of-the-line TV with all the features you can imagine? It'd likely be a product with a 5 figure price tag (or $9999, because it's just 4 figures!) with an unacceptably low margin for them.
They have no doubt flirted with that idea, but I can't see how they can execute on it. all TVs basically look the same, because the only 2 things the vast majority of people care about when buying a new TV is 1. price, 2. bezel size.
Sure, but it's another place they can pop up an app store and extract 30% rent from companies who want their product available on Apple's new screen.
The number isn't less than ten thousand, and it probably breaks six figures.
By processing the stream, many interesting stuff can be done. Maybe it can detect guns, faces or human figures in games and help game players? Maybe it can be used to record, stream or manage the screen?
Of course, I assume it has access to the image delivery. Maybe it cannot access it due to DRM stuff.
If by "really powerful computer" you mean "couple year old cellphone" then yes.
I wonder if the iOS device is connected to the display at all or if it just there to run the camera and some peripherals?
If it is connected to the display, I wonder if the future game plan is to allow for a wireless display using something similar to Sidecar. Totally laggy for some, totally convenient for others who may wish to wirelessly dock a smaller screen iOS device to it.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210380
The 27" panels from the now discontinued iMac in that size meet the A13 Bionic at end of life, and the same front-facing camera they put on everything else. The Studio Display is a bit like a restaurant serving chicken soup a few days after featuring roast chickens.
I'm surprised they didn't ship it with FaceID immediately, but I presume they have to iron out the kinks since it's never been used on the Mac before, and everything is there for them to turn it on in an update.
I can get a lot more display for $1500 (MSI Prestige 5k2k), and I'm left with a hunch that Apple's third modern display is going to be the first one I find at all compelling.
What Apple has done here is provide an obvious purchase for someone who would have gotten a 'big' iMac or iMac pro: the Mini for the former, the Studio for the latter, and the Studio Monitor. If you want the monitor to have great color range and accuracy, and good speakers, and a better webcam than a laptop which won't look up your nostrils, it strikes me as a reasonable price, I happen to just want my monitor to be a monitor.
I think this is where Apple 'just does stuff right' - you know if you buy the Studio Monitor that it will just work, having built in webcam is really nice, I presume it will charge a laptop etc.
Price is steep though.
I think the studio display is really poor value though as previously you would get a whole computer included for pretty much the same price. The little extras really have to be in your corner to be worth it.
This is one area that Apple definitely does not "just do stuff right". Display Stream Compression has been broken (for Intel Macs) - and by broken I don't mean 'suboptimal', but "completely nonfunctional" ever since the first beta of Big Sur, and is to this day - is a well-known, documented issue (many users, multiple GPUs, differing monitors), though Apple has yet to acknowledge it.
My 2019 Mac Pro cheesegrater could, under Catalina, drive 4K monitors in 10 bit HDR at 144Hz.
As soon as Big Sur was installed, your options became HDR@60Hz or SDR@95Hz. Turn off DSC in the monitor and you get the DP1.2 bandwidth.
I have that monitor… but it’s 3/4 of the studio display in terms of pixel count.
I recommend doing it as a side-by-side though, I did this with the monitor in question and the iPad Pro before choosing the former.
The price is high but it's not unreasonable for the overall quality and it comes with decent service and support unlike all other vendors in the UK which hire third party repairers who are hell to deal with.
Edit: really interested to see a teardown of this display appear. Not sure if anyone will do one though :(
Sounds like the old Apple Thunderbolt Display... which is built a lot simpler than the new model. Basically it's nothing more [1] than a PSU and a TB controller exposing eDP to the panel and PCI Express to deal with network, firewire, USB and audio. Dead simple.
The new one just reeks of needless over-engineering, similar to the Lightning-to-HDMI adapter [2]. Why the fuck does a monitor need an embedded OS?!
> The price is high but it's not unreasonable for the overall quality and it comes with decent service and support unlike all other vendors in the UK which hire third party repairers who are hell to deal with.
Oh yeah, that's a scourge on the industry and not exclusive to the UK. I had the "pleasure" of dealing with a carrier-bought Samsung tablet which as it turns out had a broken screen which made its bootloader refuse to boot. At the last second I read the T&C of the repair shop the carrier had contracted with, which stated that device erasure was mandatory which also meant I'd lose all content on the encrypted SD card. Had them bail out on literally the last second and send them back the device, so I could do the repair myself - at my own expense, to add insult to injury.
[1]: https://de.ifixit.com/Teardown/Apple+Thunderbolt+Display+Tea...
[2]: https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/accessories/apple-lightning-av...
Applying that to the Studio Display now, I paid £330 more for the Studio Display, gain a charger, 5k screen, decent speaker system, decent webcam and a warranty. And it looks really nice sitting in front of me.
I'm really not bothered.
As for the OS, I don't care if it's got an imp with a paintbrush drawing the pixels on the inside of the glass as long as it works.
Apple laptops are like heroin for eyes: experience it once and you can't go back.
Just this weekend my s/o needed a new laptop - unfortunately, she's more or less locked into the Windows world, and needs some serious-ish GPU offering. Apple was unfortunately out of the question because the M1 can't run Windows... so we looked around, and there was literally no offer that had an aluminium case, a decent GPU/CPU/RAM combo and a screen with a better resolution than 1080p at a reasonable price!
We settled on an Acer Swift X in the end and made the compromise at the display.
They've explained this. It's so that features like Center Stage and spatial audio can work when connected to Macs that don't have Apple Silicon. Also to run the camera's ISP.
I doubt this is new. The Dell U2718Q I am using right now can "crash" so that video input still works but none of the buttons do until I yank the power cord and plug it back in.
The only reason the iPod was so successful was because he had the foresight to buy up all air freight for the holiday season.
The XDR and the upcoming mid range monitor seem to be what Apple wants to do, but there was a dearth of good, professional monitors for the Mac. The Studio Display is a nice work monitor for lots of people.
More on that here: https://betterdesigned.substack.com/p/the-market-needed-the-...
> Like much in the technology space, monitors have become a race to the bottom price-wise.
I suspect that this is because computers monitors are using the same aspect ratios as televisions. I was at Costco the other day looking at televisions, and the smallest TV they had was 55". So basically, computer monitors are using panels coming from fully depreciated manufacturing lines. The "innovation" in panel manufacturing is happening at 75" (if you look at what is on offer at Costco). That's completely useless for computer monitors.
What Apple should do is diverge from the television market. Focus on a 3:2 or 4:3 aspect ratio - or something else. Give up the profit margin in the short term to build up an innovation pipeline that delivers high margins later on. Microsoft is building some laptops in 3:2, so Apple wouldn't even be the only one that is willing to buy them. The two of them together would pull the rest of the players along.
There's folks in this thread talking about why FaceID is lacking from this display given there is presumably just an iPhone 11 logic board in this display and I think they are missing the bigger picture here. I'm not certain FaceID will ever come to a non-iOS device, here's why...
With your iPhone/iPad - the OS knows you want to be authenticated because you pick up the device and the device uses that pickup/accelerometer to indicate when to trigger FaceID.
But on your laptop or Studio Display, they are stationary devices while in use. So what would macOS use to trigger when FaceID should be initiated? If the trigger event is you pushing a key on your keyboard, then how is that any better than you pushing the TouchID button?
EDIT: as a total aside, I still don't understand why my biometric is my "password". Shouldn't my biometric be my "username".
The equivalent system on another OS? At least when talking Android that should be easy since accelerometer(/gyroscope w/o gravity) are already available from the OS side. When talking windows/linux that's arguably harder but not impossible. The only major caveat is required hardware for that. But this situation is somewhat similar to Microsoft Hello, except we're not talking entirely about cameras.
These are just wishful ideas though, and you are right: we know Apple will never open their face ID implementation ever, let alone give users outside their ecosystem the possibility of using Face ID for any of their services/products. To that end, I don't even know if there's a use case where someone could need Face ID on a non-Apple device.
Sudo / security approvals appear on your watch too so you double press the side button to approve.
Unfortunately using unlock with Apple Watch means that I can be reading in a chair on the opposite side of the room, and when the cat walks across my desk the computer helpfully goes "lemme unlock that for you so we can type in this important sdxvi90weraklxczkopk."
If Apple sold a webcam with FaceID built into it as an alternative to their keyboard with TouchID, I would definitely buy it. I don't like the keyboard options, it's either $150 for the too small one (I like having full size arrow keys and the isnert/home/etc block), or $180 for the too big one (numpad puts the mouse unnecessarily far away).
I'm quite happy with a tenkeyless layout but I don't see Apple adding a "just right" keyboard size in between their existing models.
Agree with your points about keyboard. I am fine with the basic Magic Keyboard though. I actually quite like that. I don't need Touch ID on it.
Not positive if it's still happens in my current layout, I got in the habit of pushing the keyboard back below the monitor when I get up so that the cats won't walk across it.
This is how FaceID works already on the iPad Pro. If you use it with a keyboard there's no TouchID on the keyboard. Any key press wakes it up and it does a FaceID scan to check who's trying to wake it up.
The part that isn't covered is activating FaceID other than on wake up. On the iPad it still has you double click the wake button, they'd need a button on the side of the monitor or something if keeping a separate hardware activation button is required.
How is that a better experience than on macOS where you "Sit down, tap the [touchID] key ... and you're logged in"?
Not wanting to sound argumentative, just playing devils advocate.
One concrete example. When working at my desk I have my MacBook plugged into a screen/keyboard/mouse and stashed away to the side with the lid closed. In this state the touchID key is not accessible and so touchID cannot be used. While Windows Hello works with the webcam I have over my screen.
Actually, this description is not quite accurate. The phone doesn’t depend on the accelerometer alone. Keep your iPhone on a desk or table and just peek over it (from above) to have it unlock. The trigger here could be a touch on the display to wake it up, or a notification that turns on the display and your face happens to be above it (or close enough with you looking at it if attention is turned on) to unlock and show the notification details (if setup that way). It’s the display turning on that’s a major trigger to keep FaceID ready to go.
The larger reason why FaceID may not make it to Macs is because they’re or could usually be shared devices, whereas iPhones and iPads are usually personal devices attached to one user account (I don’t have inside knowledge of Apple’s views on this, so this is just another speculation).
After reading that sentence, the only thing that came into mind was "do you know how much (surveillance) video can fit in 64GB?"
Can‘t find a good display for my macbook. No gaming, just dev & design.