If you’re regularly in a coworking space like I am, you want the non-glossy finish. So instead of the $5,000 one, you need the $6,000. And on top of that you need the stand, which sells separately for $1,000. So all totaled, you’re looking at $7,000 pre-tax. Where I live with a roughly 8.5% sales tax, that’s $7,600 total. To put things in perspective, that’s more than what I paid for the Honda Accord that I bought in 2012 and that I still drive to work every day.

This new monitor isn’t the monitor for the rest of us. It’s the monitor for the elite of the elite. And here I was thinking that LG’s 5K monitor was a splurge at $1,300. 🙄

My day-to-day monitor is a discontinued Dell 27” 4k Monitor. I bought it used from a friend for $200 earlier this year. It’s not as elegant as Apple’s aluminum Thunderbolt Display monitor of yore but it’s got a sharper display and (very importantly) it has a matte finish. Unless you want to see your face in a mirror all day, if you’re in a well-lit open office environment, you need a matte finish.

In a way, it’s a relief that Apple’s one and only standalone display is so ridiculously out of our price range. It keeps us from even being tempted. Still, this is bonkers. Nobody except those within rich Hollywood film studios (and similar) are going to buy this. In making the best monitor in the world, in settling for nothing except the best, Apple priced itself out. Apple made its accomplishment irrelevant. Meaningless. It would have been far better for Apple to offer an aluminum 27” 5K monitor that was “close enough,” and offer it at $1,000. That’s what the Steve Jobs Apple did with the Thunderbolt Display.

Don’t give me some nonsense about “Apple just doesn’t compete at those lower margins.” The 27” 5K iMac starts at $1,800. What I’m asking is that Apple take that computer body, gut the internals so it’s just a standalone monitor, and slash off $800.

Maybe they’ll still do that at some point in the future. But I’m not holding my breath.