Apple has released the latest iPad Pro, but apart from the new M4 chip, which itself is very interesting, the highlight is definitely the new dual-layer OLED display, known in Apple terms as Tandem OLED. Capable of 1,000nit lasting full screen brightness and 1,600 nit peak HDR, it will blow away any OLED PC monitor for pure brightness. Even the best current OLED large format desktop panels top out at about 250nit full screen.

So, the question at hand is whether Apple's dual-layer OLED technology can make the transition to a desktop or laptop Pc. But it seems unlikely. The main reasons are cost and complexity.

First, the tandem OLED panels use 2 OLED panels stacked with each other. The current PC OLED monitor is expensive enough with just one. 1. The cost of 2 panels to one monitor, do not bear the thought. And that's before you consider the complexity of manufacturing such a display. To ensure a sharp image quality, 2 panels should be aligned very closely.

Then I have the problem of driving 2 panels in parallel. You need to have very precise control over the update and timing of the images. Indeed, Apple's new M4 chip has an all-new dedicated display controller block designed to do exactly that. That timing and synchronization challenge will only be trickier in the context of premium desktop PCs where refresh rates of 240Hz or higher are expected.

Imagine you are trying to update 1 panel in full sync over 240 times in 2 seconds. It even gets infinitely wrong and you're going to have all sorts of problems with response and image blurring. As such, dual-layer OLED monitors may require expensive, custom-built control chips to drive the panels.

In addition, it is also worth considering whether it makes sense to achieve a full screen 1,000 nits for a PC monitor. A device like the iPad should work well in scenarios with a much wider range of settings than a desktop monitor or definitely a laptop screen

Critically for the ipad, it seriously includes the outdoors where high brightness is needed to offset the glare in broad daylight. Indoors, the full-screen feature of 400 nits is probably enough, and more will be uncomfortable. Yes, more than 400 nits are needed for a proper HDR experience. But it is not a lasting brightness across the screen. Not everyone wants a 1,000-inch plus panel that strikes their retina with a 30-inch knit of sustained full-screen sizzle.

In addition, existing large-format single-panel OLED screens can already achieve more than 1,000 nit in small windows. So for these important HDR highlights, OLEDs like the current favorite Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM work very well.

Similarly, in a normal indoor setting, the return value in terms of perceived brightness is not scaled linearly with the nit rating. A screen with a 2x rating of Nit doesn't look as bright as 25% subjectively as 2x.

So it all goes to represent decreasing returns in a typical desktop context, adding a huge cost to increase brightness to a level that almost no one wants.

In reality, the latest desktop OLED panels are pretty decent for full-screen brightness. Sure, to be perfect, you probably need another 100-150 full〜screen punches. But the huge cost and complexity of double-layer panels is almost certainly not the right solution. Instead, iterating a little more with existing single-panel technology will probably take us there while reducing costs, rather than adding it

After all, Apple's Tandem OLED tech is the solution to a very specific problem. Definitely it looks stunning. But, as attractive as it is to desire the same technology for the PC, it only makes sense.