Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

cfenollosa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 203 posts

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#51

Post by hadjian »

This might be a bit off-topic, but since we’re talking big screens: I also have a 27“ display. I mostly work with emacs and a couple of shells, both in the kitty terminal. For emacs, this is great, but for a terminal, it really feels dumb, if you have a 3x2 terminal window and write something into the lower left one. It’s so far at the bottom and you have this huge real estate… I started to use a 1x3 terminal window. The bottom row is where I can glance at and the top one is where I swap out the terminal windows.

Anyone know of a new paradime for text based computing one huge screens? Sounds too niche, right? ;-)

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#53

Post by newaccount2021 »

ysleepy wrote: post #5

They sort of imply that only the Studio display would have given him a DPI increase over his previous 27" 1440p display. Any 4k screen would have also done that. Then he concludes that 600nits is unnecessary and that he doesn't need or want the USB-C ports. I have no idea why he went with the apple display instead of any good 4k screen for 400$, or two of them.

No post body was provided.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#54

Post by kinghtown »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #21
yakkityyak wrote: post #2

I prefer running two 144hz 27” 4k monitors instead. Yeah the 5k to 4k scaling isn’t as crisp as native 2x, but god the high refresh rate really makes up for it.

I really wish I'd never seen a screen with a 144 Hz refresh rate, I've not been able to un-see the difference from my 60 Hz setup ever since! I've done the same with audio, having bought a decent-ish set of speakers makes everything else sound like arse as much as it makes your music sound good.

I recently got a 32 inch LG monitor with 144hz refresh rate for about $375. It’s qhd/2k, and VA panel.. honestly I’m in love with it. At the store I had a really difficult time seeing a big difference from my display or a 4k 27 inch. I feel like tons of people can be very happy and save a bit money if they would just trust their own eyes. Like I don’t doubt the apple display is better but $1000 better?? doubt it.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#55

Post by D13Fd »

ysleepy wrote: post #19
mistersquid wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would have given him a DPI increase over his previous 27" 1440p display. Any 4k screen would have also done that. While true, the ppi increase from most 4k screens would not be as large as the Apple Studio Display. Most 4k monitors are 24 inches, and those monitors will be 192.94 ppi. [0][1] The Apple Studio Display comes in at 218 ppi. [2] [0] https://www.sven.de/dpi/ [1] https://imgur.com/a/8Woe7Bn [2] https://ww…

That's why I said "DPI increase". 27" at 1440p is 108.79 PPI. I'm sitting in front of a 4k 27" and the 160ppi is almost indistinguishable to my macbook at 227 due to the different viewing distance. And I always had the impression most 4k displays were 27".

I use a 30" 4K monitor, and I still don't notice the DPI difference between it and my MacBook Pro or iPad.

Personally I would much rather that they made the display 4K and 120hz instead of 5k and 60hz. At that size, I don't see a big difference between 4K and 5k, but the 60hz vs. 120hz jump is very noticeable.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#56

Post by rsynnott »

asciimov wrote: post #20

It seems like those writing about this monitor are like "look it's got all these problems, but at least it doesn't have a notch so I'm keeping it."

It basically fits into the same niche as the LG 5K; it is profoundly meh, and far too expensive, but if you want a 5K screen you don't have many options.

I have, and am basically happy with, an LG 5K. If I didn't, though, I'd buy this. Not because it's amazing; it's not, by any means. But because it is the only game on town (except for the LG, and it is at least better than _that_).

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#57

Post by canuckintime »

shadowfacts wrote: post #10
ysleepy wrote: post #5

They sort of imply that only the Studio display would have given him a DPI increase over his previous 27" 1440p display. Any 4k screen would have also done that. Then he concludes that 600nits is unnecessary and that he doesn't need or want the USB-C ports. I have no idea why he went with the apple display instead of any good 4k screen for 400$, or two of them.

I can't speak for the author, but I find 2560x1440 /logical/ pixels (what apple calls points) at 27" to be the ideal amount of screen real estate (and physical size for UI elements). Unless it's a small 21" display, 4k at high-DPI would result in less screen space. Going up to 5k is the best way to get that combination of real estate and pixel density.

> 2560x1440 /logical/ pixels (what apple calls points) at 27" to be the ideal amount of [MacOS] screen real estate (and physical size for [MacOS] UI elements)

ftfy. Apple is double dealing you here. Apple developed MacOS to look best at that size/density, and forced the development of the few expensive displays are that size/density... After a decade waiting for third party displays to meet up their standard, to no avail, perhaps Apple should just modify the OS to better support other HiDPI displays available

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#58

Post by coder543 »

marcellus23 wrote: post #15

My understanding is that the webcam issue has been essentially (not officially) confirmed as being a software bug. Which makes this kind of vitriol pretty unnecessary: > There is a product manager at Apple who, for some reason, hates webcam users with a burning passion. It also makes perfect sense, since the actual specs of the camera should be giving a much better picture.

Since it supports Center Stage, the camera is actually seeing an extremely wide field of view, and then cropping in to show a more normal view. This naturally means the resolution is going to suffer, and gone are any hopes of the optics being good enough to provide even the tiniest background separation. Even if they fix some ISP issue, the webcam quality seems unlikely to ever be good, but it might become acceptable.

It's trivial to find people complaining about the quality of center stage online[0], although it seems like reviewers were mostly wowed by the novelty of the feature, and not how it looks in day to day usage.

Apple doesn't want to talk about the resolution of Center Stage, but when zoomed all the way out... you're limited to 1080p30. It crops significantly into that 1080p image during normal use, so I wouldn't be surprised if we're looking at an effective resolution of 480p or worse.

Given how much space they have on the monitor, and how much they're charging for the monitor, I wish they would have done something cool like having the Center Stage camera and a better quality normal camera. Center Stage is only useful when there are multiple people, or you can't stay still for some reason... and neither of those apply to 99% of Zoom calls I've seen in the past several years.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/ipad/comments/nypvug/m1_ipad_pros_f...

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#59

Post by dandellion »

wodenokoto wrote: post #7
yakkityyak wrote: post #2

I prefer running two 144hz 27” 4k monitors instead. Yeah the 5k to 4k scaling isn’t as crisp as native 2x, but god the high refresh rate really makes up for it.

Is 144hz useful for anything other than gaming?

It's also better for watching videos at 2x speed.
Post reply on HN