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

151–160 of 203 posts

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#151

Post by sharms »

MatthiasPortzel wrote: post #138
Joeri wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never really understood how so many people could come to the conclusion that the 5K iMac was too low. An ideal ergonomic screen height is the top of the screen 5 to 10 cm above eye level, and I’ve always wondered what kind of desk setups people have where it ends up way below that to the point that it needs raising. If anything the 5K iMac was a few cm too tall, and it is a good thing the studio display is lower…

I've been using a laptop as my primary computer for ~8 years now. Now I find it difficult (unergonomic) to go back to a normal monitor; I'm more comfortable with my head tilted down 20º. I wonder if laptop use leads to this preference for lower monitors.

Do you find any ergonomic issues looking down? Do you still use a laptop with a standing desk, or what is that like?

Also does using a single screen have any anecdotal impact on focus?

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#152

Post by conk »

Symbiote wrote: post #124
conk wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point I see no reason to continue putting USB A ports in products. Continuing to include them is only going to prolong the transition to USB C. The great thing about USB is the protocol is the same for different connector types so you can use a $5 adapter to easily plug an older USB A device into a USB C port.

Including a USB-A port on a monitor is easy: there's loads of space. It allows the user to continue using their existing devices without needing adaptors. Offering only USB-C forces additional purchases and the resulting e-waste, so it's no surprise at all that Apple does this.

If they include a USB A port then it forces users who have USB C cables to purchase adapters and results in more e-waste.

Is there loads of space in the display? Looks like apple is packing quite a bit into a slim display profile. Not to mention, ports with different dimensions/heights require additional fixturing and likely additional PCBs or connectors to work. It’s not as easy as slapping a few more ports in the display. Sure a company the size of apple can add more ports. But it’s far easier to line up 4x usb C connectors. And likely makes for less ewaste.

Personally I’d rather have an RJ45/Ethernet port built in over USB A ports. The monitor is going to sit on a desk it might as well be hardwired to the local network.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#153

Post by sph »

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.

Same here, after I've seen my first Retina screen I can't go back to less than 2x scaling. Coding at 1080p is such a poor experience, my desktop is dual 4K 27 inch screens, and I'm on purpose avoiding high refresh rate screens until decent 4K 144Hz monitors exist and I can buy them.

There's some out right now but they're either crappy gamer panels, very large and low density, or extremely expensive.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#154

Post by joeman1000 »

To the author: get some glasses and stop being stubborn! The screen will look even nicer if you do. I held out for years and I curse myself for it. I don’t get headaches from squinting and craning my neck now. Also, out of curiosity, why is your laptop keyboard covered with paper? Bonus: why this display over a cheaper M1 iMac?

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#155

Post by jwalton »

joeman1000 wrote: post #154

To the author: get some glasses and stop being stubborn! The screen will look even nicer if you do. I held out for years and I curse myself for it. I don’t get headaches from squinting and craning my neck now. Also, out of curiosity, why is your laptop keyboard covered with paper? Bonus: why this display over a cheaper M1 iMac?

Or, buy a different 5K monitor? Apple is not the only game in town here.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#157

Post by shadowfacts »

joeman1000 wrote: post #154

To the author: get some glasses and stop being stubborn! The screen will look even nicer if you do. I held out for years and I curse myself for it. I don’t get headaches from squinting and craning my neck now. Also, out of curiosity, why is your laptop keyboard covered with paper? Bonus: why this display over a cheaper M1 iMac?

The glasses thing is a simile. As for why not an iMac? Presumably because he doesn't want an iMac. He could prefer a laptop, or still need Intel, or want a bigger screen, or some other reason.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#158

Post by jmull »

coder543 wrote: post #148
jmull wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That looks like a temporary software issue.

Disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057

Sure, but it should be perfectly possible to improve it to the level of the front-facing camera on the iPad Pro, which has an "ultra-wide" camera for "center stage" as well.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#159

Post by coder543 »

jmull wrote: post #158
coder543 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057

Sure, but it should be perfectly possible to improve it to the level of the front-facing camera on the iPad Pro, which has an "ultra-wide" camera for "center stage" as well.

Yes, but the quality of the iPad Pro front camera is exactly what the Reddit post I linked to was complaining about... and I saw a lot of other similarly negative discussions online when I was googling it.

At best, the Studio Display’s camera can reach that level of quality. I personally have one of the new iPad minis with Center Stage, and I don't consider the front camera quality to be anything better than "acceptable".

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#160

Post by shadowfacts »

canuckintime wrote: post #57
shadowfacts wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Yes, I made the reasonable assumption that anyone interested in an Apple display is using a Mac.

> Apple should just modify the OS to better support other HiDPI displays available

For a number of years[1][2], OS X did partially support fractional scaling. They ultimately decided the tradeoffs, as mentioned in other comments, weren't worth it and went integer-only[3]. Even if it were still supported, it wouldn't be a complete substitute for displays of appropriate pixel density for integer scaling.

[1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/20/#scal... [2]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/9/#res... [3]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/14/#hi...

Post reply on HN