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

171–180 of 203 posts

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#171

Post by Dracophoenix »

xoa wrote: post #109
Tagbert wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the bandwidth of 120Hz/5K is too high for current Thunderbolt connections. It does support 120Hz/4K but the higher resolution puts it over the edge. It is the same reason that the Apple XDR display is 60Hz/6K. Bandwidth limits. If you are interested in games, you likely don't want a high resolution monitor anyway. Those of us who do need the higher res of 5K value that above refresh rate and are likely not going to p…

Yes, it's very unfortunate that silicon photonics never hit critical mass. It's intensely painful to constantly see these bandwidth limitations run into and have to deal with ludicrously expensive active cables with extremely short lengths because of the stubborn sticking to copper, when plain old cheap OM3 will cheerfully do 100 Gbps at hundreds of feet. Someday I hope to see the last of copper for data. That said,…

If optical material is as cheap as you say it is, then why are optical cables so expensive? A few meters can run for hundreds of dollars.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#172

Post by vonseel »

copperx wrote: post #166
vonseel wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most 4k monitors are 24 inches Where are you getting this? I was looking at monitors recently and it's impossible to find ANY 24" 4K monitors. Most of them are 27", which at that screen size you really need scaling. My LG 27" 4K recently went out so I downgraded to my older 1440p 27" monitor. I'm not using scaling anymore, but the text doesn't have that buttery smooth look...

I have a Dell 24" 4k, which I got about two years ago, and back then, only Dell and Asus had a 24" option. I have no idea why manufacturers are so insistent on selling 27" 4k monitors; 2x scaling looks too big, and non-integer scaling looks blurry because the resolution is too low for 27". My theory is that most people, for all practical purposes, are blind.

It seems the only option available is the Lg $700 monitor.

So at 24” 4K does everything looks nice and smooth without scaling like a built in Retina display?

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#173

Post by dangus »

mort96 wrote: post #29
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.

Maybe because he wanted a 27" display and not a 24" one? You wanna stick to integer DPI scaling for the most part, and at 2x scale, a 4k 27" display has way too big GUI elements. There aren't many good options in the HiDPI 27" market, just half-measures like the 4k 27" screens you mention which require fractional scaling.

This is bologna. You don't have to stick to "integer DPI scaling."

You can get a Dell with 90W charging 27" 4K for under $600.

The Studio Display is 60Hz, no HDR, no Mini-LED...it's got really similar specs to similar 4K displays for $1000+ more.

Getting 5K over 4K is not worth $1000 extra. Other displays are offering Mini-LED in this price range.

Plus the stand situation is ridiculous.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#174

Post by TheAngush »

hollerith wrote: post #161
BoxOfRain wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Do you notice a difference between 144 Hz and 60 Hz even when interacting with, say, the HN web site?

I notice it when interacting with my computer at all. Mouse movements, alt tabbing, system animations, (some) keyboard inputs. The content being viewed is irrelevant to me; 144 Hz improves my experience across the board.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#175

Post by Tagbert »

hackernewds wrote: post #144
tzs wrote: post #117

> Apple, if you ship a monitor with a non-adjustable stand in 2022, please make sure that the default height is at an ergonomic level. It should be at least 5-8 centimeters higher. That's terrible advice. For a non-adjustable stand it needs to be at or near the lowest that people would want, because it is way easier to raise a fixed stand that is too low by putting something under it than it is to lower a fixed stand…

Why use brakes when you can use books? :) adjustable height, differing thickness, ETC

In our office when we had the earlier Thunderbolt displays, which had the same tendency to be too low, everyone used reams of copier paper to raise them a couple of inches.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#176

Post by Tagbert »

canuckintime wrote: post #123
ziml77 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you saying this is a macOS thing? It's the same for Windows and Linux.

Windows supports non-integer DPI scaling. The typical riposte is many (most?) third party Windows programs don't support it* BUT many third party MacOS didn't support 'Retina' scaling for some time after launch either (I have more faith in MacOS developer system to jump on board if Apple added support)

True, though “no supporting” mainly meant that icons and images looked a little blurry because they were scaled up from 1x. The text and app layouts were fine.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#177

Post by aabhay »

mistersquid wrote: post #22
ysleepy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1000$ worth of difference? - Why not buy the LG then 5 years ago for cheaper?

> Why not buy the LG then 5 years ago for cheaper? The LG Ultrafine 5K is notorious for its high unreliability (WiFi interference), low build quality (creaky plastic), and low durability (flaky ports). The target market for Apple Studio Display does not look to trade price for lower quality. Rather, Apple's target market are premium buyers, people looking to pay a bit more for higher quality.

As a counterpoint, I absolutely love my LG Ultrafine 5k. I bought a second one even. Never had any issues at all, and I love taking video calls, doing design work, etc. on them.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#178

Post by veidr »

> As soon as I started using the Studio Monitor it felt like I had put glasses on. Every other screen looks blurry now.

This is literally how I felt about moving from these 27" 5K screens (I had Apple's iMac Pro and also a couple LG UltraFine external monitors), when I moved to a 31.5" 8K screen (Dell UP3218K).

The difference is every bit as dramatic as going 4K → 5K.

I had literally just gotten my first prescription glasses a month before getting the 8K. I don't need them at all on the 8K; I put them back on when I use these horrid, blurry 5K panels — panels that I used to love, mind you, and proclaimed "I think these are good enough; with my middle-aged eyesight I don't need anything better."

I was dead wrong.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#179

Post by [deleted] »

veidr wrote: post #178

> As soon as I started using the Studio Monitor it felt like I had put glasses on. Every other screen looks blurry now. This is literally how I felt about moving from these 27" 5K screens (I had Apple's iMac Pro and also a couple LG UltraFine external monitors), when I moved to a 31.5" 8K screen (Dell UP3218K). The difference is every bit as dramatic as going 4K → 5K. I had literally just gotten my first prescription…

[deleted]

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#180

Post by veidr »

veidr wrote: post #178

> As soon as I started using the Studio Monitor it felt like I had put glasses on. Every other screen looks blurry now. This is literally how I felt about moving from these 27" 5K screens (I had Apple's iMac Pro and also a couple LG UltraFine external monitors), when I moved to a 31.5" 8K screen (Dell UP3218K). The difference is every bit as dramatic as going 4K → 5K. I had literally just gotten my first prescription…

It's more like 220ppi vs 280ppi (thanks https://www.sven.de/dpi !) and the difference is way, way bigger than I thought.

In fact it is the biggest improvment in text-reading ergonomics I have ever experienced from a monitor upgrade, and that includes 4K → 5K.

I can't even see the pixels at 220ppi on a 5K, so I thought I didn't need any higher.

But in fact, what I see is fuzz. Just a bit, and it's very small and I could live with it... until I saw the 8K at 280ppi.

For a few weeks I had them side by side so I asked serveral non-nerds (no other nerds were available, due to the ongoing pandemic). Every person agreed the 8K monitor "looks clearer".

(Oops looks like the comment I am replying to was deleted, but anyway I will leave this additional info anyway.)

Post reply on HN