171–180 of 322 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you overestimate the popularity of refresh rates over 60hz.
Yeah, I also want 90hz, but when I need to use HDMI on my fairly recent X1 I must choose between 4k@30hz or 60hz and I would always choose 4k. The banwidth for 4k at 60hz is only now becoming mainstream.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would Apple add a connector that none of their computers use?
So people like me would consider buying it. I have a Mac. I also have a work-issued PC. I have both machines connected to the same displays, and switch between them. DisplayPort isn't some obsolete technology here. I understand why this display doesn't have HDMI, or DVI, or VGA, or Composite, or S-Video, etc. But DisplayPort would be nice.
Type C is one of the standard interfaces for the Displayport standard, and Displayport is the standard video transport on a thunderbolt cable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't change anything at all. It's a shame that they are selling that. And it costs 1600€! It's insane.
Are there any alternatives you'd recommend? When last I looked I was surprised how limited the options were for 2160p + higher refresh rates (I guess maybe cables/ports/GPUs need time to catch up?)
Every ginormous “4k2k” or whatever display is just that: ginormous, so the actual pixel density is much lower, and is comparable to a typical (smaller, 1440p, etc) display.
I suspect this is because the fabrication of the LCDs is tuned to a particular pixel size, so if a company wants to make a 4K monitor, they scale existing LCD production up to a large enough size that they can get it 2160 pixels tall (by however wide), and that’s the size of the display. They can advertise having both a large display (which people like) and 4K (which people like), so there’s no downside to the manufacturers.
But if you want actual high pixel density, 200+PPI, your options are basically an Apple monitor (LG’s apple-sold display notwithstanding), or a smartphone.
(I’d love to be proven wrong on this! My holy grail monitor is 200+ppi, 120+Hz, large (27”+), and ideally ultrawide, but alas, such a thing doesn’t exist.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people believe anything that Apple says these days? LG has a spec-for-spec monitor that's over 3 years old.[1] [1]: https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-27MD5KA-B-5k-uhd-led-monit...
That's the monitor that Apple sold for the past years in their stores (and has now replaced with this new monitor).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Samsung G9 is for sale now, and it pushes 5120x1440 at 240Hz without subsampling through DisplayPort 1.4, which is the exact same pixel rate as 5120x2880 at 120Hz.
1440p for 49" in 2022? You can probably pick the pixels with your fingers.
Not the author, but in response to the many variations of "why would you do this?", the answer seems simple: If you do most of your computing on a Mac, this is one of the few available monitors that has highly compatible resolution and behavior, and if you have a PC for gaming as well, not everyone has the space or desire to maintain a completely separate monitor expressly for the purpose of PC gaming.
Not the author, but in response to the many variations of "why would you do this?", the answer seems simple: If you do most of your computing on a Mac, this is one of the few available monitors that has highly compatible resolution and behavior, and if you have a PC for gaming as well, not everyone has the space or desire to maintain a completely separate monitor expressly for the purpose of PC gaming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Back when the Thunderbolt display was a couple years old, I got it in my head that I wanted a very beautiful monitor with at least a casual gamer compatible response time. When all was said and done, the monitor I found turned out to have similar specs to the Thunderbolt display. Color reproduction, pixel response rates. Basically the same panel and driver. It was $100 cheaper than the Thunderbolt display, at the out…
That’s some good longevity there. Hope this one lasts as long
So it was either get the big brother of my primary display (larger but lower ppi), or wait. Last fall they bumped that monitor to... I want to say better speakers and a uniform bezel (old model was fat at the bottom).
I really miss the speakers in the Thunderbolt display. Holy hell are people shipping bad speakers in some otherwise excellent monitors. I'm back to using external ones and dealing with the EM interference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any alternatives you'd recommend? When last I looked I was surprised how limited the options were for 2160p + higher refresh rates (I guess maybe cables/ports/GPUs need time to catch up?)
Unfortunately there are no monitors sold by any company other than Apple (and LG for that one 5K display they made specifically _for_ apple) that have a “retina” pixel density, which I would define as >200 PPI. (The Studio Display’s is 218.) Every ginormous “4k2k” or whatever display is just that: ginormous, so the actual pixel density is much lower, and is comparable to a typical (smaller, 1440p, etc) display. I sus…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't really ever need >60Hz for editing though. You're working with 60fps, at most, but even more likely 30fps or 24fps.
Remember all those 120hz and 240hz plasma TVs back in the day that couldn't take any >60hz input signal? Yeah that wasn't just pointless marketing. It was so they could show 24fps and 48fps video content smoothly, without 3:2 pulldown artifacts. If you're working in a professional video studio, chances are you're probably going to encounter 24fps video. So yeah, still matters beyond gaming.