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

Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 438 posts

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#201

Post by dewey »

bradlys wrote: post #197
dewey wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the reviews of the LG Ultrafine that extra $300 really are worth. Alone for not having a stand as shaky as the Ultrafine one.

For these types of displays - you shouldn't really ever be using the stand that it comes with anyway. Monitor arms are ubiquitous and known. They do much better job of holding a monitor than the stands that come with most monitors.

That's a "you are holding it wrong" kinda argument. If you pay 1.5k for a monitor you should be able to expect a stand that doesn't shake if you bump into your table a bit.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#202

Post by spudlyo »

gen220 wrote: post #136
techpression wrote: post #115

For all the work Apple is doing to improve their environmental impact (which I applaud) I'm completely flabbergasted as to why this is a single device monitor. It's quite the impact on the environment to require users who have a Mac mini/Studio and a MacBook Pro to buy two monitors (no matter how great the production chain is). Sure, you can plug/unplug the cable, but that works so-so on a Studio with the ports on th…

Can you not use a thunderbolt switch? In my home office, I've got two monitors and a switch to flick input between a personal machine and a work machine.

I use an IOGEAR Thunderbolt 2 KVM[0] that lets you switch thunderbolt between two computers. I use this in conjunction with three TB2 -> TB3 adapters[1] and a CalDigit TS3+[2] (which drives my DisplayPort monitor). It's janky, but it works, and I don't really notice the speed difference dropping down to TB2 speeds since the only TB3 peripheral I hang off the CalDigit is an audio interface.

At some point I actually had a TB2 only computer I wanted to KVM switch with a TB3 laptop so this weird setup made more sense then.

[0]: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M74Y03E

[1]: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MQ26QIY

[2]: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07CZPV8DF

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#203

Post by kccqzy »

adrianmsmith wrote: post #174
kccqzy wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UI elements are still rendered at 2x and then downscaled. It's just that you (or most people) can't tell the difference. Me neither.

However this decision does mean Apple can't produce monitors with more than about 200 PPI without the text being too small (at 200%). i.e. they can't go beyond 5K at 27". Which is a shame, you can use 8K monitors with Windows at e.g. 300% just fine.

They can easily add support for rendering at 3x. iOS has supported that since iPhone 6 Plus. The only thing that's missing from macOS is a switch to turn it on, and produce all the UI assets at 3x.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#204

Post by kitsunesoba »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #176
tstrimple wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple accounted for this by making sure none of their monitors have a standard VESA mount.

They do, they are sold separately.

The VESA mount is actually a no-extra-cost configuration option on the Studio Display.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#205

Post by petilon »

adrianmsmith wrote: post #28

Would be nice to have >5K resolutions to have more pixel density. Alas, macOS doesn't support any native scaling other than 100% and 200%. So if they did release e.g. a 27" 8K monitor, the text would either be too small, or they'd have to use bitmap scaling to make it bigger in which case there'd be no advantage of having an 8K monitor. (EDIT: To clarify, all other scaling factors are done by rendering at either 100%…

> I really don't understand why they don't either (a) adopt Windows' approach of allowing rendering directly to any arbitrary scale

Windows is badly broken in this regard. I bought and returned a Microsoft Surface laptop because its rendering is broken: If you display a web page containing horizontal lines (like grid lines of an HTML table) then the lines will appear to have varying thickness even though they are all set to 1px. That's crap; I couldn't believe Microsoft is shipping this. If Windows scaling is set to anything other than 100% or 200% you will have this issue. Both 150% and 300% have this issue. I have never seen such issues on a Mac.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#206

Post by petilon »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #187
naikrovek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is allowing a 150% option considered "going wild"?

Personally, no, but the GP did say "allowing any arbitrary scale" and that's what I was referring to. Why Apple does not allow 150% is beyond me because it is quite reasonable. But I can understand why they don't allow users to enter a value like 168%.

> Why Apple does not allow 150% is beyond me because it is quite reasonable.

It is absolutely not reasonable. HTML tables with horizontal grid lines will appear to have varying line thicknesses when in reality they are all set to the same width.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#207

Post by TingPing »

NobodyNada wrote: post #106
pcr910303 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Macs does support non-integer scaling. In fact, macOS currently ships non-integer scaling by default in certain MBP models. It gets criticized from time to tome, though the newer 14/16” MBPs ship 200% as default again.

Unless things changed since last I checked ~2 years ago, macOS’s 150% scaling actually renders at 300% and downscales. It looks pretty bad (visible aliasing on any kind of text) and is wasteful performance-wise.

That's just how to do it. You scale extra information down. Anything else doesn't work outside of vector based formats.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#208

Post by dnissley »

oceanplexian wrote: post #171
jjcm wrote: post #98

Awesome to see them finally putting out almost consumer friendly pricing displays. Few things I'm disappointed about though: - 60hz. For this price point I'd expect higher. - Thunderbolt 3. Interesting that they didn't bump to 4, given the Mac Studio is Thunderbolt 4. This means you wont be able to daisy chain the displays. - Lack of size options. Would love to see more variety here. After moving to an ultrawide form…

Yeah I don’t know what it is with everyone prioritizing pixels over refresh rate.. once you start using 100+hz 60hz starts to feel like a slide show. You can see mouse trails and scrolling is jerky and uncoordinated, it’s painful and insanely distracting.

I mainly just look at text all day, so the "slow" transitions between different bits of text just don't matter all that much to me. Resolution helps that text look nice and crisp though, which I really do appreciate.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#209

Post by ericmay »

fotta wrote: post #130
ericmay wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No webcam or microphone in the LG displays. Well the 4k at least. I assume the 5k is the same. It does have speakers. They're ok for the price point but not notable. It's also basically unsupported as far as software is concerned. You can't connect an iPad to it for example. Or at least I can't anymore. Sound would play but not screen mirroring.

The 5k has a webcam and mic. The webcam is much higher quality than my MBP's too.

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I guess I should have been less lazy and just looked that up before posting. When I was looking at both the 4k and 5k it was completely lost on me that it had those features. Dang! I don't need 5k (or 4k really but w/e) but would have liked to have had the webcam and mic.

Re: Apple announces 27-inch 5K Studio Display

#210

Post by Gualdrapo »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #95

$1599 isn't quite as bad as I expected, actually. I've still got my old 27" Apple Thunderbolt Display (a puny 2560 by 1440 pixels), which i use daily. (The convenience of built-in video/mic/USB hub, with one cable, is indispensible and more important to me than resolution, and it's been really unclear to me what else could do that with a macbook). But might be ready to upgrade to this guy.

I also have a Thunderbolt Display, which I got last year. It's been great and, as you say, having webcam/mic/speakers/usb hub _and an Ethernet port_ is absolutely fantastic. And the quality of the thing overall is just superb.

Also for me those "add-ons" are more important than pixel density, and I'm saying this as a graphic designer. If there were a version of this with a bigger size (but with less pixel density), and maybe a more 'squared' factor, I'd jump to it without even thinking, but alas for Apple pixel density is first above everything else.

Post reply on HN