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

Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 335 posts

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#221

Post by nicce »

anon7000 wrote: post #118

So the $1600 Studio Display does not have 120hz. Here’s some monitors you can buy at that price point: - 6k 32” monitor (similar PPI) (Acer PE320QX) - most high-end 4k displays (even OLEDs) with 144hz+ refresh rate 32” 4k isn’t great PPI, but it’s still fine PPI, at a reasonable distance. Double the refresh rate is a much more noticeable improvement to me than 40% better pixel density, at a distance where retina matt…

> So the $1600 Studio Display does not have 120hz.

Usually these exists only to bump the price of the pro model.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#222

Post by realityking »

strongpigeon wrote: post #105
realityking wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think so. My M3 Pro is on the list as supporting 120 hz but it only has Thunderbolt 4. Also the base M4 doesn’t habe Thunderbolt 5 and it support 120 hz.

> My M3 Pro is on the list as supporting 120 hz Can you point me to said list? All I could find was: > Mac models with M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, M1 Ultra, M2, and M3 support Studio Display XDR at up to 60Hz. All other Studio Display XDR features are supported. And The Verge reports: > There’s also support for adaptive sync that can adjust between 47Hz and 120Hz (if it’s connected to an M4 Mac or later, or the M5 iPad Pro)…

> Can you point me to said list?

There’s no list per-se. The MacBook Pro (2021 and later) is listed as supported. The M3 Pro and M3 Max are not listed as only supporting 60Hz while the M3 and M1 Pro are.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#223

Post by nicce »

craftkiller wrote: post #163
data-ottawa wrote: post #138

I was hoping for OLED or dual-OLED based monitors, especially for this price point but I’d want this slightly lower than the XDR price. Sequoia+Tahoe seems like they’ve been laying the groundwork for OLED macs — removing the menu bar background and making text dynamically change colour, moving/cycling backgrounds, liquid glass reducing the effect of static UI elements, etc. I personally wouldn’t buy a new LCD based d…

Along similar lines, there's no way I would buy an OLED at this price point. If I'm dropping $3k on a monitor, it needs to be a technology that lasts, not a technology that wears out over time.

> If I'm dropping $3k on a monitor, it needs to be a technology that lasts, not a technology that wears out over time.

I bought my OLED TV when fearmongering was the highest, and it still works perfectly with zero burn-ins. So it is definitely possible. I bought the tv 8 years ago.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#224

Post by simondotau »

als0 wrote: post #220

Since the base model is still 60Hz, I'm struggling to pick between the base model or a Kuycon G32P. Can anyone on here help?

It shouldn't be a struggle. If you need colour quality (e.g. content creation/consumption) get the Studio Display. If you need real estate (e.g. technical work or programming) get the Kuycon.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#225

Post by craftkiller »

szmarczak wrote: post #216
craftkiller wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Along similar lines, there's no way I would buy an OLED at this price point. If I'm dropping $3k on a monitor, it needs to be a technology that lasts, not a technology that wears out over time.

Current gen OLEDs almost don't wear out (saying this as an OLED owner). To see the wear you need to have a completely black room and the wear is unnoticeable unless you're specifically looking for it. You don't need to spend 3k, 1k is enough.

Ah, you should update wikipedia then: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED#Lifespan

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#227

Post by EnPissant »

badc0ffee wrote: post #202
praseodym wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hardware is great, but the software is lacking. macOS only supports resolution-based scaling which makes anything but the default 200% pixel scaling mode look bad. For example, with a 27" 4K display many users will want to use 150% or 175% scaling to get enough real estate, but the image will look blurry because macOS renders at a higher resolution and then downscales to the 4K resolution of the screen. Both Wind…

I would love to see examples of this. I have a MBP and a 24" 4K Dell monitor connected via HDMI. I use all kinds of scaled resolutions and I've never noticed anything being jagged or blurry. Meanwhile in Linux the scaling is generally good, but occasionally I'll run into some UI element that doesn't scale properly, or some application that has a tiny mouse cursor. And then Windows has serious problems with old apps -…

I have a Macbook pro and a Linux machine attached to my dual 4k monitors.

Fonts on Linux (KDE Plasma on Wayland) look noticeably sharper than the Mac. I don't use subpixel rendering either. I hate that I have to use the Mac for work.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#228

Post by delta_p_delta_x »

MagicMoonlight wrote: post #215
roboror wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Studio Display shares a panel with the MSI MPG 271KRAW16

So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop as a $5000 premium display?

> So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop

There are only ~5 flat-panel manufacturers worldwide: AU Optronics, Innolux, LG Display, Samsung Display, Sharp Display, and recently BOE Display. Apple has to use one of these, even for its bespoke, notched, curved iPhone/iPad displays.

This new 5K 2304-zone panel was developed by LG Display, and is not 'generic white-labelled slop' by any means. It is an extremely good panel in its own right, probably the bleeding edge of LCD technology today achieving top-notch responsiveness, contrast, and colour depth and accuracy.

That MSI monitor will probably retail for ~£800 as will the Asus and LG equivalents, which is not a trivial amount for a monitor. Apple just marked it up 3×, as they are prone to do for anything.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#229

Post by [deleted] »

Aurornis wrote: post #187
praseodym wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hardware is great, but the software is lacking. macOS only supports resolution-based scaling which makes anything but the default 200% pixel scaling mode look bad. For example, with a 27" 4K display many users will want to use 150% or 175% scaling to get enough real estate, but the image will look blurry because macOS renders at a higher resolution and then downscales to the 4K resolution of the screen. Both Wind…

> For example, with a 27" 4K display 4K pixels is not enough at 27" for Retina scaling. Apple uses 5K panels in their 27" displays for this reason. There are several very good 27" 5K monitors on the market now around $700 to $800. Not as cheap as the 4K monitors but you have to pay for the pixel density. There are also driver boards that let you convert 27" 5K iMacs into external monitors. I don't recommend this ligh…

[deleted]

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#230

Post by tumult »

hbn wrote: post #198
jasomill wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

120 Hz vs 60 Hz? Night and day. Immediately noticeable just by moving the mouse pointer. Would expect improvements in scrolling to be apparent to even the most casual passers-by. 120 Hz can also noticeably improve frame pacing for 24p video*. 120 Hz vs 144 Hz? Barely noticeable when flipping between the two. Not sure if I'd pass an ABX test with 100% accuracy. Can't speak for 240 Hz or higher, as I haven't used them.…

> 120 Hz vs 60 Hz? Night and day. It's night and day when you're going back and forth between looking at them and wiggle your mouse around in circle. But after a few seconds of being focused on your work, you're not thinking about it anymore. Being able to watch 24fps video without non-integer frame weirdness is the only real advantage outside of twitch-reaction gaming.

I disagree. 120hz makes typing, mousing, etc. noticeably more responsive. I never stop noticing it. I never liked having to use 60hz all the time once LCDs were replacing CRTs. The original iMac didn't even let you choose 60hz to run the desktop at -- it only offered higher refresh rates in the menus. (Games could set the display to 60hz if they really wanted to.)
Post reply on HN