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

251–260 of 335 posts

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#251

Post by benbayard »

praseodym wrote: post #76
densh wrote: post #13

I might be the only one, but it's still to this date (and dating all the way back to 2014 with the first iMac 5k display) Apple is the only company that truly gets HIDPI desktop displays with high quality gloss and 200+ ppi at screen this large. In the meantime popular and widely sold gaming screens with matte blur filters and mediocre ppi give me headache and eye fatigue after a few hours of use. Prior generation St…

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 just tested on my 4k display and 150% and 175% were not blurry at all. I'm on a 32 inch 4k monitor. Is it possible this information is out of date and was fixed by more recent versions of macos?

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#252

Post by szmarczak »

craftkiller wrote: post #243
szmarczak wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In 2016, LG Electronics reported an expected lifetime of 100,000 hours 23 years for an older generation OLED seems fine to me, I don't understand the problem here?

The US Department of Energy report from the same year reports far lower numbers, which I'd be more inclined to trust since they are impartial / not trying to market a product.

True, but those numbers are from 2016, 10 years ago. For a more apples to apples comparison see [1] [2] [3].

[1] https://youtu.be/H43wnV-v7V0

[2] https://youtu.be/RbEgQrigiLc

[3] https://youtu.be/AZfwHcMLorY

In my case, 3205 hours of use:

- 428 pixel cleans

- 1/3 brightness (my room is pretty dim and I often code during the night)

- static control on

- pixel shift on

- apl low

- sub-logo dim on

- corner dim on.

During the day I am not able to see any burn in. During the night it's unnoticeable unless you're looking for it. And it's only visible on gray backgrounds, unnoticeable during normal use. My phone (Nothing Phone 2) fails to capture it no matter how hard I try (even during the night).

The only issue I had was at 2417 hours and it was vertical white stripes like this: [4] but they were completely gone after a manual pixel clean. No issues since. I am never going back, worth every penny I spent.

[4] https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/1gyv1db/fo32u2_ve...

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#253

Post by joemi »

culopatin wrote: post #248
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't it be something simple? Because monitors aren't simple. There are dozens of axes along which they can be scaled. They have resolution (1080p FHD, 1440p QHD, 4K, 5K, 6K, 8K), aspect ratio (16:9, 8:5, 4:3, 3:2, 21:9, 32:9), refresh rate (60 Hz, 75 Hz, 120 Hz, 144 Hz, 165 Hz, 240 Hz, 360 Hz, 480 Hz, 1 kHz, and of course adaptive refresh rate tech including G-Sync), colour quality (depth and accuracy), contra…

But they make it like this. They also have the power of simplifying their offers.

Simplifying their offerings for the sake of the model number doesn't make any sense. Simplifying their offerings for other reasons might make sense, but the companies themselves would be the best judge of whether or not it makes sense for them.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#256

Post by bombcar »

dawnerd wrote: post #56
jakubadamw wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR and starts at $3,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (U.S.) for education.”

They'd just call it something else or simply add a new size option for Studio Display XDR like they do Macbooks.

Studio Display XDR Pro

Available July 2026 - calling it now.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#257

Post by evanjrowley »

troupo wrote: post #39
pwthornton wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great news. Apple announced a 120hz display today.

There are other 120Hz displays than Apple's. There are even 240Hz displays. IIRC Apple couldn't get above 60Hz even on third-party displays they explicitly advertised.

My MacBook M3 Air & Pro laptops can run two QHD displays with one at 240 Hz and the other at 120 Hz. What it can't do is run either above 60 Hz with HDR enabled. But for my use cases, I've never need more than 60 Hz anyway.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#258

Post by xienze »

szmarczak wrote: post #252
craftkiller wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Department of Energy report from the same year reports far lower numbers, which I'd be more inclined to trust since they are impartial / not trying to market a product.

True, but those numbers are from 2016, 10 years ago. For a more apples to apples comparison see [1] [2] [3]. [1] https://youtu.be/H43wnV-v7V0 [2] https://youtu.be/RbEgQrigiLc [3] https://youtu.be/AZfwHcMLorY In my case, 3205 hours of use: - 428 pixel cleans - 1/3 brightness (my room is pretty dim and I often code during the night) - static control on - pixel shift on - apl low - sub-logo dim on - corner dim on. Durin…

That doesn’t sound very reassuring. 3205 hours, or a little over a year at 8 hours a day. Be generous and call it two years of use. You’re babying it with low brightness, dynamic dimming, etc. etc. and the fact that there’s anything, even if you have to “look for it”, is not a good sign.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#259

Post by ChildOfChaos »

Bit disappointed with this release.

I have a iMac 5k that I want to replace with a Mac mini or Studio, but monitors for Mac's are difficult since you need 5k at 27" or even 6k at 32" to keep th pixel density and then they aren't many options.

It's getting better, but prices are very high and a big issue with the 5k 27" monitors is that they are stuck at 60hz, Apple announced an approved offering here, but it's very expensive for the XDR and ideally I'd like to upgrade to 6k at 32" and have 120hz but that just seems unobtainable at the moment.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#260

Post by gucci-on-fleek »

hollerith wrote: post #241
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…

Wayland supports it (and Chrome supports it very well) but GTK does not. I run my UI at 200% scaling because graphical Emacs uses GTK to draw text, and that text would be blurry if I ran at my preferred scaling factor of 150% or 175%.

This works with GTK for me at least. I've been using Gnome+Wayland with 150% scaling for almost 4 years now, and I haven't noticed any issues with GTK. Actually, my experience is essentially backwards from yours—anything Electron/Chromium-based needed a bunch of command-line flags to work properly up until a few months ago, whereas GTK apps always just worked without any issues.
Post reply on HN