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

291–300 of 335 posts

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#291

Post by speleding »

RulerOf wrote: post #280
brailsafe wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm more surprised that you're using a 24" display at any resolution. Of course, everyone has different preferences, but that just seems ridiculously small considering how available larger displays are for the same ppi and refresh rate probably. I'm personally on the old 30" 16:10 2560x1600 form factor, and it's wildly better visually than the 27" 1440p screen by the same brand (all of them Dell) I use at the office.

> I'm personally on the old 30" 16:10 2560x1600 form factor I sorta wish that form factor had taken off instead of 27" 1440p. The extra vertical space is really nice, and that seems to be the ideal PPI for 100% scaling IMHO. I keep telling myself I'd like to get a 4K OLED display at the same PPI, but 40" seems to be conspicuously missing in every monitor lineup... at least at a price that will convince me to buy thre…

Agree! I still have several (now discontinued) Philips 40 inch monitors, and that is the perfect size to do programming work. Very little scrolling needed while you work. But I would love to have a 40 inch in 4K+ instead of 2560x1600, why is no one making these? (I did get a Samsung 8K 50 inch, but that's too large for a multi screen setup)

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#292

Post by vladvasiliu »

brailsafe wrote: post #264
badc0ffee wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'm more surprised that you're using a 24" display at any resolution. Of course, everyone has different preferences, but that just seems ridiculously small considering how available larger displays are for the same ppi and refresh rate probably. I'm personally on the old 30" 16:10 2560x1600 form factor, and it's wildly better visually than the 27" 1440p screen by the same brand (all of them Dell) I use at the office.

> I'm more surprised that you're using a 24" display at any resolution

I have an 24" 4K Dell I bought when big 4k screen with good (measured) colors were still expensive. It's a very pleasant screen to use. Sure, it has less real estate than a bigger one, but this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that I can keep it closer to my eyes, so I can use smaller text.

I find it makes me more "focused" in a way. Can't have multiple windowfuls of crap visible at the same time. It's very practical for TWMs. It also works well in a dual screen scenario, for stronger separation when you need it, but I'm still not sure if a single bigger screen is better than two smaller ones for things like having docs up next to code for example.

I find I can't use two 27" or higher screens, they're just too big and I need to turn my head way too much for comfort. At work we have a 2x27" 4k setup, and I basically only use the screen in front of me. Later I've been experimenting with pushing them very far away, but then I just need to increase text size and lose actual real estate.

> but that just seems ridiculously small considering how available larger displays are for the same ppi and refresh rate probably

I don't particularly care about refresh rates above 60 Hz (my laptop does 120 Hz, can see the difference, don't care). But I do care about PPI. Which screens are easily available with the PPI of a 4K 24"? I'd expect something like 5k 27" or 6k 32". These are very expensive (>1000 € for a crappy 27" Samsung, 2000 for a 32" Dell) and not that common, at least in France.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#293

Post by merlindru »

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.

everything feels much more responsive on 120hz+

especially noticeable with typing. and scrolling.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#294

Post by akvadrako »

tmp10423288442 wrote: post #122
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…

Do you notice 120Hz and above when doing office tasks? I'd much rather have improved resolution and PPI rather than 120Hz for that use case.

I don't notice it at all, on my laptop or phone. Even when having one monitor 60 and one 120 next too it.

Only when looking at demo pages to show off high refresh rates can I tell.

Though what I do notice is replacing the mouse with a higher polling rate from 125Hz to 250Hz.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#295

Post by hollerith »

gucci-on-fleek wrote: post #269
hollerith wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're using a high-DPI monitor, you might not notice the blurriness. I use a standard 110-DPI monitor (at 200% scaling in Gnome) and I notice it when the scaling factor is not an integer. Or more precisely, I noticed it eventually as a result of my being primed to notice it after people on this site insisted that GTK cannot handle fractional scaling factors. Compared to the contents of a browser's viewport, Emacs…

> If you're using a high-DPI monitor [...] I use a standard 110-DPI monitor (at 200% scaling in Gnome) FWIW, I'm using a 184 DPI monitor with 150% scaling. > you might not notice the blurriness. [...] > Compared to the contents of a browser's viewport, Emacs and the apps that come with Gnome are visually simple, so it took me a year or 2 to notice I'm pretty sensitive to font rendering issues—to the point where I've…

Do you notice blurriness on MacOS when the Settings app (name?) has been used to change the scaling factor to a fractional value?

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#296

Post by gucci-on-fleek »

hollerith wrote: post #295
gucci-on-fleek wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're using a high-DPI monitor [...] I use a standard 110-DPI monitor (at 200% scaling in Gnome) FWIW, I'm using a 184 DPI monitor with 150% scaling. > you might not notice the blurriness. [...] > Compared to the contents of a browser's viewport, Emacs and the apps that come with Gnome are visually simple, so it took me a year or 2 to notice I'm pretty sensitive to font rendering issues—to the point where I've…

Do you notice blurriness on MacOS when the Settings app (name?) has been used to change the scaling factor to a fractional value?

Sorry, but I haven't ever used a Mac, so I unfortunately can't answer that. I've used Windows with fractional scaling, and most programs aren't blurry there, but the few that don't support fractional scaling are really blurry.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#297

Post by BoredomIsFun »

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…

Apple still uses ancient 450nm panel though, nowadays everyone and their dog moved to 455-460nm ones. 450nm considerably more harsh on my eyes.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#298

Post by seec »

delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #89
behnamoh wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the new one in this post?

Yes. That MSI monitor was unveiled at CES 2026, alongside several other monitors that use the same panel, such as the LG 27GM950-B.

That's pretty good. I think the sales of monitors have become slow overall, so now they can focus on higher-end stuff to make some money even if it's for niche products at first.

I just saw a brand new display for 70 bucks at a store the other day; the margins must be extremely low.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#299

Post by BoredomIsFun »

bsimpson wrote: post #210
Analemma_ wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can second this. I bought two of the 5K 27" ProArt monitors plus a Thunderbolt hub to be my home setup, all for less than the price of one Studio Display, and it has been working perfectly.

That was the one I'd heard of, but I was shocked to see how low the Amazon reviews are (3.8). A highly-rated review said it had horrible clarity, like a greasy phone screen. You haven't had problems, and would buy it again?

As someone who is _very_ sensitive to screen texture (cannot tolerate grain, own glossy Dough Spectrum 27" 4k for that reason), from what I gathered, yes newest 5k and 6k panels use unusually harsh coating, which I am certain I would not be able to use whatsoever.

Re: Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR

#300

Post by seec »

a2tech wrote: post #44
sq_ wrote: post #2

I was curious to see the "Innovative DICOM Medical Imaging" section. I wouldn't have thought that Apple would be interested in niche applications like viewing radiology imaging, but I guess they're probably interested in any cost-insensitive market for these since they're so expensive.

At a local hospital the radiologists have been all Mac for a long long time. They refused to give it up and resisted all attempts to get them to switch. So it doesn’t surprise me at all.

Yeah, in my first job I was an Apple technician for a company that supplied DICOM solutions to radiologist, both in hospitals and standalone.

I thought it was weird they spent so much money on Apple hardware when most of what we sold was servers that would be hidden anyway. But they do like OsiriX; once a solution is established in those fields, they stick with it, very conservative professions obviously...

Post reply on HN