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

I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

cfenollosa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 203 posts

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#61

Post by RandallBrown »

vonseel wrote: post #35
mistersquid wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would have given him a DPI increase over his previous 27" 1440p display. Any 4k screen would have also done that. While true, the ppi increase from most 4k screens would not be as large as the Apple Studio Display. Most 4k monitors are 24 inches, and those monitors will be 192.94 ppi. [0][1] The Apple Studio Display comes in at 218 ppi. [2] [0] https://www.sven.de/dpi/ [1] https://imgur.com/a/8Woe7Bn [2] https://ww…

> Most 4k monitors are 24 inches Where are you getting this? I was looking at monitors recently and it's impossible to find ANY 24" 4K monitors. Most of them are 27", which at that screen size you really need scaling. My LG 27" 4K recently went out so I downgraded to my older 1440p 27" monitor. I'm not using scaling anymore, but the text doesn't have that buttery smooth look...

I think it's safe to say that 24 inch monitors aren't the majority of 4k monitors, but there's still a good number available.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/searchpage.jsp?st=4k+monitor+24...

https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HMUA2VC/A/lg-ultrafine-4k...

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#62

Post by treesknees »

dainiusse wrote: post #52

Honestly I just dont understand why would one buy a 27" display these days. 32" makes much more sense

How about desk space? The author says he's replacing his existing 27-inch monitor. If you look at the final photo in the article, I don't believe he could fit a 32-inch monitor in the same place and keep his existing desk layout the same.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#64

Post by fuzzieozzie »

ysleepy wrote: post #5

They sort of imply that only the Studio display would have given him a DPI increase over his previous 27" 1440p display. Any 4k screen would have also done that. Then he concludes that 600nits is unnecessary and that he doesn't need or want the USB-C ports. I have no idea why he went with the apple display instead of any good 4k screen for 400$, or two of them.

Maybe because it's April 1?

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#66

Post by sp332 »

bgentry wrote: post #41
miohtama wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the camera so bad in Apple Studio Display, as the article claims? iPhone and iPad cameras are quite good. Edit: Found in the comments a claim it’s a software bug.

In addition to the software bug, they also used a dated camera module from the front-facing camera on the iPhone 11. They could have used the higher quality rear-facing camera from the iPhone 13, or the front-facing camera part from the iPhone 13, or even (god forbid) a single rear-facing camera part from the iPhone 13 / Pro for the best quality. The iPhone 13 Pro contains 3 of these rear-facing cameras with far bett…

I think they went with the front-facing part for the field of view.

Re: I didn't return my Apple Studio Display

#70

Post by sp332 »

D13Fd wrote: post #60

I don't particularly like the Apple Studio Display, but this post is wrong on the ergonomics. Generally the top of your monitor should sit at or just below eye level.

Doesn't that mean you have your head slouched forward most of the time? I think that's just painful.
Post reply on HN