What facts would you have us check? You have provided no facts about any manufacturers who are selling 27” 5K monitors that are better than Apples and significantly cheaper.And your post are typical Apple cheering instead of fact checking.
What facts would you have us check? You have provided no facts about any manufacturers who are selling 27” 5K monitors that are better than Apples and significantly cheaper.And your post are typical Apple cheering instead of fact checking.
Makes sense. The vast majority of monitors for sale out there are still 1920x1080. Most businesses aren’t buying 4K monitors for regular employees.These are all 4K... how are they described as "high resolution" EVER. They're most certainly not!
Who was making a tandem OLED before last month?Who is making a 27” 5K monitor that does 120Hz?
Well, Apple is using this tech in its new iPad Pro. Dell and others will be using it in their new snapdragon x elite laptops.Who was making a tandem OLED before last month?
According to rtings, the text clarity is crap. Note, there's a G8 and a Neo G8. The Neo scores much higher on text clarity.What's the thought on the quality of the 32-inch Odyssey OLED G8 ($1,299) - as a work/productivity monitor?
Checked the specs for the Studio Display and they‘re not bad. The problem is if you put a whiz bang camera in a display you’re venturing into YouTuber territory and most of them are springing for a discrete camera rig. It’s the law of diminishing returns. Anecdotally I have a Studio Display and in Zoom and Teams the picture quality blows away the others in the meeting.Well, at least upgrade the camera. Why do Apple have to wait 5-6 years for a monitor design refresh to do that? Can’t they refresh some technologies as become available?
Thanks for your explanation. While I agree with you that Apple is making quality products and therefore asking more money for it. For me that’s justified for state of the art tech. But we are talking computer technology here not art.I admit that I don’t follow tv advancement to really comment on that with confidence. But I get the impression tv’s get minor improvements each year to the processors, and picture quality doesn’t really seem to improve within the various classes (e.g. 4k compared to 4k) across a 5-year, maybe 10-year, span.
Again, I could be wrong there, but if a 15 year old 27-inch monitor from Apple still looks great (although resolution isn’t cutting edge) by comparison across the resolution class, what would be gained with a faster upgrade cycle? I suspect we’d get lower quality and a worse product. Something similar to Samsung.
Of course, I can see why you want a lower price for the same product, that makes sense (setting aside that Apple doesn’t often do that). But the thing that might (or might not) set Apple apart is that Apple spends a lot of time building a monitor (or any product). The result is a product that looks and feels like a quality product. Samsung displays aren’t really in the same category side-by-side (even fairly irrelevant tests like wiggling your desk are insightful, Samsung will sway side to side). So Apple, playing the long game with its goal of peerless quality, might be selling the monitors below their ideal profit margin for the first year or two, with the end goal of becoming a cash cow in the following years.
It’s just a thought. With my conclusion being, I am not prepared to side with your initial response, it did sound like a joke… I may have misinterpreted your sincerity.
Hi-res = ~218+ ppi screen density to 99.999% of users over the last few years since they've been a thing since Apple released their first 5K iMacs. Not just the general resolution, as alluded to.Makes sense. The vast majority of monitors for sale out there are still 1920x1080. Most businesses aren’t buying 4K monitors for regular employees.
In part, there reads to be some baggage associated with your response that I am just not following. And the tv improvements, again, I don’t see or notice them, I might need to be shown a comparison of mid level 2018 tvs to mid level 2024 tvs to see a difference… I don’t understand how or why we should upgrade our display every year as if it’s an iPhone. I tend to believe Apple doesn’t even want to fool us into buying a new monitor every year. But again, I can’t really contribute there since in my limited experience monitors and tvs of the last 5 or even 10 years seem to be marginally different, maybe not even improved.Thanks for your explanation. While I agree with you that Apple is making quality products and therefore asking more money for it. For me that’s justified for state of the art tech. But we are talking computer technology here not art.
However I don’t agree with you that tech on monitor and tv’s don’t evolve that quick. Take a look at CES for example. LG and Samsung are both battling it out every year. More brightness, better blacks, better response times, better everything.
The studiodisplay was introduced in march 2022. So the tech inside it is also dated.
120hz refresh rates? Oled?
The prices have stayed the same. As with the extra swivel stand voor $ 999,- 🫢. And those are US prices. Here in Europe it’s even more expensive.
Yes, it’s a beautiful monitor. But it’s also tech and tech is aging very fast. That’s the problem with Apple and Timmy in particular. They’ve become too greedy, fat and lazy.
Every tech company has to make profit to survive and invest in R&D. Looking whats coming from Apple with their huge pile of profits and looking what they’re putting into R&D to make their products better… only 7% of their income. The rest goes to Timmy and gang and their greedy shareholders.
The Studio Display came out two years ago.
Other manufacturers are still missing the mark in matching the Studio Display’s 5K. And not, 4K 43” isn’t close.
And you want high refresh rate and that offers little extra value to me. I would love a high refresh, OLED, 5K monitor but no one is offering that now.The Studio Display is using a nearly decade old panel that doesn’t hold up with what’s available today. They could do better. They choose not to. I’ve said this before; the Studio Display doesn’t offer anything special other than the fancy Apple aluminum body to justify the price. It doesn’t even compete with the displays on their mobile products.
Where’s the high refresh rate?
Where’s HDR?
Where’s a modern backlight with local dimming (or an OLED)?
Where are multiple inputs or the ability to use it with anything that isn’t a mac?
You want a great 5k Monitor? Great, if you’re one of the small minority of people that can tell the difference between 4k and 5k, Samsung will sell you one for half the price.It is undeniable that for the price that Apple charges. You can get all of those features in one screen for less than the Studio Display. Oh, but they aren’t made of aluminum with an Apple logo on them so they don’t count, right?
If you can’t see differences with monitors or tv’s a couple of years ago, I suggest you have to let to check your eyes. Each year there are improvements. And each year last year tech goes down in price because of that.In part, there reads to be some baggage associated with your response that I am just not following. And the tv improvements, again, I don’t see or notice them, I might need to be shown a comparison of mid level 2018 tvs to mid level 2024 tvs to see a difference… I don’t understand how or why we should upgrade our display every year as if it’s an iPhone. I tend to believe Apple doesn’t even want to fool us into buying a new monitor every year. But again, I can’t really contribute there since in my limited experience monitors and tvs of the last 5 or even 10 years seem to be marginally different, maybe not even improved.
To your other portion, regarding R&D I don’t think percentage of income (irrespective as to whether you meant gross or net) is a good measure to compare. I guess if this was BMW, vs GE, vs Nvidia, vs Startup X… it’s going to be across the board. And I am not certain a higher R&D budget would be well spent on monitors… what could the ROI look like? What should the budget be?
(A) Yes, cross comparisons of display classes (1080p to 4k) they’ve definitely improved, but within a class I just don’t notice a difference to justify an annual upgrade applied to a monitor.[…]
The last 10 years we’ve seen big improvements. 1080p was the standard 10 years ago. Now it’s 4 or 5k and even 8k. You can’t see any pixels when looking closer.
[…]
I don’t say Apple studio display is bad, all I’m saying that it is older tech being sold as the premium price as when it was introduced. Today that is a rip off and greediness on Apple’s part.
[…]
I didn't say specifically a 5K monitor. There aren't a lot of options for those, but for the money, I would chose one of these over the Studio Display:No you can't.
Show me a 27" 5K display with Thunderbolt3 from a different manufacturer, which you can buy for substantially less money.
I will wait.