27-inch LG UltraFine 5K Display Removed From Online Apple Stores Across Europe

[theluggage]

Aaaaaand there continues to be absolutely no viable option to have an external macOS display with Retina.

I agree that the 5k 27" display is the sweet spot for a Mac display - because MacOS doesn't have variable PPI and 5k is "just right" for MacOS's design. Apple's problem is that 5k just hasn't taken off with the PC world - there's no particular 5k advantage on Windows - hence the disappearance of 5k displays from Dell, HP, Phillips etc.

The related problem is that DisplayPort 1.2 hung around way past its sell-by date, and 5k really needs DisplayPort 1.4 to be done properly. With DP1.2 it needs two DisplayPort cables - and even with Thunderbolt it's implemented as 2 DP1.2 streams each driving half the screen. Again, with Thunderbolt not catching on so quickly with PC users, that probably helped dissuade PC users from taking up 5k.

Of course, you may not care about PC users, but the reality is that anything that only Mac users buy loses out on "economy of scale" which means that 5k panels are going to be rare, expensive or both - Apple probably need every panel that LG makes for iMacs... So if Apple do produce a 5k display, it's probably not going to be cheap.

In the absence of 5k, though:

"looks like 1080p" is fine on an up-to 24" 4K UHD display - and it isn't 1080p it's 3840x2160 but with chunky system fonts and icons - any app with a zoom feature will take advantage of the 4k. It's not that bad at 27", but the icons and fonts do start wasting screen estate. Personally, I'd probably go for a pair of 24" over a single 27".

On a 27", "looks like 2560x1440" is a bit soft compared side-by-side to a 5k iMac and, again, isn't just 1440p - its 2880p downsampled to 2160. Plus, you can switch to either 1:1 or 1080p in a jiffy if you're using an app with a zoomable interface.

Or, if your eyesight is sufficiently good that the previous solution is too "soft" then a 30"+ 4k will probably be usable for you at 1:1.

 

[Black Magic]

I'm enjoying my LG 5K 27" Ultrafine. Just plug my MacBook Pro in and instant iMac. No image retention like I had on my 2014 27" 5K Retina iMac and the minimalistic look is nice. Not sure I will ever buy an iMac again because the convenience of a decoupled solution is fantastic.

 

[citysnaps]

The panel of course is fine. A lot of people are turned off because of the aesthetics and the price. Hard to understand why a 27" monitor is only a few hundred dollars cheaper than a whole 27" iMac.

That's probably because the whole 27" iMac is very well-priced. LG will do what it needs to do.

 

[chucker23n1]

Regardless, there isn’t even another 5k 27” on the market, period. There’s nothing “average” about it. It’s well above average in terms of overall picture quality alone.

Yeah, well.

Here's the thing: you can get this for $1300, or you can get three 4K 24-inch displays (also from LG, no less), for a 11520x2160 (or 5760x1080 @ Retina 2x) resolution, for $300 each, and a Thunderbolt Dock for $200-300, and still end up below $1300.

And for what? Higher ppi. That's it. That's the entire raison d'être.

How is anyone supposed to convince an IT department of such a poor deal?

It’s not like an Apple-designed monitor of the same caliber is going to be significantly cheaper, if at all.

But most people don't need an Apple-designed monitor. They just need any monitor at all.

And there simply isn't any good option for them.

 

[chucker23n1]

I agree that the 5k 27" display is the sweet spot for a Mac display - because MacOS doesn't have variable PPI and 5k is "just right" for MacOS's design. Apple's problem is that 5k just hasn't taken off with the PC world - there's no particular 5k advantage on Windows - hence the disappearance of 5k displays from Dell, HP, Phillips etc.

But it's not just 5K — there are many more 4K options, but almost all of them have slightly too low ppi. Almost no display offers 4K at ~21.5 inches.

So what you end up with is a situation where almost zero external displays offer Retina.

Which, like you said, is a problem in macOS because its ppi scaling is supposed to be an integer.

Of course, you may not care about PC users, but the reality is that anything that only Mac users buy loses out on "economy of scale" which means that 5k panels are going to be rare, expensive or both

Yup.

 

[tevion5]

I'm ok with a 30" 5k.

Why? That wouldn't reach iMac levels of pixel density, pretty sure you can find monitor at or very close to that spec already.

It's consumer Apple displays at >=27" with retina iMac levels of DPI that are the holy grail many of us are holding out for.

 

[arvinsim]

I've never understood the hatred of the UltraFine. I know they're not Apple branded, but given the alternatives on the market I've always been very happy. In terms of features, I couldn't find a decent alternative when I was buying… I essentially wanted a 27" iMac screen for my other computers - and that's exactly what it is!

Outright hatred? No

Balked at how expensive it is? Yes

 

[djlythium]

So hoping the replacement is on its way finally. Hopefully, it will be Apple-branded and with at least a 32" screen. I would be ok with it costing up to $1500, maybe even $2k depending on specs and features.

For me to buy: 32” 4K+ w/ single USB-C charging, full Bluetooth keyboard functionality (brightness, etc.), light sensor for auto-dimming, ProMotion, + GOOD built-in speakers. Otherwise, hard pass.

 

[Black Magic]

Outright hatred? No

Balked at how expensive it is? Yes

True it is expensive but when you look at the cost breakdown, they match up with iMacs.

$1200 for 27" LG Ultra Fine
$699 for Mac mini

Entry level 27 " iMac = $1799

 

[Robert McNewbie]

4K at 24 inches is slightly too large for Apple's idea of Retina, though.

They thought about this and made it 23.7"

 

[ducknalddon]

If you need a nice but cheap „retina“ monitor, try to get a used Dell P2415Q. 185 PPI, quality looks as good as my 15“ rMBP and it has 99% sRGB colors. Also very good built quality and ergonomics.
I paid 209 euros for mine. Until there are affordable 27” 5K options, this is a very good alternative.

I had one of these and the display quality was very good but I had endless problems using it with my Mac Mini. The final straw was when it took 30 minutes to get it to connect one morning.

 

[nathansz]

Aaaaaand there continues to be absolutely no viable option to have an external macOS display with Retina. Which, since non-Retina text rendering has gotten considerably worse since High Sierra, is quite a problem.

Seems like using a Mac (other the iMac) in an office environment is no longer a setting Apple wants to support.

running 2x 2560x1440 on 27” 4k monitor looks fine to me

 

[Wordman]

Apple are saying this is all about a 'forthcoming regulation' in the EU, which means the monitor can't be sold in Europe. That would explain why it's still available in other territories.

 

[Robert McNewbie]

Outright hatred? No

Balked at how expensive it is? Yes

I was feeling the same when I started to look for a monitor for my home office. But I did not find anything with same or better color gamut, brightness, power delivery. So I ended up buying one (on a 25% sale) and I have OS integration too. The somehow cartoonish, blunt design statement "I am what I am" is to my liking.

 

[nStyle]

Yeah, well.

Here's the thing: you can get this for $1300, or you can get three 4K 24-inch displays (also from LG, no less), for a 11520x2160 (or 5760x1080 @ Retina 2x) resolution, for $300 each, and a Thunderbolt Dock for $200-300, and still end up below $1300.

And for what? Higher ppi. That's it. That's the entire raison d'être.

How is anyone supposed to convince an IT department of such a poor deal?



But most people don't need an Apple-designed monitor. They just need any monitor at all.

And there simply isn't any good option for them.

lol I’m simply pointing out it’s not average like you originally said. I couldn’t care less whether you or anyone else finds it worth it or not. I'm not even saying I disagree that it's "not worth it".

Nevertheless, A large retina display with superb PQ is always going to be expensive...

 

[bobt]

I just purchased 3 more of them for a new office for our business. My business partner and I both have them at our home based offices and although they aren’t a cheap option they have worked out well. Decent image quality, charge our MBP’s, have the built in thunderbolt ports. Clean and simple.

 

[whiteonline]

I don’t get the hate either. Regarding looks, they are very simple. Matte black finish, minimal branding, no flash. The flat base that doesn’t overrun the desk. And it’s the same panel from the iMac. Sure the bezels arent tiny, but not massive either.
Built in webcam and speakers are a bonus (of course the speakers are terrible, but just fine for my meetings).

 

[Gidiyup]

More than a month ago, LG's 24-inch 4K UltraFine display was removed from Apple's online store across Europe. Now, the higher-end 5K, 27-inch UltraFine display has also been removed from Apple's online store in several European countries, such as France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK.

Interestingly, both the 4K and 5K UltraFine displays remain listed and available for order in the United States. The 5K UltraFine display retails for $1,300 and offers one Thunderbolt 3 port and three USB-C ports. The display features up to 500 nits of brightness with a 5,120 x 2,880 resolution and P3 wide color gamut, and offers built-in stereo speakers, a camera, and a microphone.

Apple is reportedly working on a new lower-priced external monitor, according to Bloomberg. The new monitor would be offered alongside the current high-end $4,999, 32-inch Pro Display XDR. According to Bloomberg, the new monitor would be cheaper and aimed at mainstream consumers, rather than the professional market that the Pro Display XDR is aimed at.

(Thanks, Colin!)

Article Link: 27-inch LG UltraFine 5K Display Removed From Online Apple Stores Across Europe

Of course they will come out with a new monitor after I just bought a new one this year!

 

[ijbond]

i love my Ultrafine.

 

[Fabian90]

I had one of these and the display quality was very good but I had endless problems using it with my Mac Mini. The final straw was when it took 30 minutes to get it to connect one morning.

The first version of this monitor had some problems with waking up from sleep mode but the later revisions fixed that. I have 2 from 2016 and later and I don't have any problems with them.

 

[lcseds]

One can't complain about the bezels if one thinks the iMac is acceptable. The black border around the iMac is huge, and appear larger than the LG's bezel.

 

[coolcoolcool]

Re: size of new Apple branded monitor. I don't think Apple have the same one size fits all-mindset as before, and might as well release a 24-inch, 27-inch and a 32-inch all at once. Also, multiply those sizes by a hundred and you'll get their respective prices.

 

[Santiago]

It's not that it's a bad display; it's that for an average display, it's way too pricey.

You can get a 27-inch 2560x1440 display for $250. Retina perhaps justifies the price being about twice as much. It does not justify the price being five times as much.

LG can either make this a more premium display (such as by fixing the wobbliness in the stand); even then, it's really quite pricey. Or they can lower the price.

With screens, you basically pay by the pixel, with only a tiny part of the cost going up based on physical size. 5k has four times the pixels as 2.5k, so five times the price isn't particularly out of line. I bought one years ago when they came out, and have never regretted it.

 

[mctrials23]

I haven't come across many people who have the 4K/5K ultrafines who don't love them.

 

[whiteonline]

I haven't come across many people who have the 4K/5K ultrafines who don't love them.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I think this was mainly due to retail pricing.
But used, they are a bargain. One can get a perfect condition A-revision 5K for $600-$700 (and B for only slightly more).