Any Positive Reviews of the Apple Studio Display?

[generationfourth]

LG seems to be very behind in adding mini-LED to their display panels and seem to be only focusing on it next year but we are unlikely to see a new 5K/6K version of Apple displays anytime soon. So Apple like any display manufacturer is also reliant on what their vendors can provide them.

While 60 Hz is fine as 5K is a demanding resolution for bandwidth, the lack of HDR is a huge minus on a display this expensive. Like I don't mind that my cheap 4K screen doesn't have it, but for a nearly 2000 euro display I think we should demand better.

We also should not accept that Apple makes decidedly anti-consumer features like not supporting both their own stand and a VESA mount in the same product version, or having to pay 400 euros extra for having something as simple as tilt and height adjustment. Or not having a standard removable power cable. Or not having more than one input.

Yes, I've looked at the display in store. It does look pretty. The screen also looks pretty, at least in static content. But there is no way to spin this as good value or that the 5K res and Apple design excuses the massively high price.

Tell me something I haven't heard, or the thread starter hasn't heard a million times. I'm not saying your points are not valid, they are, but in the end not that insightful or all that helpful at this point. If you want those specs then wait for them. It'll happen eventually. I don't understand why everyone thought that promotion + HDR + miniLED + 10 bit would happen at the fraction of the cost of the XDR display. Because it's 5" smaller it's somehow it's going to pack all those specs and be under $900 lol.

I never tried to spin it as a good value, just saying that for pro users (where the cost is negligible, it pays for itself over the span of a few days, and costs will be amortized over 5-8 years) it is a terrific monitor with consistency with all other Mac screens, reliable P3 reproduction, and a wide color gamut. Essentially if you wanted an XDR but didn't have the need for HDR color spaces the ASD hits all the marks. And for a lot of us pros, promotion or HDR doesn't make all that much difference with the type of content we're working with.

There is a $5k 32" Dell monitor that is similar spec to the XDR- it is clad in plastic and I don't hear anyone complaining about it. There are many $1k-2.5k 27" reference monitors that have only ~350 nits of brightness, SDR, etc for their intended use. Those are made out of plastic as well and I don't see anyone crying about those either. I know that this is a prosumer/professional level monitor and when apple announced they were focusing on pro users in 2017 everyone rejoiced but very few understood that 1) their needs are actually different than the pros and 2) it's going to cost a lot more

On the other end of the spectrum there are consumers that want a premium product that fits the Mac ecosystem seamlessly. They will have to decide if it is worth the cost and for some people it will be.

 

[CubeApril]

While I certainly don't think it's worth the $2k I spent on the Apple Studio Display + nano texture + VESA, I will say that there are quite a few ways in which it is the best monitor I have ever used.

• The speakers are downright incredible for a monitor, they are miles and miles better than anything else. If you want to get desk speakers off your desk, you would be danged happy with it.
• The nano texture does a better job of controlling reflection than even the best matte display I've had in my lifetime, although it does come with some tradeoffs in clarity and texture on white backgrounds.
• It turns on instantly when I move my mouse. When I put my machine to sleep, it turns off instantly. No searching for inputs, this adds up quite a lot for me as someone who locks her display constantly.
• The clarity of text is absurdly good, especially with the glossy version.
• Build quality is great, doesn't matter super much to me since it mostly sits there but it is quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the normal plastic junk.
• The brightness it reaches is extremely high, which is nice for me since I'm near bright windows. The color is excellent too, without having to do any fiddling.

Now, I'm a developer. I'm not gaming on it. But it's an unreal good development monitor. Is it worth the asking price? Not close, it's probably worth around $1000 for the glossy and $1300 for the nano texture. I feel like every review is colored by the fact that it's a HORRENDOUS value, but it's also perhaps the best monitor on the market (outside of the XDR) for productivity work if you can justify the cost.

 

[zorinlynx]

A lot of the people complaining about the Studio Display are doing it from a gamer perspective. The ASD is not a gaming monitor. It wasn't meant to be a gaming monitor.

If you're a gamer do yourself a favor and buy a gaming monitor. 1440p or 2160p, freesync, 144Hz, all that good stuff. However, look at the ASD and that gaming monitor side by side, and you'll see that the clarity and sharpness of the gaming monitor just doesn't compare.

If you're a developer, photographer, work with video, or even just bumming around on the Internet... The ASD will blow the pants off typical gaming monitors. I tried several different monitors on my Macbook Pro; nothing looks as good as the ASD and it was worth the money.

 

[zorinlynx]

but it's also perhaps the best monitor on the market (outside of the XDR) for productivity work if you can justify the cost.

That's just it. NOTHING comes close, except maybe the LG UltraFine, which is also expensive and has nowhere near the build quality. Heck I looked at an Ultrafine 5K and ASD side by side and the ASD looked much better.

When there's no comparable competition, you can charge a higher price, and Apple did this. Sucks for us, but we should be used to it. Apple stuff is expensive and is worth it for many.

 

[BSoares]

A lot of the people complaining about the Studio Display are doing it from a gamer perspective. The ASD is not a gaming monitor. It wasn't meant to be a gaming monitor.

If you're a gamer do yourself a favor and buy a gaming monitor. 1440p or 2160p, freesync, 144Hz, all that good stuff. However, look at the ASD and that gaming monitor side by side, and you'll see that the clarity and sharpness of the gaming monitor just doesn't compare.

If you're a developer, photographer, work with video, or even just bumming around on the Internet... The ASD will blow the pants off typical gaming monitors. I tried several different monitors on my Macbook Pro; nothing looks as good as the ASD and it was worth the money.

I agree. My son is a gamer and has a gaming monitor. It’s bigger than my ASD and has faster refresh rate but the viewing angles and clarity is no where near. My son asked why does my monitor look so much better than his. I said they serve different purposes, one is best for gaming and fast motion content, the other is for an office type of work where text clarity and colors matter more.

 

[kasakka]

A lot of the people complaining about the Studio Display are doing it from a gamer perspective. The ASD is not a gaming monitor. It wasn't meant to be a gaming monitor.

If you're a gamer do yourself a favor and buy a gaming monitor. 1440p or 2160p, freesync, 144Hz, all that good stuff. However, look at the ASD and that gaming monitor side by side, and you'll see that the clarity and sharpness of the gaming monitor just doesn't compare.

If you're a developer, photographer, work with video, or even just bumming around on the Internet... The ASD will blow the pants off typical gaming monitors. I tried several different monitors on my Macbook Pro; nothing looks as good as the ASD and it was worth the money.

While they are definitely designed for different purposes, a lot of the features a gaming monitor has are not mutually exclusive to that of an office monitor. While gaming monitors often favor pixel response times above contrast ratio, out of the box calibration etc, that doesn't mean that there isn't a significant overlap in features that ideally would exist on both "gaming" and "office" monitors. This "gaming" aspect keeps getting brought up, but even that category ranges from cheap 1080p TN panels all the way to several thousand euro 4K IPS/VA panel models.

Here's Rtings comparison reviews for my Samsung 28" G70A 4K 144 Hz "gaming" monitor (449 euros on sale) vs the Apple Studio Display (at minimum 1819 euros):

• G70A has a slightly higher contrast ratio.
• G70A has more inputs but no USB-C or charging MBP capabilities. You could pick the Gigabyte M28U for these tho as it uses apparently the same panel as the G70A.
• G70A supports HDR but because it has no local dimming the feature is largely useless.
• G70A is 4K 144 Hz vs ASD 5K 60 Hz.
• G70A response times are better even at 60 Hz than the ASD, but with slight overshoot. Higher refresh rates response times are just massively better.
• ASD actually has better input lag at 60 Hz but the G70A is much better at 120/144 Hz.
• ASD has marginally better viewing angles.
• ASD is 5K, which is one of the major pluses of the display.
• ASD is glossy, which may or may not be a plus depending on your environment.
• ASD gets twice as bright in SDR content. Very nice.
• ASD has better uniformity.
• ASD does better for AdobeRGB color volume.
• sRGB calibrated performance is very close.
• ASD has built in speakers. Which IMO is a totally waste of money when I have big Genelecs on my desk as well as great headphones.
• ASD has higher build quality vs the plastic housing on the G70A.
• ASD has a much better stand, but it cannot be switched between VESA vs stand and instead you need to buy one or the other, or even spend extra just to have height adjustment.
• G70A comes with a stand with height, tilt, swivel and rotation adjustment. It also comes with a VESA adapter.
• G70A has a removable power cable.
• G70A has 3 display presets so you can configure it to several different settings at the press of a button.

I'm making a rather unfair comparison here. A cheap 4K display vs a supposedly top tier office display. I picked these two because I own the Samsung and have tried the ASD and worked quite a bit with the LG 5K Ultrafine to say something about it all.

Subjectively the Samsung looks very nice to my eyes and not really all that different in average use where the extra resolution of the ASD quickly becomes less noticeable. I don't feel the 4K is not sharp enough.

You can see where the "office" or "content creator" oriented features of the ASD are: 5K res, more uniform backlight, higher brightness capability and slightly better AdobeRGB color volume. That's all fine and definitely worthwhile features. I get paying more for those features.

I just have a hard time accepting that the ASD is worth over 4x the cost compared to this average IPS panel 4K screen. That's my big beef with it all. If the ASD was truly top tier in all respects, I totally get paying its price. But it just isn't.

• It should have slightly better response times for 60 Hz.
• It should have more inputs so you can hook it up to multiple computers easily.
• The stand vs VESA should not be a choice and certainly not an extra expense for height adjustment.
• Glossy vs nanotexture should not be a 250 euro price difference.
• The webcam should be better.
• It should have a regular old IEC cable that is easy to replace.
• It should come with a longer TB cable if I am really nitpicking. 1m is a bit short.

I think most users can do much better by picking a significantly cheaper 4K 27-32" display and spending the significant sum of money they saved on something else.

 

[CubeApril]

I don't think anybody on this forum is arguing that there aren't monitors out there which are better values or do some things better than the ASD.

Simply that, for certain use cases, the ASD is the best monitor on the market.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

I don't think anybody on this forum is arguing that there aren't monitors out there which are better values or do some things better than the ASD.

Simply that, for certain use cases, the ASD is the best monitor on the market.

If you answer a post why not quote the post instead of saying saying "extremely long comparison post" which IMHO seems a bit derogatory. The 'Reply' button will quote a post automatically.

The OP takes the effort to make an extremely nuanced pro's and con's comparison and instead of going into that you simply claim that 'for some use cases the ASD is the best monitor on the market'. No foundation, no substantation, no argumentation and completely bypassing all the points the OP mentioned.

That seems like a very unnuanced answer to a very nuanced post. (To avoid confusion, I am not the OP).

 

[CubeApril]

That's fair, I didn't mean to come across flippant. I updated my post.

While I appreciate their effort in highlighting the monitor comparison on RTings, these are two monitors that play in wildly different spaces. It just seems unlikely to me that many people are going to be stuck trying to decide between a low-to-mid end gaming monitor and the ASD.

Comparing against other productivity monitors (like the U2720Q or U2723QE) makes a lot of sense, as does comparing it against high end gaming monitors (such as the LG 27GN950-B), or even talking about if it's worth paying the few hundred dollars more for a similar panel to the LG Ultrafine 5K. I guess I just don't think there are going to be many people who can plausibly pay $1700 for a monitor and are debating internally about getting the ASD who are going to get a monitor that does pretty poorly at the things the ASD specifically does well. If you value things like very high brightness (600nits), accurate color, great macOS integration, incredible sharpness and resolution, and awesome speakers, it doesn't make a ton of sense to pick up a monitor that doesn't really have any of those attributes.

It also doesn't really get to the crux of what the OP was asking, which was: where are the positive reviews of the ASD when everything online is already comparing it to other monitors unfavorably.

Sorry again for coming off aggro though.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

That's fair, I didn't mean to come across flippant. I updated my post.

While I appreciate their effort in comparing the monitors review on RTings, these are two monitors that play in wildly different spaces. It just seems unlikely to me that many people are going to be stuck trying to decide between a low-to-mid end gaming monitor and the ASD.

Comparing against other productivity monitors (like the U2720Q or U2723QE) makes a lot of sense, as does comparing it against high end gaming monitors (such as the LG 27GN950-B), or even talking about if it's worth paying the few hundred dollars more for a similar panel to the LG Ultrafine 5K. I guess I just don't think there are going to be many people who can plausibly pay $1700 for a monitor and are debating internally about getting the ASD who are going to get a monitor that does pretty poorly at the things the ASD specifically does well. If you value things like very high brightness (600nits), great macOS integration, incredible sharpness and resolution, and awesome speakers, it doesn't make a ton of sense to pick up a monitor that doesn't really have any of those attributes.

It also doesn't really get to the crux of what the OP was asking, which was: where are the positive reviews of the ASD when everything online is already comparing it to other monitors unfavorably.

Sorry again for coming off aggro though.

No worries. Re-reading my answer I was maybe a bit to direct too

 

[kasakka]

That's fair, I didn't mean to come across flippant. I updated my post.

While I appreciate their effort in highlighting the monitor comparison on RTings, these are two monitors that play in wildly different spaces. It just seems unlikely to me that many people are going to be stuck trying to decide between a low-to-mid end gaming monitor and the ASD.

Comparing against other productivity monitors (like the U2720Q or U2723QE) makes a lot of sense, as does comparing it against high end gaming monitors (such as the LG 27GN950-B), or even talking about if it's worth paying the few hundred dollars more for a similar panel to the LG Ultrafine 5K. I guess I just don't think there are going to be many people who can plausibly pay $1700 for a monitor and are debating internally about getting the ASD who are going to get a monitor that does pretty poorly at the things the ASD specifically does well. If you value things like very high brightness (600nits), accurate color, great macOS integration, incredible sharpness and resolution, and awesome speakers, it doesn't make a ton of sense to pick up a monitor that doesn't really have any of those attributes.

It also doesn't really get to the crux of what the OP was asking, which was: where are the positive reviews of the ASD when everything online is already comparing it to other monitors unfavorably.

Sorry again for coming off aggro though.

That's kind of my point, that a rather cheap 4K gaming monitor can do a pretty good chunk of what a very expensive ASD does. You could replace the cheap gaming monitor with a slightly more expensive office monitor like one of the Dells and it's a similar story. I wouldn't be complaining if the price wasn't as high as it is and the ASD didn't come with consumer-unfriendly features.

I answered this thread because the OP was looking for someone to put a positive spin on the display and to me it deserves all the flack that it gets, unless it gets discounted to a price bracket where you can ignore its shortcomings as "good enough for the price", sort of like I can ignore the drawbacks of my Samsung display for its cost.

But considering how little Apple devices tend to be discounted it's likely that the ASD will either get silently discontinued or they start turning them into the iMac they seem to have been meant to be from the beginning. Hell, I'd probably buy it at this price if it was e.g a M2 MBA level computer that could also be used as an external display if you wanted. But that's probably a pipe dream...

 

[CubeApril]

Yeah but that’s true of almost everything in life.

A $500 TV can do a pretty good chunk of what a $2000 TV can do. A $100 drill can do a pretty good chunk of what a $400 drill can do. A $20000 car does a pretty good chunk of what a $100000 car does.

There are always diminishing returns as you move upscale, and whether it’s worth paying the premium for the very best will vary widely between people.

I found it worthwhile to spend $2000 on the ASD to replace my U2720Q, because I program all day and it’s less than a week of income. That brightness and text sharpness is 100% worth it to me, as I stare at text all day, all year. Outside of the XDR, I haven’t found a monitor that does better, anywhere, for that purpose.

It is simply the best for specific tasks, and that’s worth paying for… at least for me. Even if my U2720Q was 80% as good for 25% the price.

 

[generationfourth]

While they are definitely designed for different purposes, a lot of the features a gaming monitor has are not mutually exclusive to that of an office monitor. While gaming monitors often favor pixel response times above contrast ratio, out of the box calibration etc, that doesn't mean that there isn't a significant overlap in features that ideally would exist on both "gaming" and "office" monitors. This "gaming" aspect keeps getting brought up, but even that category ranges from cheap 1080p TN panels all the way to several thousand euro 4K IPS/VA panel models.

Here's Rtings comparison reviews for my Samsung 28" G70A 4K 144 Hz "gaming" monitor (449 euros on sale) vs the Apple Studio Display (at minimum 1819 euros):

funny how you are so obsessed with specs, but don't understand that 4k is nowhere near 5k in terms of resolution. 5k has 50% more pixels and the difference is dramatic. If you don't notice the difference, or don't need the extra resolution, then don't buy it. Stick to your much cheaper 4k monitors. Same goes for response time- just stick to the gaming monitor. For those of us who need the pixel density there is a whopping one other option the ASD could actually be fairly compared to. There are no other 27" 5k monitors. Stop comparing it to 4k gaming monitors. They are not the same and for entirely different types of users.

The ASD has made a whopping difference in how I view my design and photography work. I used a Dell 27" 4k monitor and was relatively happy with it. But I will no longer faff around with color calibration, moving art boards to the MBP monitor, having to do extra rounds of revisions with my clients to account for color correction, etc. That costs time, and time = money, and that extra time spent costs much more than the price difference of the ASD.

Don't even get me started on the claimed color accuracy and specs mostly written by the marketing department for the vast majority of those cheaper monitors...

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

A lot of the negativity surrounding this display stems from several things including; unjust comparisons with Pro Display XDR, a lack of understanding of the current display market in relation to the target customer, and the choice of FaceTime camera.

But first, let's be clear about one thing. The idea that Apple could or would sell a mini-LED with ProMotion 27" 5K display, with speakers, microphones and a camera built into a first-class enclosure for $1,600 is ludicrous. Value does have subjective notions attached to it, yet it's still important to reflect not on how we perceive engineering or target markets, but on how the manufacturer, in this case Apple, assesses value.

The Pro Display XDR - a mini-LED 32" 6K display, nothing more - retails for $6,000. When it was announced there was the usual hyperbole surrounding the price, mostly click-baiting with the "Apple has a monitor that's 6K for $6K, uh-oh!" style titles and ridiculous 'testing' that in many instances involved pitch black offices where the user, unbelievably, discovered that mini-LEDs bloom a little.

These so-called users were not the target market, they were media outlets trying to drum up clicks. Yet if you pay attention to what Hollywood industry experts and professionals had to say, they were actually seriously impressed with the performance and had no opinion on the cost. I actually listened to one podcast recently where a guest told of how their production company was now training people to use Final Cut, based on the effectiveness of the 7,1 Mac Pro and XDR Display.

Now we can ask "why" Apple charges $6,000 for the XDR, but the truth is that this particular product is in its own class. Apple's promotion for this display during their keynote was... mixed... making comparisons with reference monitors three-times the cost, but the point they (poorly) wanted to make was that they wanted the product to bridge the gap between aspiring professionals and actual professionals.

The cost reflects not simply the panel performance or the quality of the enclosure, but the knowledge that the target demographic has substantial budgets and/or disposable income that Apple can profit from, and to be clear that is their choice. Likewise, it lacks a stand not because Apple is trying to squeeze more profit, but because that demographic would never use the included stand in the first place.

The Studio Display on the other hand is an entirely different product with a different demographic again. It's been designed as a sort of Jack-of-all-trades, having the ability to offer the user the convenience of an iMac with the flexibility to switch between different Macs as they see fit. It's for the more independent prosumer or semi-professional, potentially self employed or running a small unit, who is able to compromise on great, not outstanding, performance in exchange for having their media output in one single device.

And like the XDR, it's a product in its own market segment. There simply isn't another product out there that offers this kind flexibility and performance, that also plays perfectly with Mac.

Yes, users are disappointed that Apple didn't make something cheaper like the Thunderbolt Display age. But the question is, what desire does Apple have to approach that market when there are already plenty of 4K 21-27 inch panels out there?

Finally, the potato cam? Apple's choice to use leftover iPhone 11 parts (see iFixit) is disappointing, as is having one lens for Centre Stage and cropping for portrait, but the 'issue' again is overblown. I can't wrap my head around why people are comparing camera quality going from a smartphone to a tablet to a laptop to a 27" display, and actually convincing themselves the quality steadily gets worse.

The sensor sizes in each are almost identical. Processing aside, the main reason the camera looks poor on the Studio Display is because the image has been blown up many times larger than people are used to. Receive an iPad FaceTime call on the Studio Display and the image looks poor. Receive a Studio Display FaceTime call on an iPad and the image looks great. This isn't a miracle, it's physics. It's the equivalent to projecting a Super8 film in an IMAX theatre.

So, is $1,600 'fair'? Like the XDR, it's almost impossible to say without making unfair comparisons. But what I do know is that the panel is gorgeous, the speakers are outstanding for an enclosure of this depth and the camera-microphones are convenient. No, I'm not happy

I'm happy!

 

[petvas]

I've been thinking of getting a Studio Display since Apple released it. The thing holding me back tho is that every review I have read of it is negative! (Or positive but strongly tempered by complaints about what Apple could/should have done better!)

Have any of you encountered positive reviews of the Apple Studio Display written by well-known authors/in reputable publications?

Well, there are positive reviews out there. Six Colors, Daring Fireball to name two of them.
The Apple Studio Display is really great, perfect for Apple users that want 5K at 27". Yes, it has issues with its camera, but to be honest, it works well in video conferences. The speakers are also great, so if you are looking for a display that integrates perfect with macOS, get the Studio Display. Sure, there are things like ProMotion, HDR support and maybe a better camera that could come in the next generation of the Studio Display, but we just don't know when it will come..

 

[chikorita157]

i am just sick of the haters of the Apple Studio Display as 4K is not an acceptable option as it doesn't give enough DPI for how MacOS handles scaling. While 2K looks alright, but after using 5K, it's a huge difference, especially given how sharp the text is. 4K with 2K scaling is just not the same in terms of sharpness and introduces too many issues that would bother me since I don't have the monitor further than 24 in. I also own an Ultrafine 5K, while not on the same level as the Studio Display in terms of the finish since it's a bit more reflective.

Still, 5K is the perfect resolution if you need 2K scaling that is tailored for the macOS experience since I am at my computer for a good amount of time. There is only really two options right now that can provide the perfect macOS experience. While 5K is expensive, it's worth it on the long run as these monitor will last a long time. Of course, adding mini-led and even ProMotion will increase the price a lot.

4K isn't going to cut it here, but it would on Windows. 1080p 2x scaling on 4k is just too big at 27" and the 2K scaling for 4K pales greatly compared to 5K. If people are complaining about how experience the ASD is, the product isn't for you and comparing a typical 4K monitor to it is like comparing Apples and Oranges as 4K is only 50% of 5K resolution.

 

[rumz]

i am just sick of the haters of the Apple Studio Display as 4K is not an acceptable option as it doesn't give enough DPI for how MacOS handles scaling. While 2K looks alright, but after using 5K, it's a huge difference, especially given how sharp the text is. 4K with 2K scaling is just not the same in terms of sharpness and introduces too many issues that would bother me since I don't have the monitor further than 24 in. I also own an Ultrafine 5K, while not on the same level as the Studio Display in terms of the finish since it's a bit more reflective.

Still, 5K is the perfect resolution if you need 2K scaling that is tailored for the macOS experience since I am at my computer for a good amount of time. There is only really two options right now that can provide the perfect macOS experience. While 5K is expensive, it's worth it on the long run as these monitor will last a long time. Of course, adding mini-led and even ProMotion will increase the price a lot.

4K isn't going to cut it here, but it would on Windows. 1080p 2x scaling on 4k is just too big at 27" and the 2K scaling for 4K pales greatly compared to 5K. If people are complaining about how experience the ASD is, the product isn't for you and comparing a typical 4K monitor to it is like comparing Apples and Oranges as 4K is only 50% of 5K resolution.

Yeah. At work I was given a $1600 Dell monitor — 4k 27”. Supposed to be color accurate etc. I hate it— I use a scaled mode to get the UI / usable real estate but it’s not suitable for design at that scale. So it’s relegated to just displaying other documents.

For my home setup, I’m considering the Studio Display more and more (a pair of them, anyways), if not a Pro Display XDR. (Really gotten used to a single ultra wide 34” at home but resolution / pixel density is what I’m chasing now…)

 

[rumz]

A lot of the people complaining about the Studio Display are doing it from a gamer perspective. The ASD is not a gaming monitor. It wasn't meant to be a gaming monitor.

I think there’s also the factor that the 12.9” iPad Pro (2021) and now the 14/16” M1 MacBook Pros have mini LED displays with ProMotion without being substantially more expensive (or perceived as such) than their non-mini LED, non-ProMotion predecessors (at least for the iPad Pro where you could compare more directly).

They also just have no concept of how much more expensive that technology is to implement in a 5k / 6k display vs those laptop / iPad displays.

 

[CubeApril]

I think there’s also the factor that the 12.9” iPad Pro (2021) and now the 14/16” M1 MacBook Pros have mini LED displays with ProMotion without being substantially more expensive (or perceived as such) than their non-mini LED, non-ProMotion predecessors (at least for the iPad Pro where you could compare more directly).

They also just have no concept of how much more expensive that technology is to implement in a 5k / 6k display vs those laptop / iPad displays.

I think people have this assumption that if it costs $X to a display, then it costs 2 * $X to make a display twice as big, not understanding that costs increase exponentially instead of linearly. Your odds of having a defect in a large display are absurdly higher than in a small display, which is why the best technology usually starts in tiny screens like phones and then slowly works its way up from there.

...and the 27" ASD is 4x larger than the 12.9" iPad.

 

[kasakka]

funny how you are so obsessed with specs, but don't understand that 4k is nowhere near 5k in terms of resolution. 5k has 50% more pixels and the difference is dramatic. If you don't notice the difference, or don't need the extra resolution, then don't buy it. Stick to your much cheaper 4k monitors. Same goes for response time- just stick to the gaming monitor. For those of us who need the pixel density there is a whopping one other option the ASD could actually be fairly compared to. There are no other 27" 5k monitors. Stop comparing it to 4k gaming monitors. They are not the same and for entirely different types of users.

I have stated 5K is one of the major features of the ASD over and over. I fully understand what it is, how it works and why people would find it preferable over 4K. I don't agree that it provides such a massive benefit that it is enough to ignore all the shortcomings and the price point of the ASD. You are welcome to disagree.

Let me put it this way, would anyone buy the ASD if it was a 4K display where there is more competition and options? IMO only Apple diehards would.

I can see the value in the 6K XDR display a lot better, even though it gets more dated every year as mini-LED displays keep adding more and more dimming zones for HDR.

 

[kasakka]

i am just sick of the haters of the Apple Studio Display as 4K is not an acceptable option as it doesn't give enough DPI for how MacOS handles scaling.

Yes, 5K allows for 1440p (please don't call it 2K, 2K is 1920x1080 or 2048x1080) integer scaled which helps with sharpness at that scaling level.

Personally I don't mind non-integer scaling levels at all so for me this is not an issue. When I had the 5K Ultrafine I usually used the next step up from "looks like 2560x1440" for the extra desktop space instead, which is a non-integer scalable options.

 

[CubeApril]

Let me put it this way, would anyone buy the ASD if it was a 4K display where there is more competition and options? IMO only Apple diehards would.

This is such a weird question to ask, as being 5K is the most important part of this display and where the majority of its utility and value is from. It’s also what drives the cost up, since it’s expensive to manufacture.

Would anybody buy a car if it didn’t have an engine? Or a refrigerator if it didn’t have a compressor?

 

[kasakka]

This is such a weird question to ask, as being 5K is the most important part of this display and where the majority of its utility and value is from. It’s also what drives the cost up, since it’s expensive to manufacture.

I don't think it is. It's taking that one aspect that the ASD does better out of the equation and then putting the rest of its features in competition with the more varied 4K market. If you value 5K over anything else, then your options are just very limited and the ASD is just as good (and bad) as most everything else with 5K res.

I'll gladly compromise by going from 5K -> 4K but gaining high refresh rate options and a lot lower price in the process. 4K to me is sharp enough and if I want more desktop space I can pile on more displays on my desk while still being way under the cost of one ASD.

 

[nosnhojm]

I'll gladly compromise by going from 5K -> 4K but gaining high refresh rate options and a lot lower price in the process. 4K to me is sharp enough and if I want more desktop space I can pile on more displays on my desk while still being way under the cost of one ASD.

I wouldn't. Different set of trade-offs for different people. I have an ASD and an LG 32" 4k; I can't stand the blurry resolution, low luminance, awful "HDR", poor speakers, and wobbly construction of the LG. It also lacks a built-in webcam.

Let me put it this way, would anyone buy the ASD if it was a 4K display where there is more competition and options? IMO only Apple diehards would.

Would anyone buy a Tesla if it was gas-powered and had more competition? This thought experiment is nonsensical.

 

[CubeApril]

Would anyone buy a Tesla if it was gas-powered and had more competition? This thought experiment is nonsensical.

So much for my plans to sell a $4.3M Bugatti Bolide but with the engine from a Toyota Corolla.