Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bro there was a StudiNo display at the Apple Store at my mall next to a M1 iMac and there was hardly a difference. Even the Apple Store employees were making fun of that thing.

Bro, the M1 iMac is a 24 inch display. Size matters when discussing PPI. But you have already said you can't see the difference in a 5k display or 4k.. so what new info is here?
 
Yes because 5K is an overpriced gimmick resolution that doesn't sell since the majority of people have no use for it and monitor manufacturers have the sense not to make more of them.

Hi Spacebot.

We heard the same thing about 1080p.

We heard the same thing about 4K.

We are hearing the same stupid opinion about 8K.

If you don’t understand then either you have been asleep for the last 20 years or you were born about 12 years ago.

1659543191363.jpeg
 
Hi Spacebot.

We heard the same thing about 1080p.

We heard the same thing about 4K.

We are hearing the same stupid opinion about 8K.

If you don’t understand then either you have been asleep for the last 20 years or you were born about 12 years ago.

View attachment 2038599
It's been 7 years and there's only two 5K monitors on the market: LG's, and Apple's. Soooooo...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: chikorita157
I'm sure this happened.
Apple Store trip back in May when I was bringing in my Macbook Pro in for repairs. Everyone including me who went over to view the Mac Studio, the Apple Store employees were directing people away from the Studio Display pushing them more towards the 4K iMacs. I overheard one of them recommend a Mac Studio buyer a 1440p monitor for them over the Studio Display. Even when I went over one of the employees and I went on an open hinge about the non-removable power cable.

The monitor is crap buddy.

That proves nothing

It proves there's virtually no demand for 5K to warrant making more
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: chikorita157
I have two nanotexture Studio Displays. I have zero regrets, and debating on buying a third as they're pretty much the only 5K monitor worth getting. That being said I would be nothing but a fanboy if I said these monitors were perfect. The camera situation in my opinion was *slightly* overblown, though for the price you are paying for them it should have been better than what it is. It's decent, but not $1599 decent. The audio issues are very annoying however. I have issues about once a week where sound will stop coming out of my main studio monitor. The solution has been to either restart my Studio Display, restart my Studio, or in some cases both. I'm glad this is a software issue, but I agree with another comment above that this could have been avoided if it weren't so over engineered.
But this adds lots of fun to video coneference calls.Sorry guys, can‘t hear you anymore -I just need to restart my monitor ….
 
The same panel doesn’t necessarily translate to the same performance. Reviews give the Apple display better picture quality as well as 100 nits more brightness, along with faster USB ports. I think the Apple display is over priced, and Apple needs to find out and fix its issues; but some may find it more suited to their needs than the LG.
Any again…

Didn’t mention nano can be had without adjustable stand.

You forgot build quality.

Forget camera and center stage.

Forgot audio.

The cognitive dissonance in this thread is real. People just pick and choose whatever they think makes them sound like winner winner chicken dinner.

You should look up…

1. Cognitive Dissonance
2. Why the webcam isn’t worth the $800 premium

The Apple Studio Display just is not a good buy versus the 5K Ultrafine. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad display.
 
The same panel doesn’t necessarily translate to the same performance. Reviews give the Apple display better picture quality as well as 100 nits more brightness, along with faster USB ports. I think the Apple display is over priced, and Apple needs to find out and fix its issues; but some may find it more suited to their needs than the LG.

Very fair point. I can say that same 5k panel in my 5k iMac was superior than the implementation on the LG Ultrafine. But as you said it’s overall, if comparing directly, not worth an $800 premium. I really wish it was, I was hoping the camera, etc. would really be great. Or if not, maybe some differentiation from the 5k display from
2017.
 
Yes because 5K is an overpriced gimmick resolution that doesn't sell since the majority of people have no use for it and monitor manufacturers have the sense not to make more of them.

5k at 27” is a far superior display then 4K at the same size.

You’re right most people likely have “no use” for it, but that doesn’t make it a “gimmick”. It’s a better display.
 
I feel it's an unnecessarily over-engineered product. I really was waiting for the next version of the thunderbolt display, slimmer, lighter, brighter, cooler.
It's only $200 less than the $1800 starting price of the 2020 27" iMac, which offers essentially the same display performance, and which came with a whole computer. So I guess Apple felt they needed to gussy it up to justify the price.
 
Last edited:
I guess we must consider that the Studio Display is a giant iPad that is switched on for many hours a day (and perhaps never entirely switched off) and might need a restart every couple months. No big deal. I suspect Apple will release a fix soon.
Since the late 80s, I've plugged a monitor in and turned it on and it just worked. I've never had to unplug a freaking monitor/display just to get it to do what it's supposed to do. Until I bought this LG 34" 5k/2k a few months ago, I don't think I unplugged a display for years at a time.

The Studio Display, gorgeous as the screen is, is just way too expensive to have to deal with all these issues it has. Apple keeps claiming it's a software issue, but clearly it isn't. Not with the camera, not with the speakers, and certainly not with the ridiculously overpriced adjustable stand (not to mention the display itself).

Seriously, Apple is charging people $100 per inch for height adjustability. Think about that.

If this were any other company, people would be losing their freaking mind. Instead, half the people make excuses like "but it won't look as good as the SD" or "you get what you pay for." Well, all these problems people are having... that's what they're paying so much money for.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: chikorita157
5k at 27” is a far superior display then 4K at the same size.

You’re right most people likely have “no use” for it, but that doesn’t make it a “gimmick”. It’s a better display.

I wouldn't really call a hardwired proprietary power cable, 600nits and 60hz, no turning or screen rotation on non-VESA models, with only USB-C ports and full functionality only usable on macOS for $1600+ a "better display."
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: chikorita157
I wouldn't really call a hardwired proprietary power cable, 600nits and 60hz, no turning or screen rotation on non-VESA models, with only USB-C ports and full functionality only usable on macOS for $1600+ a "better display."

You’re more commenting on the overall package of the Apple Studio display, which I was not referring too. I actually am not a fan of the Studio display, and believe the LG 5k Ultrafine is a better purchase if you want a 5k display.

My comment was simply stating that a 5k panel is a better than 4K period. Whether the trade offs outside of the actual panel are worth it or not are valid points.
 
You’re more commenting on the overall package of the Apple Studio display, which I was not referring too. I actually am not a fan of the Studio display, and believe the LG 5k Ultrafine is a better purchase if you want a 5k display.

My comment was simply stating that a 5k panel is a better than 4K period. Whether the trade offs outside of the actual panel are worth it or not are valid points.
32 inch 4K > 27 inch 5K. Just gonna say it.
 
That’s delusional or uninformed. No Thunderbolt Display in 2011-2012 could ever be called color accurate even when they were new. Maybe at best they could do 65% P3 and AdobeRGB. Make professional colorists laugh.

We only started getting color accuracy at consumer to prosumer prices in the last 5 years and even today the results are mixed.
I’ll repeat: they are as color accurate as when they were plugged in, 65% P3 and AdobeRGB of accuracy you say? Alright, they still are 65% P3 and AdobeRGB.

And they are still on, and bright, I use them next to Studio Display and iMac 5K, yes, they look “different” besides being half the resolution, but are perfectly functional over a decade later.

No, I don’t think I’m being delusional, I see them right in front of me still working. And they don’t make me laugh either, but I’m no professional colorist so maybe that’s why I don’t get their jokes.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.