Apple Reportedly Working on 90Hz Studio Display, iMac, iPad Air

[cyb3rdud3]

Lol why not? It’s a very ignorant remark,

Oh come on 4K 16:9 resolution in TV sizes and a TV panel, is rubbish to use as a computer monitor. Let alone in the context of the kind of monitors that is being spoken about here. You should see in the other thread how people are concerned about PPI, and how a 5K2K monitor is like half of something like this. Now checkout a 4K TV. Nope not something anyone wants to use. In the past when people spoke about those it was in combination with the so called "6 foot interface".

but if you are unable to answer and prefer to stick to your question: all proper panels made in this size are 120 Hz minimum nowadays. So anything below 120 Hz would be an intentional handicap.

No they are not, please do list a single 5K 120Hz panel that is up for sale today? Dell U4025QW is the closest and released 2 months ago, but that is a 5K2K, I'm sure that LG will follow soon. I've got the model before that which is a 5K2K which is 72Hz and was the previous maximum. There is the Samsung ultrawide 49" but that is a 5K with 1440 vertical resolution, that does 240Hz. There is no 5K like the Apple announced one with that resolution and pixel density that does 120Hz that I am aware of.

 

[Flowstates]

Lol why not? It’s a very ignorant remark, but if you are unable to answer and prefer to stick to your question: all proper panels made in this size are 120 Hz minimum nowadays. So anything below 120 Hz would be an intentional handicap.

I think that the remark is grounded in some truth. At the very least that people interested in productivity as a main pruchasing factor do steer away (Readability of text and ergonomics are generally sub optimal compared with multiple monitors and ultra wides). "Gamers" do seem to enjoy the immersivity of a TV as Monitors so that might create a whole sub-demographic trying to accomodate both usecases.

From my pesonnal experience, anything above 27'' is sub optimal (windows cannot yet be stacked and the text becomes comically large/small due to macOS scaling).

PS: What has been mentioned above is true, the market for 27" 5k is very narrow and the options scarce. What you are mentionning as far as 27" 4k | 4k Tv's might hold some water. But then you run into the issue of uneven scaling that has been discussed ad nauseam on this forum.

PSS: Don't be rude.

 

[majkom]

I think that the remark is grounded in some truth. At the very least that people interested in productivity as a main pruchasing factor do steer away (Readability of text and ergonomics are generally sub optimal compared with multiple monitors and ultra wides). "Gamers" do seem to enjoy the immersivity of a TV as Monitors so that might create a whole sub-demographic trying to accomodate both usecases.

From my pesonnal experience, anything above 27'' is sub optimal (windows cannot yet be stacked and the text becomes comically large/small due to macOS scaling).

PS: What has been mentioned above is true, the market for 27" 5k is very narrow and the options scarce. What you are mentionning as far as 27" 4k | 4k Tv's might hold some water. But then you run into the issue of uneven scaling that has been discussed ad nauseam on this forum.

PSS: Don't be rude.

 

[Alameda]

A 90hz panel is only saving money any good 4k TV uses 120 hz so sinking any effort by Apple to promote this ploy.

The reason for 120 in a TV is to smooth motion. In a computer monitor, higher refresh makes scrolling less jittery. It’s usually not that big a deal. A 30 Hz display will be pretty slow but 60 Hz is fine and 90 should be good enough for anyone unless you’re buying a gaming monitor. But gaming monitors are optimized very differently than, say, a monitor for graphic arts or photography.