Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Stores Quietly Carrying New LG 23.7-Inch UltraFine Display

Can we get some 4:3, 16:10 or 1:1 hidpi displays please?

16 x 9 and wider is just a ridiculous format for so many uses.

Some of us want to get work done, not watch movies.

(Yes, you can put things side by side...I’m aware. I just want some more optionality in the display market)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ, user74246, madrag and 5 others
This screen makes sense since 4K monitors are gaining momentum and Apple probably will release a more expensive 6K monitor. The gap from that to a 21.5” monitor would be weird. This more or less confirms that something extra is coming.

I have the 5K UltraFine and it has an ambient light sensor just like Apples Thunderbolt Display, but Apple hasn’t made the feature enabled in software unfortunately. Good to know before you buy this new 24” too if that’s a feature you want. I’ve submitted a bug report about it to Apple but they won’t reply.
 
RyanXM said:
So what was the other model that was laid out for him? Size? Part Number?

On another note, this might give us the idea that Apple is going to introduce a 24" (23.7") 4K iMac. 21.5" is just too small in todays world. Would be interesting to see a 28" 5K iMac.
Click to expand...

"Just too small in todays world". Listen to that. Would you like a 50" TV on your desk?
Apple's 21.5" displays actually have higher resolution than any other 4K display in the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
From what I can see it doesn't have built in iSight/webcam. Am I missing something or is that correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji
saulinpa said:
Specs show 8.3 megapixels - 3840x2160 - https://www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-displays/details/2331816

So to do sudo-retina on a Mac would you set the resolution to 2200x1250 or thereabouts ?
Click to expand...

True Retina, meaning @2x, would be showing a resolution of 1920x1080 or "Best for Display" in System Preferences and System Information. Anything else is a scaled resolution that is then displayed @2x for the end user. For exampl, I generally run a resolution 2560x1440 on my BenQ SW271, which means that macOS creates a screen of 5120x2880 and then scales it to 2560x1440@2x before sending it to my display for me to view. Solid @2x values work better and place less demands on the GPU and scaling algorithms because macOS contains @1x and @2x pixel-based art assets for the system to use without any scaling mathematics needing to take place.

For many, like myself, a true Retina resolution of 1920x10980@2x on a 27" display simply displays item too large, despite being the crispest version that the user will see of the UI, icons, widgets, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mastercheif91
Moonjumper said:
I've noticed a massive different going to a work-supplied laptop that is 16:9 coming from a MBP with 16:10. Vertical height is more important to me than horizontal. Luckily I can still do most of my work on my iMac, which still being 16:9, is at least large enough to have a reasonable height because it is 27". But I would love to see a 1:1 ratio display available.
Click to expand...

Well, 1:1 might be a bit extreme, ha, but 3:2 would be a great companion monitor to a 16:10. I just don't understand why Windows laptops choose 16:9 screens when it just provides an ugly and wasteful huge lower bezel. I've had a few ThinkPads and that was the most annoying thing about them (other than they ran Windows).
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ, Brian33, madrag and 3 others
Moonjumper said:
I've noticed a massive different going to a work-supplied laptop that is 16:9 coming from a MBP with 16:10. Vertical height is more important to me than horizontal. Luckily I can still do most of my work on my iMac, which still being 16:9, is at least large enough to have a reasonable height because it is 27". But I would love to see a 1:1 ratio display available.
Click to expand...

same to me, sadly, 16:9 are main stream and that's way 16:10 are reserved for pro users and then charged 200-300% more

iMac Pro, on the other hand should mount a 16:10 screen, but then the resolution could be too much...
at least a 30" screen...
 
  • Like
Reactions: mastercheif91
myapple2019 said:
It is not surprising. Usually and generally 9 to 5 Mac carries any Apple rumors then MacRumors carries them. I have noticed this for sometime. I am wondering if they work together.
Click to expand...
MacRumors is like an news aggregator.
They try to pick up news/rumors from all around. I personally like it as long as they are not too much behind the 8-ball.
 
Ugly stand - cheap frame.
24-Inch is great, I expect Apple to be able to sell one of their own to complete MacMini...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bbdani
Relentless Power said:
Why would that matter or have any relevance to the reader? It’s not like that these displays are available in the masses in Apple stores (They are not in stock in my area) or not available in Apples online store yet.
Click to expand...

Just saying.Everytime 9to5Mac post an article it pops up on here shortly after.Sometimes it’s the other way round.They must copy from each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nicho
Sounds like a 30” 5K display is in the works (to expand the 27” by 10%, same as the 23.7” compared to the current 21.5”).
This would imply that new iMacs with the same screens will appear soon.
 
Side note - if you're going the desktop route, why buy such a tiny display? Unless desk space is REALLY cramped...
Imho, even my 27" 5K iMac feels quite small to me nowadays (I'd upgrade to 34-38" ~6-8K iMac in a heartbeat).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back