Apple Studio Display Reviews: 'A Confounding Miss'

[petvas]

So here are my first impressions of the display, after connecting it to my 14" MBP. My Mac Studio is coming by the end of the month, so I will have to wait for it..

The display looks very familiar if you ever had a 27" iMac. I would say that it's the same quality, maybe a bit brighter. The display is very stable and sits nicely on the table but is twice as thick as my 24" M1 iMac..
The speakers are very good, much better than the speakers on the 24" iMac. As far as the camera concerns, I just opened FaceTime and the image looked a bit washed out, but definitely it wasn't a disaster. The camera in its current state is usable and I hope that the upcoming update will improve it more. Here a comparison of the camera between the 24" M1 iMac (on the right) and the Studio Display (on the left):

 

[petvas]

and here is what happens if I disable center stage and portrait mode:

I find the picture quality without center stage better, but definitely not as good as on the M1 iMac.

 

[The Game 161]

really surprised about the camera quailty.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Ok, but that’s like saying “I’m selling this car with all door hardware removed, but that’s not a problem because the people who would buy a car that cant have doors dont care about having doors”

Pretty much. Incidentally, it might even be a perfect purchase for someone celebrating the 4th of July in Alaska!

It’s a disingenuous argument, of course people who never cared about changing the mount dont care about buying a monitor with an unchangeable mount

It’s not disingenuous, it’s just an obvious realization. They made this monitor for people who think about things like that before spending $1500 and, as a result, that’s who’s going to buy it.

There are also a lot of folks for whom this will be the reason they dont buy one, people who would have bought it without that limitation

Right, and, like I said, it’s ONLY a problem for those folks that ARE NOT buying it. Fortunately for Apple, they focus on those that WILL buy it.

- and worse there will be plenty of people who buy it not realizing that limitation who might not have, because people are used to having that option with displays

As someone else who found themselves in that position posted, that limitation is made clear AS a user is choosing the stand. There might have been plenty without that, but with that there, not really.

 

[LMC91]

So here are my first impressions of the display, after connecting it to my 14" MBP. My Mac Studio is coming by the end of the month, so I will have to wait for it..

The display looks very familiar if you ever had a 27" iMac. I would say that it's the same quality, maybe a bit brighter. The display is very stable and sits nicely on the table but is twice as thick as my 24" M1 iMac..
The speakers are very good, much better than the speakers on the 24" iMac. As far as the camera concerns, I just opened FaceTime and the image looked a bit washed out, but definitely it wasn't a disaster. The camera in its current state is usable and I hope that the upcoming update will improve it more. Here a comparison of the camera between the 24" M1 iMac (on the right) and the Studio Display (on the left):

View attachment 1975854View attachment 1975855

Hi, thank you for this. I'm going back and forth in my mind about going 14 inch + Studio Display, or just getting myself a 16 inch and letting that be my only monitor, currently only using a MacBook Air 2015 13 inch with no monitor. How do you find the Studio Display compares with the 14 inch? I know there's difference with promotion and the true blacks, but I'm wondering if I'll even care with such a big sharp screen. I was tempted with the 24 inch iMac and only heard good things about that screen, but love the convenience of the laptop.

 

[usagora]

5K scales better in macOS than 4K.

What does that mean? I have a 27" iMac 5k and also a Mac Mini with a 27" LG 4K monitor and notice no difference in everyday usage aside from the fact that the LG is matte and the iMac glossy

 

[petvas]

Hi, thank you for this. I'm going back and forth in my mind about going 14 inch + Studio Display, or just getting myself a 16 inch and letting that be my only monitor, currently only using a MacBook Air 2015 13 inch with no monitor. How do you find the Studio Display compares with the 14 inch? I know there's difference with promotion and the true blacks, but I'm wondering if I'll even care with such a big sharp screen. I was tempted with the 24 inch iMac and only heard good things about that screen, but love the convenience of the laptop.

The 14" MBP has definitely a better quality screen, but the 27" is very big and has Retina quality resolution, which I absolutely love. I would get the Studio Display. The 14" is better suited for traveling than the 16".

 

[iRobertM]

Given her subscriber numbers and views per video, together with the fact she's been around since people making and posting video on the internet became a thing, I'd wager she's been VERY good at this aspect. Probably has 8 figures in the bank.

When I see any of her videos I think, "Who in their right mind likes this adolescent untreated ADHD routine?" then remember she is attractive, blond and not married, sometimes that's all it takes.

 

[Black Diesel]

Speak with your wallets folks and hit them where it counts. I'm a huge apple fan and I spend tons of money on apple devices every year. I'm fortunate to be able to afford a new Studio + Studio Display but I'm not about to spend a penny on this money grab for the display. This display was the worst thought out product I can remember with lack of adjustability/swivel, and price. They removed the computer guts and charge the same amount for just the panel....no matter how bad I want a new setup, I'm not giving apple my money for this garbage.

Had apple offered a display option without speakers and camera for $999, it would be a totally different atmosphere. Two of those along side an upgraded (matching) 27" iMac and apple would have taken approximately $5500-$6000 from me this year. But instead they will get nothing. I know many other 27" iMac users who are boycotting apple this year for the same reason. Maybe that's why you can already pickup a display in the stores?

Back to the drawing board apple, your decision to kill the 27" iMac is going to cost you. People are just going to wait for an upgraded Mac mini and use a 3rd party display.

 

[NightOne]

Back to the drawing board apple, your decision to kill the 27" iMac is going to cost you. People are just going to wait for an upgraded Mac mini and use a 3rd party display.

That is the way I am leaning unless I see something different come out.

 

[NightOne]

The display is very stable and sits nicely on the table but is twice as thick as my 24" M1 iMac..

Explain to us again why the thickness of a desktop display is so important.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

So if the price point doesn’t meet the standards of what you’re looking for, then why don’t you shop a cheaper display then? Clearly this price point isn’t intended for you, and/or it’s above a price range that you possibly can’t afford.

The LG 5K sells for $1299, so let’s quit this silly game of Apple should sell things cheap because you said so. A $999-$1299 range is more a reasonable price, especially if they fix any valid issues that are found by reviewers. Keep your pricing skills to crisps or something not out of your depth.

You're reasonable pricing is your own opinion which doesn't make it right either. You can get 4K HDR monitors with 144Hz for half the price or lower than Studio Display.

 

[neuropsychguy]

So here are my first impressions of the display, after connecting it to my 14" MBP. My Mac Studio is coming by the end of the month, so I will have to wait for it..

The display looks very familiar if you ever had a 27" iMac. I would say that it's the same quality, maybe a bit brighter. The display is very stable and sits nicely on the table but is twice as thick as my 24" M1 iMac..
The speakers are very good, much better than the speakers on the 24" iMac. As far as the camera concerns, I just opened FaceTime and the image looked a bit washed out, but definitely it wasn't a disaster. The camera in its current state is usable and I hope that the upcoming update will improve it more. Here a comparison of the camera between the 24" M1 iMac (on the right) and the Studio Display (on the left):

Thank you for sharing. The quality looks decent. Reviewers were making it sound like it was terrible but your images are far from terrible.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

are there 5k's for 600?

4K ,5K or 6K in the XDR. 99% of people would not be able to tell the difference. But for £600 you can get a 4K HDR 144Hz 27" monitor. That 1K difference you will not notice.

The Studio Monitor is overpricing dated technology. Let's be generous with the Apple tax £999 would be more reasonable.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Back to the drawing board apple, your decision to kill the 27" iMac is going to cost you. People are just going to wait for an upgraded Mac mini and use a 3rd party display.

I would not be surprised if that’s what Apple expects as a response I mean, when you think of it the whole Mac experience (all 9% of the marketshare of it) is, “If you don’t want {a Mac thing Apple makes}, buy something else.” So it wouldn’t surprise me if their thinking is “If you don’t want this monitor for that Mac you kindly bought from us, buy something else!”

 

[UK-MacAddict]

Speak with your wallets folks and hit them where it counts. I'm a huge apple fan and I spend tons of money on apple devices every year. I'm fortunate to be able to afford a new Studio + Studio Display but I'm not about to spend a penny on this money grab for the display. This display was the worst thought out product I can remember with lack of adjustability/swivel, and price. They removed the computer guts and charge the same amount for just the panel....no matter how bad I want a new setup, I'm not giving apple my money for this garbage.

Had apple offered a display option without speakers and camera for $999, it would be a totally different atmosphere. Two of those along side an upgraded (matching) 27" iMac and apple would have taken approximately $5500-$6000 from me this year. But instead they will get nothing. I know many other 27" iMac users who are boycotting apple this year for the same reason. Maybe that's why you can already pickup a display in the stores?

Back to the drawing board apple, your decision to kill the 27" iMac is going to cost you. People are just going to wait for an upgraded Mac mini and use a 3rd party display.

Apple need to stop paying out dividends to its shareholders like they did before and go back to storing all that cash for future products. Then they can focus on making quality products at more reasonable prices.

Apple products were always more expensive but cut a balanced line between being way over priced and the feeling from the customer that it was worth paying that little bit more.

With Tim's Apple, every product release you feel like you are being ripped off. The cost greatly outweighs what you are actually getting from the product.

 

[petvas]

Explain to us again why the thickness of a desktop display is so important.

Who said that it's important? I just stated what I immediately noticed by putting my Studio Display next to the M1 iMac.

 

[iSee]

It sounds good to me.

Assuming the web cam problem is a glitch as Apple has claimed, the reviews are actually quite good.

The other complaint is the price, but that's pointless since there isn't an equivalent cheaper option. We can all decide for ourselves if the features are worth the cost or not.

Another complaint is no promotion and HDR. But (1) promotion would take some as-yet-unknown technical magic to do on a 5K external monitor; and (2) As mentioned before, the price is already very high. Apple has a $5K+ monitor if local dimming is your thing.

 

[ams1117]

It’s not as sexy but this is so much better for the money and so much more monitor
https://www.amazon.com/LG-32UN650-W-Compatibility-Borderless-Adjustable/dp/B08FQ42MN1/ref=mp_s_a_1_4?crid=E84T6J4ELJGY&keywords=32+lg+4k+monitor&qid=1647528626&sprefix=32”+lg+%2Caps%2C71&sr=8-4

Which part of 27 inch or 5K do you have trouble understanding?

5K is 78% more pixels compared to 4K. (four thirds on each side, 5120x2880 vs 3840x2160)
5K @ 27 inches is ~218DPI and 4K @ 32 inches is ~138DPI, which is 58% denser linearly.

 

[cylack]

Woefully old tech and so expensive for what it is. They should be selling 120Hz Promotion display by now.

 

[SpinThis!]

4K ,5K or 6K in the XDR. 99% of people would not be able to tell the difference. But for £600 you can get a 4K HDR 144Hz 27" monitor. That 1K difference you will not notice.

The Studio Monitor is overpricing dated technology. Let's be generous with the Apple tax £999 would be more reasonable.

People are getting too hung up on HDR and stupid fast refresh rates that really don't matter to graphic design professionals.

How is the Studio Monitor dated tech? Show me another manufacturer that put a system in a chip and has 5K in a display.

Again, to do a 27" retina display "properly" (eg to show it at 2.5K), you need 5K. You can't simultaneous argue dated tech and then say 4K scaled down is state-of-the-art. Resolution matters.

For the sake of argument, let's say Apple put out a 4K - 32" display. The graphic design pundits would rake Apple over the coals for using scaled resolution.

FWIW we're also 1) in a supply chain shortage and 2) other display manufacturers aren't really making 27" 5K panels. Both of those factors are likely driving up the overall component cost as well. It may even be partially why the 5K iMac was discontinued instead of refreshed.

 

[deevey]

You're reasonable pricing is your own opinion which doesn't make it right either. You can get 4K HDR monitors with 144Hz for half the price or lower than Studio Display.

Choosing a monitor with 1/3 less pixels and half as bright, doesn't make it any more reasonable, you are just willing to sacrifice features you don't feel you need in order to cut corners.

I'd bet the profit margins on a $799 4k/144hz Dell are probably far higher than the ASD, because it doesn't have a processor, doesn't have a CNC'd chassis, doesn't have a fancy speaker array, doesn't have a decent webcam and uses the same bulk display that hundreds of other computer makers use.

That doesn't mean they aren't decent displays but if you want better than "decent", you pay a premium.

Apple products are rarely cheaper than their nearest competitor, never have been, never will, but they'll look nicer, have far better build quality and most of the time perform better.

 

[seek3r]

As someone else who found themselves in that position posted, that limitation is made clear AS a user is choosing the stand. There might have been plenty without that, but with that there, not really.

a lot of these are going to be bought as PO requests by folks to their employer’s purchasing depts, and thus they wont see that caveat on the purchase page

 

[siddavis]

Apple conned everyone the display is old tech it’s mega over priced for what it is, get the Mateview it’s so cheap and better

Pretty sure I would never buy anything from that company, but it does look nice.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I bought my refurb BenQ SW271 for $647.83 over Memorial Day weekend in 2018 and haven’t looked back. It retails for $1099.00 and is still only 4K. Lots of value for the money. Lots of monitors exist in this $1000-$1800 priced range, but most of this crowd here sure doesn’t get it. Good monitors aren’t cheap. But again, it’s all about them Hertz, ain’t it? Cheap girl in a cheap dress gets you every time, right?