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

Apple Working on Mystery New Display

ilikewhey said:
burn-in isn't a that big of a issue anymore with the 2nd gen QD-oled. Woled is even better.
i haven't personally witnessed much dark grey uniformity issues but there are reports that it's panel dependent.
HDR brightness so far seems to be a OSX issue, on windows 11 HDR works like magic.
build quality- again it depends how rigid of a standard you are telling the suppliers, the ones in alienware is pretty high.
i went from 218ppi to 140ish ppi and the trade off is only noticeable if you sit a foot away and try to make out whatever blurriness there is, once you get accustomed to it you won't even know its there.
Click to expand...

OLED burn-in - less intense of a problem nowadays, but it's still a cumulative effect. RTings has an ongoing longevity test that shows the latest gen OLED Panels still suffer from static content over time. Part of the improvement is just manufacturers using better compensation algorithms, which has the cost of lower brightness over time.

I own a 2nd gen QD-OLED TV that I don't baby, but I won't be shocked if it develops noticeable issues over its lifespan. I would not feel comfortable displaying static UI stuff from my Mac for many hours a day though.

HDR Brightness - OLED monitors currently can't get anywhere near as bright with specular highlights and especially full-field versus miniLED. I suppose that doesn't really matter in darker rooms or if you're not trying to grade HDR video though. One thing I appreciate about the Studio Display is that it gets plenty bright enough to use in a bright space.

PPI - Do you use non-integer scaling on your OLED monitor? 4K looks completely fine @ 1080p HiDPI, but once you scale to 1440p text takes a noticeable hit on MacOS.
 
Kyle crane said:
Maybe Apple should work on bringing live presentations back instead of the lifeless whatever the frick we are watching everyyear since 2020
Click to expand...



Agree they are terrible but 0% chance that will happened with Tim Cook at this point. Too much prep needed and pressure. Once he saw there was no negative impacts to the stock when they did pretapes during lockdown that was a wrap on those live events. These pretape events are cake for him. Just showup read some lines. Steve Jobs did an entire hour+ 1 year before his death when he had cancer and still did 20 mins on stage 4 months before his death. Steve was just built for this.

I did laugh when Apple demanded their employees back in the office and my thought was "Tim when are you guys going get back to your in person job for the Apple events"?
 
citysnaps said:
Then you should use a 120 Hz display. For post-processing thousands of photographs a 60 HHz refresh display works great for me.

As an aside... Apple's Pro Display XDR, a high-end display targeting professionals for use in image and video editing/processing, is also 60 Hz.
Click to expand...
A lot of people just put up with eye strain. I did for decades.

My response was due to someone saying they don’t need 120Hz because they work on X. I provided a benefit. Just because you aren’t gaming doesn’t mean 120 Hz doesn’t benefit.

Guess what Apple’s laptops have high refresh rates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: omicronx9 and jakey rolling
omicronx9 said:
No one cares about the backlighting, or whether its miniled, qled, oled or ballsackLED. Fix the freaking refresh rate. No one with an IQ over 10 is buying a 60hz monitor in 2026.
Click to expand...
Graphic designers who are looking at static images 8hrs a day and couldn't care less about 120Hz and, my wild guess, making the core audience of 5k displays because all they need is a picture clarity/quality ?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: omicronx9 and splifingate
Apple monitors: today's equivalent of 1990s Bose speakers.

Third article in as many weeks about a vapourware rumoured upcoming monitor, and the most accurate speculation is that it might catch up with some of the basic specs that we see in some other mid-range monitors today, while keeping its four rather dubious advantages (slightly higher resolution, extra brightness - though many other monitors also peak at 600 nits now, decent-for-a-monitor speakers, and a metal chassis). Likely still going to have its glaring disadvantages as well (single video input, VESA and HAS being optional, non-removable power cord, mediocre webcam...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: omicronx9, Mrkevinfinnerty and drrich2
jabbr said:
OLED burn-in - less intense of a problem nowadays, but it's still a cumulative effect. RTings has an ongoing longevity test that shows the latest gen OLED Panels still suffer from static content over time. Part of the improvement is just manufacturers using better compensation algorithms, which has the cost of lower brightness over time.

I own a 2nd gen QD-OLED TV that I don't baby, but I won't be shocked if it develops noticeable issues over its lifespan. I would not feel comfortable displaying static UI stuff from my Mac for many hours a day though.

HDR Brightness - OLED monitors currently can't get anywhere near as bright with specular highlights and especially full-field versus miniLED. I suppose that doesn't really matter in darker rooms or if you're not trying to grade HDR video though. One thing I appreciate about the Studio Display is that it gets plenty bright enough to use in a bright space.

PPI - Do you use non-integer scaling on your OLED monitor? 4K looks completely fine @ 1080p HiDPI, but once you scale to 1440p text takes a noticeable hit on MacOS.
Click to expand...
2048 x 1152, one step above 1080p, at 32inch with the viewing distance of around 2 feet, you really have to be pixel hunting to notice any difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabbr
Alex.ne said:
Graphic designers who are looking at static images 8hrs a day and couldn't care less about 120Hz and, my wild guess, making the core audience of 5k displays because all they need is a picture clarity/quality ?
Click to expand...
I do….as my post earlier indicates.
 
Rumours you've all seen from Mark Gurman is for early 2026 release.
I really don't want to wait, so eagerly anticipating the LG Ultrafine 6K 32" screen 32U990A.
It was announced at CES in January 2025... yet still no further update either.

"LG’s latest UltraFine (model 32U990A) monitor is the world's first 6K high-resolution monitor to come with Thunderbolt™ 5 and its versatile connectivity. Featuring a Nano IPS Black panel, it delivers exceptional color accuracy and a high contrast with a wide color gamut covering 99.5% of Adobe RGB and 98% of DCI-P3," said LG Electronics.

(prefer the glossy screen, personally)
 
  • Like
Reactions: drrich2
usagora said:
The LG 32" 4K display I'm currently using with my Mac Mini M4 is certainly not "barf" - excellent display.
Click to expand...
I had a 32" 4K Dell and returned it.

Simply put, Apple is not going to make a 32" display with lower resolution than their 27" display.
 
I just want someone to release a 40" 8K monitor... it would be great if it was 120hz. I just want SOMEONE to make a standard retina 40" monitor. Macs have been able to drive this for awhile now, but NOBODY makes one.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: scgf
SeenJeen said:
I had a 32" 4K Dell and returned it.
Click to expand...

Why?

SeenJeen said:
Simply put, Apple is not going to make a 32" display with lower resolution than their 27" display.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, because they want the "retina" PPI spec to they can use that in marketing. My point was simply that 32" 4K is still an excellent display size / resolution combo. You were making it sound like it's something horrible.
 
fumi2014 said:
27 is too small now and Apple prices are ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Why? My eyes haven’t moved further apart and my focus is the same. When you are only inches away from a screen why do you need something enormous? I just don’t get it. With a very large display you need to physically move your head around to see all of the screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: splifingate
IMO, Apple should first sort out the mess that is Mac OS' scaling on external monitors. Like, it's either hunt for an older 24" 4K monitor, - or good luck fixing blurry fonts on a 27". Or else get LG's 'UltraFine' for a pretty penny (about the price of a Mac mini), or one of Apple's own, even more ridiculously-priced, monitors.

I mean, Apple have never played nice outside of their limited plug-and-play range, but this here is so basic the sheer audacity baffles me. First buy a thousand-dollar computer, then a ca thousand-dollar monitor it'll play nice with, - or spend weeks trying to get another one to work. Not exactly the experience one expects when paying a premium for something that supposedly 'just works'.

Seems Apple are determined to make the Mac 'all pro' in price only. Pro-bros will pay anything for their fancy kit, and everyone else can hunch over their 13" or screw off.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: omicronx9
Alex.ne said:
Graphic designers who are looking at static images 8hrs a day and couldn't care less about 120Hz and, my wild guess, making the core audience of 5k displays because all they need is a picture clarity/quality ?
Click to expand...

Aye; even 75Hz is fine, by me.
 
Yoooo where is this display, man
I wanna play RE2 with real HDR and proper black levels
 
Ethosik said:
A lot of people just put up with eye strain. I did for decades.

My response was due to someone saying they don’t need 120Hz because they work on X. I provided a benefit. Just because you aren’t gaming doesn’t mean 120 Hz doesn’t benefit.

Guess what Apple’s laptops have high refresh rates.
Click to expand...
What's funny about the dummies claiming they don't need 120hz because they're not gaming is that gaming isn't 120hz anymore. It's 360hz+ or higher. Gamers know full well that refresh rate matters significantly. It matters so much that they chase astronomical refresh rates of 360hz+. But the dummies around here think that 60hz refresh rate is acceptable on any screen built in 2025. One wonders if they've used their eyeballs at all to look at a screen before that refreshes higher than 60hz and the glaring and obvious differences which are immediately noticeable to any layperson. So many Apple fans just have no idea what they're talking about but come on here and speak confidently.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: Ethosik and turbineseaplane
Alex.ne said:
Graphic designers who are looking at static images 8hrs a day and couldn't care less about 120Hz and, my wild guess, making the core audience of 5k displays because all they need is a picture clarity/quality ?
Click to expand...

splifingate said:
Aye; even 75Hz is fine, by me.
Click to expand...
If you think 60hz - 75hz refresh rate is acceptable in 2025 you are functionally blind and/or possibly low IQ and shouldn't be employed in the design industry.
 
Those of us that have gamed since the 80s, and earlier, seemed to have had no issue playing FPS games and all others with low refresh rates. If you think you need a 10k refresh rate, maybe need to up your game ;)
 
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