Spoiler alert: 'retina' doesn't exist. It's a marketing-term Apple came up with regarding what DPI they thought was acceptable for a device you typically hold about 6"-8" from your face so you don't see the dots unless you look real, real close. But in reality that's going to be different for everyone. Exactly how close are you sitting to a 27" monitor where the difference between a 3840 X 2160 display and a 5120×2880 display is such a big issue?
Not who you’re replying to, but when using Max OS’s native “scaled” resolution, 4K vs 5K is a night and day difference in clarity. I worked with 2 4K displays for the longest time. Eventually bit and bought 2 LG UltraFine 5Ks after seeing the difference on a 5K iMac. I don’t know if I can ever go back to something less than 5K with a screen that size. And it’s a shame, because just about no one makes them.
Is this sarcasm?
Actually Steve Jobs defined Retina on stage when he introduced the iPhone 4. Which was basically, any resolution where individual pixels can't be seen at normal viewing distances.
sure you cant but they dont understand this here! If you work with adobe soft, musicsoftware of 3d applications you need the desktopspace! 4k is way too low in resolution.
Good for Steve. That doesn't change the fact that it is nothing more than a marketing term. There's no "Retina Display Consortium" comprised of independent reviewers or engineers who have collectively determined an industry standard measurement for declaring a display as "Retina". There's just a guy and a marketing department that came up with a pseudo-scientific sounding term so they could justify a higher price for a phone (and later, a monitor).
You do know that people have been working in all of those applications for literally decades before 4k was even a thing, don't you? And you also do realize that the vast majority of people working in those industries today do so without a 5k+ monitor.
Not likely. It might add a bit to Apple's cost, but probably would not provide enough justification to increase the price further. The Studio Display is already priced at what Apple determined the optimum price for a 27" Apple branded monitor would be.
If Apple actually hired competent developers and fixed Mac OS scaling, this wouldn't be a thing.
Who's sitting closer than 20" though? I just measured 23" between my eyes and my 27" display.
I was never saying that that this monitor was Retina or not, just that the OP was complaining that it wasn't high enough resolution, so I said to move the monitor farther away(It was supposed to be humorous).
You say this but who knew that the a VW from factory did a better job of "rolling coal" than a Dodge Ram. 😂
Haha...dude...."4K 27" is really not that sharp"....HAHAHA Your absurdity and fanboyness needs to stop.
"retina" is a sliding scale...it depends on how far away you sit from the monitor. A 27" 4K monitor is "retina" at 21 inches or more viewing distance. I'd think that the average person sitting at a desk views their monitor at 21 inches or more. So the whole "retina" argument is bunk. The entire term "retina" just means that at the distance you view from, you cannot see the pixels. I have two workstations, one has two 32" samsung 4K monitors and one has a dell ultrasharp 27" P series 4K monitor. I cannot see pixels in any of the monitors when seated and working normally.
Billy sits as far from his display as Tim Apple tells him to. Billy is a good, unquestioning Apple customer. You are an infidel and are unworthy of making any comparisons to Apple's brilliant and completely unmatched works of engineering art.
