You're welcome. This time I'll give them a pass since the iMac is an old design - why match the new Studio Display with a design (/height requirement) they no longer sell?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm genuinely surprised by the negative reviews of the Studio Display
- Thread starter CalMin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah imagine that people who arent sheep consumers, the horror.
I think some of you confuse aluminum for good looks.
And other OEMs seem to also care about the design of HOW you use the product which Apple does not. $400 for a stand that actually allows you to use the monitor correctly? ( Or I guess you could shove some books under there, that looks great). Only 1 input too because who needs to use a monitor with a work laptop and home desktop or some other device? Oh and you can't adjust the brightness on your work PC laptop at all once you've swapped the cable over. Zero thought to actually using it outside the scenario of people the exact correct height with exactly 1 computer.
Design is not only about looks but how you use the product and this is just another instance of Apple dropping the ball there.
You seem to confuse “bad design” with “this device wasn’t designed for you”.
Can’t make everyone happy, they clearly decided the market of people with your needs wasn’t worth pursuing.
IMO value judgment is a very personal thing. If I'm happy about a product at a certain price I guarantee you there will be many who won't be and vice versa.
Absolutely, I was just curious as when I was a student $1500 monitor was out of my budget so I wonder where I went wrong :-D
It doesn't. The contrast ratio isn't high enough. It isn't because Youtube for some reason allows the HDR content to be enabled on such monitors that you're actually experiencing HDR.
And in fact, the "HDR" the ASD is showing is likely worse than an SDR image. Forcing HDR does not always yield positive results if the video or display are not meant to handle it. Looking at the videos of people who have tried in their views, the blacks are crushed. However, looking at a video is not representative so it may look fine in person.
The education store is available to more than students: "Available to current and newly accepted college students and their parents, as well as faculty, staff, and homeschool teachers of all grade levels."
While I generally agree with this sentiment, I don't think a non-height adjustable stand was designed for anyone at all. Everybody would appreciate the option for height adjustment, even if the standard height is fine for you by pure luck. Next time you buy a new table or chair, that height might not be perfect anymore. If they would offer the standard stand and the height adjustable one for the same price, what reason could there be to get the standard one? Can't think of anything.
I don't have an opinion on the price of the monitor, but they should have only offered the height adjustable stand and they could've marketed that as a clear improvement over the iMac and older monitors.
(and additionally offering the VESA mount, though I am sure there could be an easy and elegant solution to have both at the same time, so that's another weird one).
When I bought a 2011 27" Thunderbolt display in 2011 for $1000 I thought that was expensive, but since I have been using it for 11 years, I have to say, it's been a necessity for the clear sharp fonts.
$1500 for a newer tech display is in line with my thoughts on how a display should perform.
Gotta love my dual generation displays working side by side + HDTV:
It does have a height adjustable stand though. You just need to spec that option on the build sheet.
All apple has done is given people the option of an adjustable or non adjustable stand.
Aside from that fact, the difference only comes down to price like you say, all they are offering people is the option of a cheaper non adjustable choice.
That capture is from this Chinese Youtube review. The guy got a review unit with the adjustable stand. This video is one of the most comprehensive day1 reviews of the display actually.
But that's what I mean, the option of non-adjustable should not be an option, because it offers no advantage to the adjustable one. The monitor is obviously and rightly so designed and marketed for a specific group of people. But the non adjustable stand is not designed for anyone. They have gone through the trouble to delevope something better, therefor that should be standard and the only option when releasing a new monitor (apart from VESA).
It's not about the cost. I don't mind paying 1600 or 2000 for this monitor (my current monitor costs 5000). But it's clear the only reason adjustable and non adjustable exists as options is to milk customers for more money. Like "we got this nice monitor now that we can sell for X amount of money, how can we get them to spend even more on the same monitor?"
The Studio Display with the non-adjustable stand:
- can be considered more elegant/minimalistic
- is less deep (display area is 2 inches farther back, which matter on a shallow desk)
- has less parts than can fail
And with regard to the cost: do you really think that if Apple had decided against producing the version with non-adjustable stand, they would have offered the display with adjustable stand at $1599? No, it would have been $1999, just like it is today.
spot on:
www.macworld.com
Apple has taken its love of recycling just a little too far
The Studio Display illustrates how the company's tendency to recycle its tech may not always be the best option.
www.macworld.com
Loving my tilt-only, normal glass "bare bones" model. . It is a replacement for the Thunderbolt Display I had for 10 years and nothing more. It's exactly what I was waiting for and if it lasts as long as the TBD did it was well worth the money. My office setup shows off the back of the display when you come into the room and cheap plastic computer stuff would look out of place. I'm very happy with this display.
Attachments
I'm using my 15-year-old 23" Apple Cinema Display with my new Mac until the Studio display is delivered.
What a great monitor it still is.
It gives me confidence in the Studio display. I sure don't mind dropping $2K on primary gear that I'll still be happy with 15 years from.
What a great monitor it still is.
It gives me confidence in the Studio display. I sure don't mind dropping $2K on primary gear that I'll still be happy with 15 years from.
It could be said that it’s designed for the kind of folks that bought iMacs. Not those folks precisely (as the vast majority would not have need for a monitor) but the kind of folks for which “using a monitor with no height adjustment capability” is of zero issue for $1,599. Or, those that are accustomed to making decisions that provide the flexibility they need upon purchase. AND, maybe, that like that a VESA option doesn’t cost more money now.
That’s NOT going to be a lot of people and it doesn’t have to be as this isn’t intended to be a mass market device. If it has sold 10 million in 5 years from now, I’d be quite surprised.
I think these are the reasons and we are the customers for this display. The raw specs just don't tell the story.
I certainly would not be spending this sort of money on a 27" display if I hadn't had just a perfect experience with Apple displays in the past, and negative experience with non-Apple displays. I like that it's designed for my computer and I love the aesthetics and build quality.
This is good point and one that I haven't seen made before. Of course, Apple could have implement a height adjustment technology that doesn't cost $400. There are lots of ways to accomplish this other than the one that they chose. There's no doubt that it operates really well and looks stunning, but I think it's overkill in the sub $2k market.
I'm lucky enough to have a height adjustable desk and set it so that the display is at the correct height. Talk about the tail wagging the dog on this!