Who is forcing you to buy anything? If you don't like it then don't buy it.
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
You must be kidding. The way macOS does scaling is much superior than Windows and offers a much sharper image and text. There is no comparison whatsoever..
Please show me a 27" monitor with MiniLED, HDR and a 220PPI, also offering 120hz, speakers and a webcam. I can help you here so that you don't lose any time. There is nothing out there. Nothing! Even one of the best monitors for gaming offers only 93ppi, which is just ridiculous for a computer monitor: https://www.displayspecifications.com/de/model/128c1f95
That’s the thing. Having got the thing, unpacked and used it I find that none of what you say to be true.
The display is anything but garbage. It’s bright (600 nits), sharp, has beautiful color. It sits alongside the 14” MBP display just fine. Also, the speakers are excellent.
I’m not sure I’ll keep it after I get the Dell, but make no mistake this is a beautiful display. Just overpriced.
Wow! Pretty sure that was the whole point of my post.
Same. I'm happy with it but have to return mine, due to cost. But I plan to buy one again to keep when I can afford it. The fact I could keep one for a decade even if it takes me another two years to save up and buy... I have friends who used TB displays several years, if not a decade, the longevity is something to behold.
Nothing wrong with it. Just seems the price/performance ratio is a bit off.
You can get a good 4k 27" screen for like 500USD. It might not be as good as this Apple display, but is the Apple 3x as good?
On the other hand, people are getting used to the HDR displays. For example, on the new 14/16 MBPs, the really dark blacks are quite a revelation.
So to make it consistent, Apple could have included HDR.
So, either selling the current display at $999
Or, making it HDR and selling it for $1599-1999
The way this product is priced and marketed is a bit awkward. Neither really matches the quality of the MBP screens to demand a premium, nor cheap enough to not care about it.
You can get a good 4k 27" screen for like 500USD. It might not be as good as this Apple display, but is the Apple 3x as good?
On the other hand, people are getting used to the HDR displays. For example, on the new 14/16 MBPs, the really dark blacks are quite a revelation.
So to make it consistent, Apple could have included HDR.
So, either selling the current display at $999
Or, making it HDR and selling it for $1599-1999
The way this product is priced and marketed is a bit awkward. Neither really matches the quality of the MBP screens to demand a premium, nor cheap enough to not care about it.
Last edited:
Right, I’ve been waiting 11 years I’m also happy with mine!
You should watch the review by Rene Ritchie. I am not usually a fan, but I think he did a good job of explaining who this monitor is for.
Agree, the price would put me off if I wanted one - which I don't. As for the $400 height adjustment option, that is typical of Apple once again taking the p**s! Anyone taking up that option surely must be wearing a white straightjacket.
With or without the straightjacket......
Just because it's the same resolution as the LG Ultrafine 5K, why is it identical? And who said there has been no development on it since the LG was introduced? We already know it's brighter than the LG, and the A13 gives it more upgradability than using the LG display.
The biggest problem is there are those on here with the kool-aid huffing mentality that'll buy that pile of trash.
Oh it's 100 nits brighter - you do damage to your eyes at 500nits already, so its just exacerbating that.
Also, hate to break it to you, I almost guarantee if someone was to pull it apart you'd find an LG OEM stamp on the actual display itself, so its nothing particularly special on that front either.
Oh it's 100 nits brighter - you do damage to your eyes at 500nits already, so its just exacerbating that.
Also, hate to break it to you, I almost guarantee if someone was to pull it apart you'd find an LG OEM stamp on the actual display itself, so its nothing particularly special on that front either.
Apple seems to be the only OEM out there that cares at all about industrial design and what their products look like.
It’s a really nice looking aluminum display that integrates well with their products. It’s not a bad monitor by any means, maybe not the best value for the specs but if you are a specs junky and only care about what’s inside and not what it’s wrapped in this is so not the display for you.
I have a $$$ LG 4k 32” in front of me right now. The entire thing is made of plastic and it shows. The sleek metal exterior and simplicity has value to some people. For everyone else buy something from Asus or Dell and move on. I for one am glad this monitor is an option in the market.
It’s a really nice looking aluminum display that integrates well with their products. It’s not a bad monitor by any means, maybe not the best value for the specs but if you are a specs junky and only care about what’s inside and not what it’s wrapped in this is so not the display for you.
I have a $$$ LG 4k 32” in front of me right now. The entire thing is made of plastic and it shows. The sleek metal exterior and simplicity has value to some people. For everyone else buy something from Asus or Dell and move on. I for one am glad this monitor is an option in the market.
Think of all the money you could make if you designed/marketed/sold a better display to all us koolaid kids, but at a $799 price point.
You shouldn't be. It is an inferior product, with design choices that prefer form and profit over function, which is a slap in the face to customers after all this time.
Solid 2/10 product from Apple.
Solid 2/10 product from Apple.
At launch:
My biggest beef was that’s it’s still just LED backlighting. I have the first Gen LG UltraFine 5K, and it seemed like all but the same panel, which even though design is nice, not much of an upgrade
After seeing in store:
It’s gorgeous and I want one.
?
My biggest beef was that’s it’s still just LED backlighting. I have the first Gen LG UltraFine 5K, and it seemed like all but the same panel, which even though design is nice, not much of an upgrade
After seeing in store:
It’s gorgeous and I want one.
?
I think the main issue is its price point. As a display, it’s fine. We know exactly what it is because it’s been on sale for like 7 years now in other products. As a display for 1600+ dollars, it’s a lot less fine. It has all the niceties of integrating with Apple stuff but it’s also missing a lot of things that are very common in sub-$1000 monitors today, and that’s not even mentioning that height adjustment costs you an extra $400.
Complainers is what has gotten Apple to reverse several decisions they made the last few years, most notably the 2016 MacBook Pro. Many of us love macOS and the Apple ecosystem but get frustrated by decisions such as their use of integer-only scaling that limit choice.
In regard to the OP, the monitor is not a bad one by any means. The poor reviews come from Apple essentially recycling an old display and charging a premium price for it. If this were under $1000 it would be fine and the reviews would be kinder. It is missing too many features (many of them very basic ones such as height adjustment or multiple inputs) for its price point.
I think it’s a combination of things. You have one group of people that genuinely want something other than this — a display that may not have this resolution, but that has other things instead, such as HDR, ProMotion (not currently possible at this resolutions/size), or larger size. For them, this is a miss, and those of us who care more about higher resolution are simply wrong.
You also have critics who think Apple is price-gouging us. If your universe of comparison is displays with lower resolution, then this might seem true. If, on the other hand, you restrict your comparison to 5k displays, it seems much less true.
Finally, you have some boneheaded decisions by Apple in that the mounts can’t easily be interchanged, height adjustment isn’t standard, the power cable isn’t easily detachable (a big issue for my intended usage), etc.
None of that means this isn’t a good display, though. It just didn’t excite quite as much as it could have.
I’m considering one myself, but with caveats I hoped I wouldn’t have. I’ll be very curious how you think the 32” 4k display you ordered compares.
You also have critics who think Apple is price-gouging us. If your universe of comparison is displays with lower resolution, then this might seem true. If, on the other hand, you restrict your comparison to 5k displays, it seems much less true.
Finally, you have some boneheaded decisions by Apple in that the mounts can’t easily be interchanged, height adjustment isn’t standard, the power cable isn’t easily detachable (a big issue for my intended usage), etc.
None of that means this isn’t a good display, though. It just didn’t excite quite as much as it could have.
I’m considering one myself, but with caveats I hoped I wouldn’t have. I’ll be very curious how you think the 32” 4k display you ordered compares.
One more factor, and this happens a lot with Apple products. People tend to initially discount certain Apple-esque features until they have experienced them. The sound quality and TrueTone might be examples here. Those things don’t show up on a spec sheet but make a bigger difference in actual use. This display may end up looking much better once non-reviewers start spending time with it.
I’m trying to think if any of Apple’s monitors have come with height adjustable stands in the past…. I can’t think of one before the XDR. Were any iMacs height adjustable since the one with the arm?
My Thunderbolt Display has a captured power cord, and captures the display cable as well. It's a display. Those cables aren't getting a lot of wear.
I can’t think of an Apple display that supports multiple inputs, either. Their solutions are Airplay and universal control.
I’m already annoyed that they put outdated USB-A ports (and an SD card slot) on the Mac Studio, I don’t need to duplicate that in one or more monitors. It seems the industry has over reacted to the whining over a lack of legacy ports and they've started putting USB-A port into freaking everything-- to the point that my biggest problem is a lack of USB-C ports. First thing I'm going to wind up doing with a Studio is put A to C adapters in those ports.
I know there’s an “HDR400” spec, but is that really anything more than marketing? Most of the cheaper displays being compared are in the 350-400nit range. At that point, I’d say even if the display thinks it’s producing HDR, most people aren’t seeing HDR through all the calibration errors and screen reflections and such. The room needs to be awfully dark for HDR to really work well in the higher brightness iPPs. This display wasn’t made as a reference monitor expecting controlled lighting, they’re assuming those folks want the XDR. So what we get is a brighter SDR monitor which I’m quite excited about.
I think a lot of people who were complaining after the XDR release that they want an lower cost Apple designed display didn't really want an Apple designed display. They wanted someone to issue a display with a long laundry list of specs to meet the mythical video-production-iOS-developer-pro-gamer renaissance users needs assuming that such a user is more concerned about datasheets than quality.
Apple made the apparent mistake of actually releasing a lower cost Apple designed display. Apparently this is too expensive. When they put their support behind a cheaper plastic LG display, it was too ugly. People are going to complain no matter what Apple does.
Fortunately, Macs include everything you need to attach whatever display you wish. People complaining about the one they don't want seems kind of petty.