I'm genuinely surprised by the negative reviews of the Studio Display

[profcutter]

It will be interesting to see people using the studio display next to a 27 inch iMac, 2020 I suppose would be the best comparison, because aside from the iMac Pro, it’s the first iMac to support HDR. So let’s see how it holds up next to the old standard. I’m not holding my breath that it’s a dramatic improvement. The camera problem is actually a big deal, they hyped the 12MP camera after having such lousy 720P cameras for so long, it should have been a stunner out of the box.

 

[SpotOnT]

*cough* That panel is an evolution of what Apple has put in their 27" iMac for years already and nothing else. There is absolutely nothing groundbreaking about it in 2022. There's still a lot of rather unique and very neat aspects to it (PPI, coatings, half-decent factory calibration, brightness) but ahead of the curve it most assuredly absolutely definitely isn't, and it's not exactly on par with comparably priced or even cheaper displays for just about everything else display related.

Could you please recommend a display at this price point which you think would be a better pairing for the Mac Studio?

I am genuinely interested.

 

[The Clark]

I think it's just priced a tad too high. A few hundred dollars would have gone a long way with this display..

 

[Cashmonee]

Could you please recommend a display at this price point which you think would be a better pairing for the Mac Studio?

I am genuinely interested.

Well at this price point you are starting to get into monitors that are good at specific things. There arguably isn't a "do-it-all" monitor at this price point because people spending this kind of money are doing it for a specific reason. The specialty of the Studio Display is that it is 5K, which really only matters because of the way macOS scales. If macOS were better at non-integer scaling then this monitor would have no real claim to fame. So if the question is "what is the best monitor for the Mac Studio?" then the answer would certainly be the Studio Display or XDR Display. But that is only due to Apple boxing you in with macOS's scaling.

For the record, part of the reason Apple did scaling the way they did is because it is less resource intensive and with the lineup they had, there was no real need to support 3rd party monitors. Laptops are their top sellers by far and when they were moving to Retina it was clear that Apple was moving out of the desktop market, so they didn't probably think external displays were something their users were going to use. Now that they have reversed course back into desktops, it is a nice way to push you to buy an overpriced 5 year old monitor.

 

[SpotOnT]

Well at this price point you are starting to get into monitors that are good at specific things. There arguably isn't a "do-it-all" monitor at this price point because people spending this kind of money are doing it for a specific reason. The specialty of the Studio Display is that it is 5K, which really only matters because of the way macOS scales. If macOS were better at non-integer scaling then this monitor would have no real claim to fame. So if the question is "what is the best monitor for the Mac Studio?" then the answer would certainly be the Studio Display or XDR Display. But that is only due to Apple boxing you in with macOS's scaling.

For the record, part of the reason Apple did scaling the way they did is because it is less resource intensive and with the lineup they had, there was no real need to support 3rd party monitors. Laptops are their top sellers by far and when they were moving to Retina it was clear that Apple was moving out of the desktop market, so they didn't probably think external displays were something their users were going to use. Now that they have reversed course back into desktops, it is a nice way to push you to buy an overpriced 5 year old monitor.

Yes, the scaling is the main reason I am looking into the Studio Display. But I am open to other options if something at the same price point has a lot more to offer. The only other monitor around this price point that have popped up on my radar so far is the BenQ SW line.

Don’t really care about the webcam or speakers. Would be nice if the display had more colorspace options. I appreciate the uniformity and accuracy with P3, but AdobeRGB would be a nice addition.

My feelings about the Studio Display at the moment are pretty on par with the dp review.

 

[4sallypat]

I can provide photos of a pile of $200 dell monitors from 2005/2006 that are only being pulled from circulation because people are whinging about the screen estate being lacking despite them predominantly using a single sub 1920x1080 screen during WFH for 18 months, not because they're not working.

Meanwhile, sat underneath said pile is a much vaunted 2011 TB display, sat effectively as junk as some genius company built their cable bundle into the monitor rather than as a detachable cable for style purposes, said cables are unobtanium even in 2nd hand markets because of the same stupid failure point.

You want a metric of reliable, you go dell business monitors circa 2003 - 2015, not the TB display.

I had a 4K Samsung display paired with the 27" Thunderbolt display on then current M1 Mac Mini and have to say that the clarity, sharpness and focused fonts were NOT there.

Something with the non Apple matte plastic front compared to the TB display's glass front.

The 11 year old TB display had more sharpness, crisp text, and clear fonts without the eye strain.

 

[aurora_sect]

Does the display wobble at all? I have a nano-texture VESA model on order, but the store near me had a standard model with the height-adjustment stand on Friday, so I also picked that one up to compare as I’m not yet sure if I want the standard or nano-screen. I have a fairly inexpensive VESA mount for my LG UltraFine 5K, and while it wobbles less than the included stand, it is still a bit wobbly. The Apple height-adjustment stand is rock solid at any height.

I haven't noticed any wobbling. Caveat: I have a 24" loaner monitor right now, Studio Display order is still processing. The display currently mounted is lighter than the Studio, but the latter still weighs a lot less than the max capacity rating of the Ergotron. Now I'm shaking my desk, monitor is dead still. But my desk is pretty heavy.

 

[ninecows]

I disagree - the ASD is priced correct if my $1000 Apple Thunderbolt 27" display I have been using since 2011 is any indicator on longevity.

Try to get 11 years of monitor life in a plastic encased, less expensive monitor - I have gone thru many Dell, BenQ, HP, Gateway, etc in less than 5 years compared to my beloved Apple 27" Thunderbolt display.

$1600 is well worth it nowadays if it lasts as long as my $1000 TB display from 2011.

Yeah… if it last that long. But there’s no guarantee for that. It can crap out after 2 years or even less and then what?

BTW. My plastic 17” LG monitor from 2005 I still holding strong. It was 200$ back then. Adjust for inflation and I think 400$ is a fair price for a similar spec’ed monitor today ?

 

[clevins]

There’s plenty of displays out there for the masses. If you expected that then you set yourself up for disappointment. What we got was an updated version of the LG 5K display with some extra features for a little bit more money. It’s less than half the price of the Pro Display XDR but it’s still really good monitor. If high resolution is important then it’s well worth the price. If it’s not there’s plenty of cheaper 4K displays out there

The problem is that it's too expensive for what many people wanted, which was an updated version of the last Apple Display... that cost $999.

This thing has in it an A13 with 64G of storage (that's just there because it let them use an existing part). Spatial Audio with fancy internal speakers. Hey Siri, I think. A built in camera that will become outdated. Center Stage.

All of that is NICE but it's superfluous to the core of what many of us wanted - a high quality 5k screen with Apple build quality.

I use a display to look at and work on. Center Stage is not needed. I don't care about speaker quality past some basic level because if I did, I'd have *external* speakers. The webcam is nice, but it's 12mp and anyone who cares will be using a 4K external. And why the H does this need to run iOS for with an A13??

At $999 s screen only version would have been an instabuy for me. At $1299 probably. At $1599? Nah.

 

[CoffeeMacBook]

The Windows market is fixated on 4K because it’s cheaper and Windows scales differently from macOS. Windows allows scaling at at percentage from 100% to 200%. macOS forces 200% and then downscales as necessary. So there is a bigger benefit to 5K on a Mac than Windows.

There's an old but great article here about 5K and how the pixels scale for Graphic Designers:

Mac external displays for designers and developers

If you’re considering an external display for your Mac, there’s a few important decisions to make. Apple doesn’t sell external displays any more, so you can’t just default to their wisdom. That’s an issue, because not all displays are well suited for Macs.

bjango.com

The "bad zone" chart above has to do with scaling and the silver flickering you get when scaling (see article for detail).

 

[MayaTlab]

Could you please recommend a display at this price point which you think would be a better pairing for the Mac Studio?

I am genuinely interested.

As @Cashmonee suggested, someone likely to purchase the Mac Studio also is likely to look for a monitor (or even monitors) specialised for what they're doing.

When I look at the specs of the iMac displays I see Apple trying to strike a decent balance for a lot of various applications, at the cost of having some drawbacks for any one of them, which makes total sense in my opinion for an integrated display. For an external display (the Studio Display), perhaps for users whose activity covers a diverse range of applications, or less "power" users, but not for more specific ones.

Whether that's for photography (retouching, development, printing), video (editing, grading, etc.), productivity, coding, for each one of them the Studio Display's spec sheet makes you go "this is great, but that is meh".

To be honest I find it weird that this display was mostly shown alongside the Mac Studio. I bet that a lot of Mac Mini or MacBook users will be interested and maybe even comprise most of the people who will buy it.

So, a more concrete illustration. I do quite a bit of photography and like to proof the results on my monitor before printing, and when you do it right that's even possible for me to get a good preview of what an external printing lab will produce. For that application I use an Eizo monitor regularly calibrated, and I absolutely wouldn't want the Studio Display for it (not enough Adobe RGB coverage + not as easily calibrated in the long run as the Eizo monitors).

But that monitor's contrast ratio isn't particularly great (although no worse than the Studio Display), its coatings makes for a rather poor viewing experience for video - particularly in darker environments, and is quite unrepresentative of most displays people watch content on these days. Lately I've been looking into something better suited to video content consumption / creation for darker environments. Neither is the Studio Display superbly suited to that task as far as I'm concerned as its contrast ratio isn't good enough (nor the XDR for that matter given the lack of zones). It's likely to be be an OLED / QD OLED monitor as I'm not expecting local dimming backlights to reach the desired density for larger screens in the short term (and I'll wait until late 2022 as this is a cornerstone year for displays).

I'll end up at home with three different displays (MBP, Eizo, OLED/QD OLED monitor), each best suited for different applications. To be frank I'd have added the Studio Display to it either if it were priced at a more impulse buy price (if only for ease of use and ecosystem integration, for regular desk usage), or if it had been slightly more expensive and featured a 500+ zones local dimming backlight.

 

[palmor]

As @Cashmonee suggested, someone likely to purchase the Mac Studio also is likely to look for a monitor (or even monitors) specialised for what they're doing.

When I look at the specs of the iMac displays I see Apple trying to strike a decent balance for a lot of various applications, at the cost of having some drawbacks for any one of them, which makes total sense in my opinion for an integrated display. For an external display (the Studio Display), perhaps for users whose activity covers a diverse range of applications, or less "power" users, but not for more specific ones.

Whether that's for photography (retouching, development, printing), video (editing, grading, etc.), productivity, coding, for each one of them the Studio Display's spec sheet makes you go "this is great, but that is meh".

To be honest I find it weird that this display was mostly shown alongside the Mac Studio. I bet that a lot of Mac Mini or MacBook users will be interested and maybe even comprise most of the people who will buy it.

So, a more concrete illustration. I do quite a bit of photography and like to proof the results on my monitor before printing, and when you do it right that's even possible for me to get a good preview of what an external printing lab will produce. For that application I use an Eizo monitor regularly calibrated, and I absolutely wouldn't want the Studio Display for it (not enough Adobe RGB coverage + not as easily calibrated in the long run as the Eizo monitors).

But that monitor's contrast ratio isn't particularly great (although no worse than the Studio Display), its coatings makes for a rather poor viewing experience for video - particularly in darker environments, and is quite unrepresentative of most displays people watch content on these days. Lately I've been looking into something better suited to video content consumption / creation for darker environments. Neither is the Studio Display superbly suited to that task as far as I'm concerned as its contrast ratio isn't good enough (nor the XDR for that matter given the lack of zones). It's likely to be be an OLED / QD OLED monitor as I'm not expecting local dimming backlights to reach the desired density for larger screens in the short term (and I'll wait until late 2022 as this is a cornerstone year for displays).

I'll end up at home with three different displays (MBP, Eizo, OLED/QD OLED monitor), each best suited for different applications. To be frank I'd have added the Studio Display to it either if it were priced at a more impulse buy price (if only for ease of use and ecosystem integration, for regular desk usage), or if it had been slightly more expensive and featured a 500+ zones local dimming backlight.

Sounds like the Asus ProArt miniLED line is what you’d want (assuming 4k is good enough). It’s pricey but ticks the boxes.

27”: https://www.asus.com/us/Displays-Desktops/Monitors/ProArt/ProArt-Display-PA27UCX-K/

 

[fpenta]

Before the apple event my intention was to update my 2019 27" iMac.

Now I know that I was fortunate to buy one of the last models before it was discontinued.

I like the Mac Studio (except for the design that I hate) and at the beginning I wanted to get the ultra version but I can't justify the €2300 for the studio display that is basically the same display that I already own.

The display is lower than the iMac so the height adjustable stand is a must, in EU this config is $2500.

I will wait another year and see what happens. In the meantime I will enjoy the amazing screen of my 14".

 

[Ifti]

Club3D CAC-1332

This has just made the solution more attractive for me!

Do we know if one of the USB-C ports on the rear of the display will accept an input though - or would I have to unplug my laptop and plug that into the adapter instead?

 

[Amethyst1]

Do we know if one of the USB-C ports on the rear of the display will accept an input though [...]

They don't.

[...] or would I have to unplug my laptop and plug that into the adapter instead?

Yup. The adapter needs to be connected to the display's Thunderbolt port.

Or you can buy the CAC-1334 instead which is a cable, not an adapter and has been successfully tested with the Studio Display. (I don't know if the CAC-1332 has.)

Another thing to be aware of is the CAC-1332 and CAC-1334 don't provide a USB connection to the Studio Display; its speakers are an USB audio device connected to a built-in USB hub, so you won't be able to use the speakers with a PS5 or other HDMI device.

 

[NewUsername]

I think it’s a great display, it’s just a pity it is almost the price of the 27" iMac… I don’t mind paying the Apple tax, but when I can buy a 27" 4K display with USB-C for 400 euro, I’m not going to pay 1800 euro for an Apple display. When you buy an iPhone or a Mac, you also pay much more but in that case you also pay to be able to use iOS and macOS instead of Android or Windows. For a display though, it’s just not worth the money for me.

 

[cknlol]

Imho it's a fine display, but 60hz is a turn off for me personally. Hopefully they'll bring out a version with promotion at some point.

 

[russell_314]

At $999 s screen only version would have been an instabuy for me. At $1299 probably. At $1599? Nah.

Wait so you expect Apple to sell what is basically an LG ultrafine 5K with "Apple build quality" for cheaper than what LG is selling it for?

Sorry but you're not going to get that

I use a display to look at and work on. Center Stage is not needed. I don't care about speaker quality past some basic level because if I did, I'd have *external* speakers. The webcam is nice, but it's 12mp and anyone who cares will be using a 4K external. And why the H does this need to run iOS for with an A13??

It sounds like you just wanted a bare display for the lowest cost with a 5K panel but with an Apple logo. Take the Apple sticker that comes with your Mac and stick it on the back and you have an Apple 5K display. It's not going to be for $999 unless you get it used but it's a basic panel

 

[kwijbo]

Wait so you expect Apple to sell what is basically an LG ultrafine 5K with "Apple build quality" for cheaper than what LG is selling it for?

Sorry but you're not going to get that


It sounds like you just wanted a bare display for the lowest cost with a 5K panel but with an Apple logo. Take the Apple sticker that comes with your Mac and stick it on the back and you have an Apple 5K display. It's not going to be for $999 unless you get it used but it's a basic panel

the post you're replying to said "At $999 a screen only version..."

I dont think its too much of a stretch to speculate that the Studio Display without webcam, microphone, speakers, A13 and storage could be priced around $999. Keep in mind that still does not include a stand.

 

[Random_Matt]

Should have oled, trumps LCD. The 42" LG oled is cheaper.

 

[4sallypat]

I think it's just priced a tad too high. A few hundred dollars would have gone a long way with this display..

$1500 is not too high IMO (I paid EDU price).

When the 2011 27" TB display first came out many people complained it was too expensive and cost as much as a Macbook Air or iMac.

Then as time passed, those people with outdated Macs had to retire them in 5-7 years when OS maxed out.

My 2011 27" TB display is still going strong (I have 3 ATD: work, home, wife).

Paying for the new Studio Display is very much in line with Apple's forward thinking design.

Love my 2011 ATD next to my new 2022 ASD:

 

[russell_314]

the post you're replying to said "At $999 a screen only version..."

I dont think its too much of a stretch to speculate that the Studio Display without webcam, microphone, speakers, A13 and storage could be priced around $999. Keep in mind that still does not include a stand.

So you think the cheap plastic stand on the LG ultrafine marks it up $300 because it's $1300? Even if they didn't include none of the extra features it would still be about the same price as the LG with the stand included. This is if they didn't charge more for the better construction or did similar to the cheap plastic of the LG with a ? on the back. There would be no point of selling a consumer level monitor with the stand separate. People had a fit when they did it with the Pro monitor and that kind of made sense but not so much for a consumer level product.

So if you got to make the call instead of Tim, Apple would be be selling an LG ultrafine 5K shoved into an Apple housing with no extras for $999 + $300 for a stand. I don't see this as a logical decision because Apple wants to make their product work for the largest market thus more sales. Everyone that had an existing LG ultrafine 5K would have zero reason to upgrade other than looks. There would be no Apple specific features other than the logo so even some people might not buy it new because even at $1299 total vs $1599 that's about double the price of a pretty good 4K so it has no webcam, low quality or no speakers and no Siri... Yeah that would be a flop.

 

[mansplains]

Why would you buy one if you can’t afford it?

I didn't buy it with intention to keep. I could make it work if I really want to but I'd rather afford it properly, with a budget towards a new monitor. Because Apple's monitor releases are rather infrequent, I haven't been saving for a product I didn't envision coming for a while. Especially when the prior release starts at $5k..

Edit: I also am waiting to see whether Costco adds the VESA version for a little discount as that makes more sense for me than the tilt option I returned.

 

[BotchQue]

Not quite on-topic, but I'm wondering why, since so many of you already have this display, from local Apple store, Costco and even Walmart, why did I order from Apple with a mid-May delivery?

 

[Macalway]

The beauty of displays over the past years has been the price. You get dirt cheap, really good monitors, and many of these cheap monitors are definitely 'good enough' for serious users.

So what gives here? Apple gives, that's what (correction:takes).