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.
mini paired with Hauwei's new 4.5K 3:2 monitor = iMac killer?
- Thread starter tornado99
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Depends a bit on size and resolution - I'm just playing with my shiny new Mateview and it can very happily get two A4 Word documents side-by-side at up to 140% scale (115% is about actual size) side-by-side including the dreaded Ribbon. Something like logic pro is a harder call - you see less of the timeline (at a given size) but if you use the piano roll window underneath the main timeline the extra vertical space is most welcome.
The other possibility, though, is using two displays, which I find works better than trying to work with two or more applications in split screen. I have been using a 28" 16:9 display alongside my iMac and, with the wide-screen format, you kinda need binoculars to see the far side of the second screen. I think the "squarer" 3:2 format would work better with multi displays and I'm rather tempted to go to a pair of MateViews if I switch to a Mini/Studio setup. Heck, I could get 3 for less than the cost of a Studio Display.
Well, its arrived, and so far.... wow, that's a lot of display for £400!
Plug and play with my 2017 iMac using the included USB-C cable, and "best for display" mode went straight to "looks like 1920x1280" mode ) which is native 3840x2560 with 2:1 scaling. Early days, but I'm liking the format - object of the exercise is to decide whether I'd be happy replacing my 5k iMac with one of these as a primary display for a Mini...
I think the 5k picture quality is "better" - obviously slightly higher pixel density and the contrast /colour on photos seems better (maybe because of the bonded glass & screen treatment) but then (with the demise of the 5k iMac) but the Mateview is a pretty close second and insane for the price.
I guess it depends if you have/want/need two full size side by side windows a lot.
I honestly rarely do, and when I do, 16:10 is able to do it well enough for me.
The rest of the time, I much prefer the taller/more sqaurish aspect ratio for more height and usually for me the extra space for multitasking is to keep an eye on a chat window or a PIP window of some tv/sports, etc.
With the UK sale ending in a few days, I'm really trying to determine if I want to get this monitor to replace my old Dell U3011.
I like my monitor but I know its days are numbered with it being over a decade old and used nearly everyday. Whites don't look as white as before to the eye, not the weird HDR mode my phone slapped on.
Plus the heat it puts out is not exactly a good thing during the summer.
Does anyone have any pictures of their MateView being used Affinity Photo? How does the older CS6 Suite and LR6 scale to these monitors? Yea, I know they're older software but it's what I use.
Included in the picture is my secondary monitor Dell U2410 that I'll keep around. Hopefully the MateView is tall enough for it to be near seamless.
I like my monitor but I know its days are numbered with it being over a decade old and used nearly everyday. Whites don't look as white as before to the eye, not the weird HDR mode my phone slapped on.
Plus the heat it puts out is not exactly a good thing during the summer.
Does anyone have any pictures of their MateView being used Affinity Photo? How does the older CS6 Suite and LR6 scale to these monitors? Yea, I know they're older software but it's what I use.
Included in the picture is my secondary monitor Dell U2410 that I'll keep around. Hopefully the MateView is tall enough for it to be near seamless.
I must be hallucinating that I own two of these then.
Is it?Reddit said:
Compared to a 16:9 3840×2160 monitor, 3:2 3840×2560 offers 18.5% more vertical real estate, so 3:2 is obviously superior to 16:9. At ≈21:9 (5120×2160) things may be different. But ≈21:9 isn't considered "widescreen" and not available on laptops either.
Last edited:
Side-by-side multitasking can be achieved with side-by-side monitors. You cannot replace height with a second monitor.
I'm working on a long document at the moment, and all the scrolling is getting tedious. There would be quite a bit less if I had a 3:2 monitor instead of 16:9. I'm cross-referencing multiple documents, so a second screen works well, but would be even better with 3:2 as the far side would be nearer, and I'd have less scrolling to do on the second monitor as well.
I am rarely constrained horizontally in anything I do, but constantly vertically. That is a result of 16:9.
To add insult to injury, ultrawides are providing more width when the problem more often than not is insufficient height.
Last edited:
Does anyone have the dimensions of the Mateview?
For some reason I’m having trouble finding that on Huawei specs page
For some reason I’m having trouble finding that on Huawei specs page
According to Prad: 608 (W) × 591 (H) × 182 (D) millimetres.
I tend to agree with the above comments, was just thowing it out there. I've observed in my office a lot of people with a horizontal 16:9 24 inch next to a vertical 16:9 24 inch. Not a bad solution for side-to-side movement (narrower than double mateviews?), but a 16:9 vertical just gives you a pain in the neck.
No luxury of Mateviews or Electriqs at work. Just get what we're given.
No luxury of Mateviews or Electriqs at work. Just get what we're given.
I agree with 16:9 being generally better for two documents side by side (on a big screen), but with mateview being 28" vs 27" you are almost getting the additional vertical space "for free" while still having almost the same wide real-estate (27" 3:2 vs 27" 16:9 would be a slightly different discussion)
I think the difference is only 0.6 cm or so?
I think the difference is only 0.6 cm or so?
Don't have Affinity Photo, but is Affinity Designer close enough? Sorry, quick'n'dirty mobile photo - you can't judge clarity, but everything in Affinity is perfectly sharp, clear and usable. 27" 5k iMac for size comparison - but it's running in optimal "looks like 2560x1440" mode so everything is significantly smaller and you do get more "real estate". The system menu/icon size on the MateView is significantly larger than on the 5k: about equivalent to "looks like 2048x1152" scaled mode on the iMac. Or you can run the MateView in "looks like 2560x1707" scaled mode and get a ton of screen estate while still looking pretty sharp. If you have young, healthy eyeballs you can probably run it in 1:1 mode and get more screen estate than a 5k.
Personally, with my eyesight, I find the default mode on the 5k iMac a little small for extended use, and often run it in the next larger "scaled" mode anyway, so the MateView is just about perfect in that respect. Trouble is with "screen estate" is it really depends on what size you like
The Mateview is not such a good display as the 5k iMac panel - not quite as crisp and high-contrast - I think it's at least partly down to the Mateview's plastic anti-glare coating vs. the Mac's bonded glass... but it's pretty unfair to compare a display you can get with £400 display with one that now costs £1600 stand-alone...
(Sorry to keep comparing it to the 5k - but that's what's on my mind at the moment)
At the same width, 3:2 is always superior to 16:9 because you're getting more vertical real estate.
I make the horizontal display width of the MateView almost identical to that of the 5k iMac, within a few mm.
The iMac looks wider because of the bezels & aspect ratio.
The physical size of icons, system fonts etc. on the Mateview in optimum "looks like 1920x1280" mode is roughly the same as the 5k in scaled "looks like 2048x1152" mode. (Usual disclaimer that "looks like" here tells you nothing about sharpness/pixelation, just the physical size of the icons etc.)
Certainly, a 28.3" "4k+" (3840x2560) MateView gives you more real estate than a 27" "4k UHD" (3840x2160) display - since the physical width (they're both a smidge under 60cm wide) and horizontal resolution are the same.
Otherwise, "real estate" is a slippery concept because it depends on screen size, PPI and your preferred scaling - plus, it doesn't help that everything is sold based on diagonal size but horizontal resolution. Have fun doing Pythagoras in your head
However, some Mac users will be comparing with the iMac 5k, LG UltraFine etc. If you set the MateView in scaled "looks like 2560x1707" mode you, arguably, get the same horizontal space as a 16:9 27" 5k and more vertical space. However, you're using non-integer scaling, so there's extra load on the GPU and a slight "softening" of the display when you look closely at text, fine lines etc. Personally, I think that's overblown and scaled modes work just fine, but YMMV. If you run both in their "optimum" mode (1:1 scaling with double-size icons and system fonts) the 5k has more real estate if you don't mind the physically smaller text. If you scale the 5k to give the same physical size icons/system text as the 4k+, the 4k+ wins and it's very YMMV to compare scaled resolution on 5k with 1:1 resolution at lower PPI on the 4k+...
I have a 5K monitor running at pixel-perfect 2560×1440 sitting next to my MateViews (usually) running scaled 2560×1707 because I want the best of both worlds. Scaling peculiarities aside, the MateViews give me more vertical space.
By “the same width” I (only) meant horizontal resolution, not physical width.
Last edited:
Affinity Publisher is close enough! This is what I wanted to see with how the "real estate" looks and it looks like the UI scales well too! Thank you so much!
Does anyone have a photo of the MateView next to a 27" 4K monitor? I just want to have an idea of the size difference. Thanks
Mine arrived yesterday. On playing with it today with my 2015 Macbook Pro I did like it (despite some of the vagaries of the offered resolutions), though wasn't quite as blown away as I was hoping; I think with a new Mac Mini though it would look great running at a properly scaled resolution...
However, has anyone else had any issues with a very intermittent/complete lack of response from the monitor's touchbar? This one is very unresponsive (and I also hooked it up with an HP laptop and had the same issue, so not the Mac), so I think I'm going to have to return it as it seems like there's a fault.
However, has anyone else had any issues with a very intermittent/complete lack of response from the monitor's touchbar? This one is very unresponsive (and I also hooked it up with an HP laptop and had the same issue, so not the Mac), so I think I'm going to have to return it as it seems like there's a fault.
Last edited:
Correct, my brain dismissed the 27" iMac, those bezels are HUGE ?.
I was actually thinking of comparing it with a more modern 27" with narrow bezels.
It is now the same price direct from Huawei: https://consumer.huawei.com/uk/moni...aa&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=HotUKDeals
And it seems you should be able to get £100 cashback: https://consumer.huawei.com/uk/prom...aa&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=HotUKDeals
As you can probably see, it has inserted HotUKDeals into the link as that is where I saw it. I cannot get it to remove that. Sorry if it is an issue.