The aesthetics of M8 is nicer, but I guess it depends on how much you paid for M7.
I’ll agree with you that anything short of HDR1000 is barely worthy of being called HDR so whether you can call it HDR or not is probably pointless even if it meticulously met all the requirements of the HDR600 certification. It’s probably why Apple didn’t bother mentioning it.
Because the only people who need a 5k display are Apple users, and that's only because Apple can't figure out how to implement proper vector DPI independence.
www.ultraselective.com
Actually it’s missing a very crucial piece of it: wireless connectivity. Without Internet capability, it can’t be an Apple TV. Without WiFi, it can’t do AirPlay. If Apple were planning this as an upcoming bonus feature, they didn’t put enough hardware in it to do the job. I know iFixit did a tear down, but I don’t recall them indicating there was any wireless hardware included.
I get how scaling works. My point was 4k natively on a 32" monitor without scaling is actually a decent resolution for most people. I work on a 5k and 1440p 27" monitors side by side. The 5k is most definitely sharper on text, but 4k at 32" is an improvement over 1440p as far as actual resolution and pixel density. So my point is, that as a consumer device, a 4k 32" monitor is actually a pretty smart choice for a screen even over a 27" 4k monitor. At 27", most people would turn on scaling which would create too large of an interface/ui at the 2x option and fractionally scaling isn't ideal either.
I agree with what you say here. My comment was directed at the 109 dpi you mentioned when it isn’t 109. That was definitely incorrect. Even scaled, it’s still 218 dpi.
Yeah, that's a valid correction. I was referencing it more as 109dpi to illustrate the scaled aspect of it even though it is technically still at 218dpi.
Sure I do, however that would have to come with another rev of the monitor. For those who already own one, it’s just not possible unless you use some weird external dongle that Apple would never do. They would have to completely re-engineer the monitor to add in the WiFi antennas, which would be the hardest part to do. While the parts may not add up to much, the R&D would, especially since the whole chassis is aluminum, which WiFi signals cannot penetrate. They may potentially have to re-tool to remake the chassis. It’s not a trivial task. Yes, the front is glass and maybe the WiFi signal can come that way, but I don’t know how they did it on the iMacs and whether there would be problems if the WiFi signal were unable to penetrate the back of the monitor. I could just see the complaints where if the monitor were oriented in a certain manner, WiFi would disappear.
