Samsung's iMac-Style 'Smart Monitor M8' With AirPlay Now Available to Pre-Order

[neuropsychguy]

It’s a closed Tizen OS, no ads, since when did a TV / monitor gui have ads????

If you look at one of their previous smart monitors (in this case the M7), they show ads when you switch over to the "Smart" display part of the monitor. The 1st and 5th images on their product page show the ads ("Featured" movies or shows): https://www.samsung.com/us/computin...itor-with-mobile-connectivity-ls32am702unxza/

If you have a newer Samsung TV (2015 and onward), you've seen these ads unless you never connected it to a network. These monitors look like they work the same (considering previous versions of the monitors show ads). Again, they will not show ads when using it as a computer monitor but if you connect it to a network, it is tracking what you do (as much as the display can), and will show ads if you go to the OS-based menu.

 

[ajfahey]

I suspect Apple would lose money if they sold it at that price. Nobody makes 5K displays but LG, and their featureless monitor is $1299. There are other monitors that call themselves 5K, but they’re not. They’re usually 5K2K ultrawides with fewer pixels than a 4K monitor. You get what you pay for, and there was zero chance Apple’s monitor of a higher build quality with more features would cost less than the LG.

When 4K monitors are a dime a dozen, $700 for a 4K monitor is pushing it for being too expensive. Economies of scale with so few 5K monitors out there means 5K will be a lot more expensive. Apple and LG essentially have a pseudo-monopoly. Whether the cost is worth it is completely up to the consumer, but Apple’s display is not unfairly priced when put up against the LG.

Also, it does support HDR. Apple just didn’t bother certifying it. It’s another advantage it has over the LG. Granted it’s only HDR at 600 nits, but it still supports HDR.

5K is expensive because there isn't enough sales volume at that resolution to entice competition and, with no competition, there is no incentive to compete cost enough to reduce prices to an acceptable level. 5K is just not a significant enough improvement for existing consumer demand. Sure there are those that won't be able to live without 25% more pixels in height and width but it will remain a niche resolution at the current market price.

4K isn't perfect. It is good enough for the breadth of the monitor market. Personally, I'd be willing to pay for a monitor with Thunderbolt hub functionality and than more pixels or 600 nits or more. A gamer might also want to see double or more frame rate but pixels aren't much value there either.

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

A 32" 4k display. AKA completely useless to a Mac user.

At this point I'm not sure who to blame. Apple for not providing any kind of display scaling other than 2x, or the display market for continuing to ignore the size of the Mac user base.

I don't get why almost everyone I've asked said that macOS is better at scaling than windows is tbf .

maybe it's much better at 2* , but ****ing sucks at anythibg else ?

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

It's actually hilarious how much they did copy the iMac design and colors

It's actually tragic that they didn't exactly copy all the available colours actually. And add a Space Grey as well.

 

[SFjohn]

Precisely. Unbelievable how so many people on this site actively want a monopoly 😆

Apple is not a monopoly, governments would not need to be passing special laws if it were.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Defining "retina" as "unable to see individual pixels" is pretty dumb in 2022. It made sense in 2010 or whenever Jobs initially made the statement, but Apple doesn't really operate under that definition anymore. Now, "retina" screens are those that are capable of 2x scaling. All new Apple devices stick to this criteria—hence the weird "4.5K" iMac. So while this Samsung display seems like it would look better than the Cinema Display because it has a higher dpi, I'm not so sure because of the downscaling involved with 4K @ 32". Of course I can't say for sure without directly comparing them, but I can always tell when macOS is being downscaled and would prefer 1440p over a fuzzy 4K.

You would prefer 2560x1440p on a 27" Cinema Display over a scaled 2560x1440p on a 4K display?! Seriously? If so, that makes zero sense as the scaled off of a 4K is still going to look infinitely better than 2560x1440p@1x, especially with what Apple did to font smoothing in Mojave and later.

 

[HaddockW]

I don't get why almost everyone I've asked said that macOS is better at scaling than windows is tbf .

maybe it's much better at 2* , but ****ing sucks at anythibg else ?

Easy.
There are some older apps that have not and will not scale. the text in the menu bars will scale but not the palette floating windows. Photoshop was horrendously bad.

Others include SQL Server Management and various old school apps like VMWare ESXI client (pre web browser).
It wasn't an issue of small blurry fonts. The issue were the small icons and things you needed to click on that didn't scale. HeidiSQL, Many Oracle Java IDE tools. etc..

I can deal with blurry font but I can't deal with 32x32 icons on a 3084 resolution display that is fixed while fonts were upsized top 48 points.

 

[kesenwangs]

Looks good (as an obvious copy of Apple design) but a 4k display with Samsung's "smart" features is not a draw, unless there is no advertising in the operating system. Given how their TVs are, it's likely it will be full of ads and tracking. I keep my Samsung TV disconnected from any network because of the ads and tracking. Normally I don't care that much about "privacy" but Samsung smart TVs have so many ads that they are distracting. I guess I could block them with my PiHole but it's easier to keep the TV dumb and use an Apple TV instead.

I love this analogy, like - keep that tv dumb

 

[gugy]

DAMN.....This is what I am looking for. Sorry Apple but Samsung ate your lunch here.

 

[BigMac?]

DAMN.....This is what I am looking for. Sorry Apple but Samsung ate your lunch here.

You always get what you pay for. Good luck with this one!

 

[dzankizakon]

144 pixels per inch, no thanks. It should have been a 20" monitor. If you need a 32" 4k screen, buy a Samsung TV, it's much cheaper than this "monitor."

 

[gugy]

You always get what you pay for. Good luck with this one!

If it is $700 for a 32" that's fine, despite the quality being lower. The 27" Studio display is too small for me. I'll wait to hear about the upcoming XDR but Apple could offer something better than what they did especially at that $1600 price.
Hey, I am an Apple fanboy for over 30 years but don't mind criticizing them if they deserve it.

 

[BigBlur]

If you look at one of their previous smart monitors (in this case the M7), they show ads when you switch over to the "Smart" display part of the monitor. The 1st and 5th images on their product page show the ads ("Featured" movies or shows): https://www.samsung.com/us/computin...itor-with-mobile-connectivity-ls32am702unxza/

If you have a newer Samsung TV (2015 and onward), you've seen these ads unless you never connected it to a network. These monitors look like they work the same (considering previous versions of the monitors show ads). Again, they will not show ads when using it as a computer monitor but if you connect it to a network, it is tracking what you do (as much as the display can), and will show ads if you go to the OS-based menu.

Those are from the apps, not the OS. Take a closer look at the images. You’ll see that the Disney+ app is selected, and the movies are what’s being featured in the Disney+ app. (Don’t want to see them? Then delete the app.) I wouldn’t consider this to be an ad. It’s no different than opening the Disney+ app on your phone to see what’s featured or recommended to you. If you call that an ad, then you might as well say tv’s “What to Watch” section is an ad too.

I have a 2018 Samsung TV connected to WiFi, and these haven’t bothered me one bit since they pertain to/come from the selected app. I’m still wondering what the “ads” people speak of are. I haven’t seen any.

 

[kalafalas]

I had the M7 and sold it. The VA panel was awful. If they’ve moved to IPS for this version it would be a much better buy. The built in software was crap but was a nice backup to have, but I did like airplay built in.

 

[chetzar]

Jokes about Micro HDMI port aside, Apple is selling a monitor at over 2x the cost with only a SINGLE input. So yeah, this thing is not perfect, but at least you can connect more than 1 device to it.
At $1,600 the Studio Display is a miss, IMO, because a height adjustable stand is an extra $400 (should be standard) and because you can only connect 1 device (a "dumb" HDMI port would be an improvement, even if it was limited to 4k).

 

[-BigMac-]

Another 4K display. No one but Apple and a few others ever thought to make a 5k and higher display huh

Probably only "Apple and a few others" have the technology and consumer/prosumer demand for 4k >
Dell has had an 8k monitor for like 5 years+

 

[diego]

Another 4K display. No one but Apple and a few others ever thought to make a 5k and higher display huh

Totally agree. After using a 5k iMac for a couple years I could NEVER go back to 4k. Having Retina density on a desktop display is amazing.

 

[Macative]

I don't get why almost everyone I've asked said that macOS is better at scaling than windows is tbf .

maybe it's much better at 2* , but ****ing sucks at anythibg else ?

It's perfect at 2x and worthless at anything else.

 

[jamesrick80]

This comes with a decent stand, that's all I needed to know to make a future purchase. This thing is actually smart and has all the features besides a high refresh rate that's necessary for a well-purposed monitor and its more than half the price of that studio monitor thing. I mean why is the A13 processor in Apples monitor when it does not take advantage of it the correct way; Samsung did not need a fancy processor like that and look what they produced!!! Who pays 400 plus dollars for a stand? And to make it even more favorable, it is 32in and a Smart Monitor (I would not call Apple's studio display smart). Nice job Samsung!!!

 

[ukwebdev]

you cant have 600nits display at 5k resolution and 32" size at just $700

It's 400 nits. You're not looking at anything that is HDR on this display. They do that so they can say they are playing HDR off

So now everyone who was unsatisfied with the Studio Display can just get this and be satisfied and stop complaining?

the fan boys will never be satisfied until they stick an Apple logo on, offer wheels at $500 each and add $1k TimTax

 

[ukwebdev]

It cannot do HDR if it produces 400 nits. Calling that HDR is marketing BS and I am happy Apple does not get into that business!

Apple invented marketing BS!

 

[ukwebdev]

People need to learn that unless the display has dimming zones (miniLED, OLED) then there's no HDR. It might support it, but you won't be viewing real HDR on the display, its contrast and brightness are simply much lower than what's needed.

people buying probably don’t give two hoots about HDR… it’s not targeting them… it’s just a brilliantly featured low(ish) end monitor that isn’t subject to TimTax…

 

[ukwebdev]

Samsung really couldn't help themselves could they.

sure riled up the fanboys!

 

[ukwebdev]

Interesting product but you have to wonder who it is aimed at. The PR pics showing a spreadsheet imply a basic computing capability beyond just a smart tv, so aimed as an imac competitor while the specs suggest its just a smart tv. Look forward to reading a more detailed review.

it’s aimed at people who want a workhorse screen with no TimTax

 

[Zdigital2015]

... or those of us who bought one the original 22" LG Ultrafine and have been waiting to buy a second screen waiting, waiting, waiting for the imminent arrival of a new Apple screen. No I just have to wait, wait, wait for it to be available.

You don’t have to wait for anything. Apple isn’t the only game in town when it comes to monitors. I have 5 Dell monitors and a nice BenQ that I bought in the interim after the Thunderbolt Display stopped being sold and before the Studio Display was introduced. This is the thing I don’t understand…Apple doesn’t owe any of us a display that we can all afford or has just the right combination of features to suit everyone, because that’s impossible. It’s not like they’re the only ones making monitors. And if people are having a fit because they can’t fathom having a non-Apple monitor for their Mac or iPad, well, that’s their problem, not Apple’s. Again there seems to be a lot of misguided entitlement on these forums as to what Apple is supposed to do for users. Not sure if this applies to you, but if your upset by what Apple is selling for monitors and you think Apple owes you something for waiting all this time, well, that’s on you.