Glad to see they pulled out some old technology...Had this hinge (Tilt- and height-adjustable stand) on my Lampshade iMac...technology worked great.
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.
Studio Display Add-On Height-Adjustable Stand Costs an Extra $400, Nano-Texture Glass is $300
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The non height-adjustable version of the monitor stand does not meet modern health and safety rules for the workplace. It would actually be illegal to deploy in an office.
Somehow, every other manufacturer's monitors come with an adjustable stand for free.
Somehow, every other manufacturer's monitors come with an adjustable stand for free.
Would be interested in finding out if this monitor works with non-Apple devices as well.
My guess is, it will work but without the camera and speakers function since I believe Mac OS is specifically needed for those features.
If the adjustable stand had the option to also rotate the display orientation (like with the Pro Display XDR), then that $400 uplift would feel slightly more "justifiable".
How so? They would need to make it 6K to maintain 218PPi at 32", and then it would be more expensive and require more system resources.
That's why VESA is a better option. There are lots of nice mounts for less than $400.
Enterprises almost certainly would purchase the version with VESA mounts.
If the rumored upcoming XDR 7K is true, I think we could see a cheaper XDR 6K version at 32". This is what I am aiming for. The stand and nano option being cheaper now, makes me believe the upcoming XDR might be cheaper too. We'll see. Like you I don't mind paying $2-2.5k for a larger and better spec display.
What law states you need adjustable monitor stands for an office?
Most probably. The new Studio display seems to be identical to the iMac's 27" display, so it's basically an iMac without the computer but with better speakers and cameras. But any future iMac Pro would probably have the same camera and speakers. Add in a Mac mini hidden away somewhere out of sight and you can say you have a 27" iMac without a chin.
So Apple should build a much higher quality version of LG's 5K monitor with an aluminum body, better camera, better power, better connectivity, and somehow magically sell it for less?
Last edited by a moderator:
Yea, terrible resolution monitors are super cheap.
Not sure why so many comments about the price? This is the iMac Pro in a new design.
Pro device with pro pricing...simple.
Pro device with pro pricing...simple.
To be fair, most of the games I know won't go upper than 60fps. I don't see the need of a 120/144hz monitor for this generation at least.
I ordered one immediately because I didn't want to wait 6 months after I decided, but knowing now that this lacks 120hz, HDR, and given it's size, I think I've got to cancel. I can easily afford to waste money on **** like this, but even I have my limits. This isn't anywhere near close to what Apple is charing. 1200 tops and even then...
Um. Yeah. That's kind of what they were complaining about.
It's always weird when someone pulls out the "you're not the target market" line whenever someone complains that they are being underserved. It is such a condescendingly elitist response that basically says "you're not important enough to be considered a valued customer."
I'm clearly not the target market, either. I'm a guy who uses their Mac for coding and office work, likes to run a three-monitor setup on a set of Ergotron arms with one or two of those monitors in portrait mode for said coding, and likes to do a bit of gaming in my spare time. If I want those three monitors to have Apple-native controls with an Apple-native look and Apple-native build quality, I need to pay a premium to get a whole host of expensive features that do nothing to improve my workflow (5k resolution, super-calibrated colour accuracy, integrated speakers and microphone - all pretty meaningless features with very little real benefit to me). I also get to forego a couple of features that might actually be useful to me (120Hz refresh rate and the ability to put the stand back on the monitor if I ever decide to upgrade and either pass it down to one of my kids or sell it used).
Apple did, once upon a time, sell monitors for a reasonable price, that fit my needs. And that's the part that makes comments like yours (and by extension, Apple's, since what you say is, in essence, exactly what Apple are also saying) infuriating. "You're not part of this exclusive club we consider the 'target market' anymore."
At least the law for OHS in Denmark (FWIW). It states that you should be able to easily adjust the height, but an option is to adjust table height instead. I haven’t seen a screen at my work for a decade that did not have height adjustment. And no-one is getting 27” anymore. Too little and too late for too much.
But come on. It’s just 400 for a beautifully crafted aluminum… hinge… that’s really a bargain ?
I seriously hope that no one goes for that. Get the vesa mount and a reasonable priced stand…
The specs claim this display is compatible with the iPad Pro, but would I be able to do anything useful with it? Won’t I just have the equivalent effect of running an iOS-only app on my iPad Pro?
I can't believe I'm saying this, as someone who my friends would describe as a "huge apple fanboy," but Apple has lost the plot.
Last edited:
Only because they would have to.
I visit a *lot* of offices. Less than half of them spring for monitor arms.