March 8th event announced!

[Cmaier]

Ja, genau. Aus Bern. Vielen Dank, ich fühl mich sehr Willkommen in diesem Forum. Ich lese und lerne viel neues hier, auch wenn ich selbst keine Expertise zu den technischen Diskussionen einbringen kann.

Wir alle lernen hier. Eigentlich, ich lerne hier Deutsch. Leider muss ich viel mehr lernen.

 

[Nycturne]

Has anyone seen any proof that the Studio Display is actually the same panel as the UltraFine 5K or the 27" iMac? Everyone is saying that it is, but I've seen no proof of it. For starters, the brightness is higher (600 nits vs 500 nits), and I've seen videos were the contrast, compared to the 5K UltraFine, looks much better (yeah, not the most scientific test, but I haven't been able to find any data on the measured contrast, and Apple doesn't disclose the number).

It could very well be the same LCD panel, but different everything else. Brightness is a function of the backlight, some contrast comes from the layers used with the panel. LG uses plastic vs glass in the top layer, IIRC.

LG is pretty much the only one that makes the 5K 27” LCD panel. But the panel itself doesn’t make a monitor, for sure.

 

[DT]

We ran up to an Apple store appointment, I was checking out our options on an MBP issue (that went pretty much like I expected )

Knocked around on a Studio for a few minutes, it's [no surprise] incredibly quick, makes no sound, has a beautiful simplicity in the design. It appears much bigger than the actual dimensions would suggest, maybe the comparison to a Mini (even though they share width/depth measurements) sitting next to it, clearly it's taller (by over 2.5x) but that makes it seem larger overall. It was connected to a new Studio Display (with the T&H adjustment), which looked pretty spectacular.

Honestly, if it would improve anything about my current work, I would buy one right now - but it won't in the short term and it'll just introduce some complexities I don't have time to deal with at the moment (in the middle of something pretty major).

 

[MEJHarrison]

It was connected to a new Studio Display (with the T&H adjustment), which looked pretty spectacular.

I checked one of those out while at Best Buy over the weekend. It did look great. But so does the 2017 iMac sitting on my desk. It's essentially the same screen. Although I've seen comparisons between the Studio Display and LG, so I know there's an improvement or two in there.

I keep saying no. But I certainly wouldn't bet on myself holding strong to that stance. In fact, if I were a betting person, I'd put good money on me breaking down and getting one.

 

[DT]

I checked one of those out while at Best Buy over the weekend. It did look great. But so does the 2017 iMac sitting on my desk. It's essentially the same screen. Although I've seen comparisons between the Studio Display and LG, so I know there's an improvement or two in there.

I keep saying no. But I certainly wouldn't bet on myself holding strong to that stance. In fact, if I were a betting person, I'd put good money on me breaking down and getting one.

I'm a two-display person (sometimes three ), so vs. having $3500 with of monitors, I usually go with some Dell business class product, like right now, I'd do some U2723 (4K, 27", we get the pro service upgrade for free, onsite, 3 year, no bad pixels), usually can score a deal, like right now $155 discounted so under $1400 delivered for two.

 

[MEJHarrison]

I'm a two-display person (sometimes three ), so vs. having $3500 with of monitors, I usually go with some Dell business class product, like right now, I'd do some U2723 (4K, 27", we get the pro service upgrade for free, onsite, 3 year, no bad pixels), usually can score a deal, like right now $155 discounted so under $1400 delivered for two.

At the moment I've got the 27" iMac and a 27" 4k LG. I don't need two screens at super high resolution. But I do need at least one that nice.

 

[Yoused]

I'm a two-display person (sometimes three )

Hey, I have a challege for you: set it up so #3 is owned by a Linux box, so that it switches control of the keyboard and mouse when the cursor crosses the boundary.

 

[Andropov]

It could very well be the same LCD panel, but different everything else. Brightness is a function of the backlight, some contrast comes from the layers used with the panel. LG uses plastic vs glass in the top layer, IIRC.

LG is pretty much the only one that makes the 5K 27” LCD panel. But the panel itself doesn’t make a monitor, for sure.

Fair. But what people try to imply when they say that it's 'a 6 year old panel' is that you could get an equal looking display 6 years ago. You couldn't.

I'm seeing a lot of people comparing it to ~$500 4K 27" HDR400 monitors too, which have half the pixels, worse peak brightness, worse dpi, worse contrast, and even worse HDR capabilities despite the Studio Display not being HDR certified. And then go like "see? this is massively overpriced!".

One place where I agree with the general sentiment against this display is on backlight technology. It's a *great* display, but in the middle of Apple moving all its displays to OLED/Mini-LED, a new $1699 display using the backlight tech that is currently being replaced in every product lineup is... odd.

 

[DT]

Hey, I have a challege for you: set it up so #3 is owned by a Linux box, so that it switches control of the keyboard and mouse when the cursor crosses the boundary.

Synergy - Share one mouse & keyboard across computers

Synergy is an app that shares one mouse and one keyboard across multiple computers and monitors. Instant download, easy to setup in minutes.

symless.com

 

[Yoused]

What I want is a monitor that fixes that probem where I say that is burgundy but she insists it is maroon while my father tries to calm us down by splitting the difference, "it's purple".

 

[Andropov]

What I want is a monitor that fixes that probem where I say that is burgundy but she insists it is maroon while my father tries to calm us down by splitting the difference, "it's purple".

Next time just say that it's #6A0DAD.

 

[Nycturne]

Fair. But what people try to imply when they say that it's 'a 6 year old panel' is that you could get an equal looking display 6 years ago. You couldn't.

I'm seeing a lot of people comparing it to ~$500 4K 27" HDR400 monitors too, which have half the pixels, worse peak brightness, worse dpi, worse contrast, and even worse HDR capabilities despite the Studio Display not being HDR certified. And then go like "see? this is massively overpriced!".

One place where I agree with the general sentiment against this display is on backlight technology. It's a *great* display, but in the middle of Apple moving all its displays to OLED/Mini-LED, a new $1699 display using the backlight tech that is currently being replaced in every product lineup is... odd.

Oh, I agree there’s a lot of conflation going on. Apple has always given more care to their displays than the very companies they source panels from, and spending money on small improvements that add up, and that’s true for a lot of premium monitors aimed at content work.

As for the lack of mini-LED, I agree it‘s a bit odd, but I also wonder about the pricing scale involved. I am mostly curious how much the size of the display plays into the costs, versus the number of zones. If a mini-LED version would be over 2k USD, I could see them wanting something that sits below it to get closer to the LG 5K price.

 

[Andropov]

Oh, I agree there’s a lot of conflation going on. Apple has always given more care to their displays than the very companies they source panels from, and spending money on small improvements that add up, and that’s true for a lot of premium monitors aimed at content work.

I think that not having a standard way to measure display characteristics is a big problem here. I couldn't find answers to very simple questions like, for example, how black is the deepest black of this display compared to others. At most, a few media outlets have measured contrast, but reviews of the same outlet for different displays often have contrast measured at a different brightness, so the measurements can't really be compared. Really, the best option is to go to a store and try the display, while for example CPU benchmarks give a very accurate estimate of the performance to expect for a computer. So many reviews end up being just a list of the published specs, and have just a tiny section about display quality, because other things (build quality, camera, speakers...) are much easier to compare to other models.

As for the lack of mini-LED, I agree it‘s a bit odd, but I also wonder about the pricing scale involved. I am mostly curious how much the size of the display plays into the costs, versus the number of zones. If a mini-LED version would be over 2k USD, I could see them wanting something that sits below it to get closer to the LG 5K price.

In retrospect, expecting a cheap 27" 5K Mini-LED 120Hz display when the Pro Display XDR is $5000 and doesn't even have 120Hz (nor as many lighting zones as the MBP display) was just wishful thinking. Probably it's as you say, mini-LED is too expensive for an entry level display. The Pro Display XDR was too expensive for anyone other than video/photo editors. The Studio Display is already borderline too much money for what non-content creator are willing to pay. Going even higher (mini-LED) would mean that non-video/photo editors still can't justify buying an Apple display.

 

[MEJHarrison]

I've been trying to figure out what to replace my iMac with. From looking at the M1 reviews, I'm quite sure a Mac mini would take care of my needs. But I'd also like to keep it at least 5 years, if not longer. So a little future proofing seems like a good idea. But the thought of jump to an M1 Max/Ultra in the new Studio just feels like overkill. That's way more power than I'm likely to need in foreseeable future.

So the M1 Pro is what I decided I'd want. But it seems I can only get that in a laptop. And when I did a 1TB system with 32GB of memory, the laptop with an M1 Pro was $400 more than the Studio with the M1 Max. If I drop the laptop down to 16GB, they're the same price.

So it seems the sane options are either go with the Mac mini (maybe hold out for an M2), or just suck it up and go with the Studio.

By the time I talk myself into everything (I'm almost there now), I'm thinking the new Studio Display and new Studio (base model bumped up to 1TB drive). That should last me for a very long time.

 

[Andropov]

I've been trying to figure out what to replace my iMac with. From looking at the M1 reviews, I'm quite sure a Mac mini would take care of my needs. But I'd also like to keep it at least 5 years, if not longer. So a little future proofing seems like a good idea. But the thought of jump to an M1 Max/Ultra in the new Studio just feels like overkill. That's way more power than I'm likely to need in foreseeable future.

So the M1 Pro is what I decided I'd want. But it seems I can only get that in a laptop. And when I did a 1TB system with 32GB of memory, the laptop with an M1 Pro was $400 more than the Studio with the M1 Max. If I drop the laptop down to 16GB, they're the same price.

So it seems the sane options are either go with the Mac mini (maybe hold out for an M2), or just suck it up and go with the Studio.

By the time I talk myself into everything (I'm almost there now), I'm thinking the new Studio Display and new Studio (base model bumped up to 1TB drive). That should last me for a very long time.

IMHO, with Macs now tied to Apple Silicon's pace of getting +20% CPU performance per year, and generally getting more significant upgrades lately, it makes sense to go back to the strategy of getting the base model and putting that extra money into updating more often. +20% performance increase YoY is a 70% faster computer in just 3 years. In a similar situation, I got the M1 Pro with just 16GB of RAM cause it's fine for my needs of the next three years, instead of going for the 32GB config. When I got the 2015 MBP, I configured it to last instead.

 

[Joelist]

One of the things in some of the Studio Display "reviews" that is aggravating is they are comparing apples and oranges and they know it. The Studio Display may use the same panel as the LG but the color calibration, drivers and coating are FAR superior. The build quality is also way better (the LG is both cheap plastic and the stand rattles among other things). The Apple Studio also:

- Has a high resolution Webcam with high end DSP and on a Mac enables Center Stage and other advanced functions

- Has a high end sound system (with subwoofers) and a really excellent mike.

- Has its own built in SOC (A13) and supports stuff like Hey Siri among other things.

- Four backend ports (3 USB-C plus a TB3)

You HAVE to factor this stuff in or the comparison is not reasonable.

 

[mr_roboto]

I've been trying to figure out what to replace my iMac with. From looking at the M1 reviews, I'm quite sure a Mac mini would take care of my needs. But I'd also like to keep it at least 5 years, if not longer. So a little future proofing seems like a good idea. But the thought of jump to an M1 Max/Ultra in the new Studio just feels like overkill. That's way more power than I'm likely to need in foreseeable future.

So the M1 Pro is what I decided I'd want. But it seems I can only get that in a laptop.

One thing to keep in mind is some informed conjecture about Apple's future product directions...

There's this giant Apple Silicon price gap between the $900 M1 Mini 8/512 and the $2000 Mac Studio M1 Max 32/512. Right now every non-iMac between those two prices is a hex-core space gray Intel mini, which starts at $1100 for 8/512, and rises to $1700 for 32/512.

So far Apple takes away Intel Mac models from the lineup once Apple thinks they have a good enough Apple Silicon replacement. The big price gap in Apple Silicon desktop Macs and the continued existence of the high end Intel minis is a pretty strong hint that a M1 Pro (or maybe M2 Pro) mini is coming.

 

[MEJHarrison]

One thing to keep in mind is some informed conjecture about Apple's future product directions...

There's this giant Apple Silicon price gap between the $900 M1 Mini 8/512 and the $2000 Mac Studio M1 Max 32/512. Right now every non-iMac between those two prices is a hex-core space gray Intel mini, which starts at $1100 for 8/512, and rises to $1700 for 32/512.

So far Apple takes away Intel Mac models from the lineup once Apple thinks they have a good enough Apple Silicon replacement. The big price gap in Apple Silicon desktop Macs and the continued existence of the high end Intel minis is a pretty strong hint that a M1 Pro (or maybe M2 Pro) mini is coming.

An M1 Pro based mini would be ideal. Fortunately, I'm not in a giant rush. I've already been dragging my feet waiting for the new M2 to appear.

 

[Yoused]

There's this giant Apple Silicon price gap between the $900 M1 Mini 8/512 and the $2000 Mac Studio M1 Max 32/512.

Not really, though. The mini starts at US$700 with 8/256 and specs up to $1800 with 16/2T/10GbitEthernet. Seems like the top-end Mini comes in just a little under the base Studio, which looks like a good product stack. I believe this entire line will hold steady until M2 and be updated together.