undefined | Better HN

0 pointssearls4y ago0 comments

Important to note that this is a 110dpi monitor and therefore not retina nor suitable for integer resolution scaling, whereas the Studio Display is 218dpi. I care a lot more about resolution and dot pitch than about frame rates higher than 60hz

0 comments

noahtallen4y ago

That’s fair, but the overall point is that Apple could have added a standard connector (normal Display Port) without sacrificing quality.

jolux4y ago

Thunderbolt 4 is a standard interface, and it supports DisplayPort 1.4 as well as 2.0.

noahtallen4y ago

That’s a good point — what I meant was that the DP connector found on graphics cards is pretty common (“standard”), so should be included. As a frame of reference, a similarly priced monitor I have has 2x HDMI, DisplayPort, thunderbolt 3, and a few USB A ports if you use it as a thunderbolt hub. And it’s a 144hz ultrawide with HDR support.

And while I acknowledge that Apple made a trade off for pixel density, they weren’t forced to make tradeoffs for other features that are common on high end monitors.

1 more reply

fckgw4y ago

Why would Apple add a connector that none of their computers use?

function_seven4y ago

So people like me would consider buying it.

I have a Mac. I also have a work-issued PC. I have both machines connected to the same displays, and switch between them.

DisplayPort isn't some obsolete technology here. I understand why this display doesn't have HDMI, or DVI, or VGA, or Composite, or S-Video, etc. But DisplayPort would be nice.

3 more replies

manicdee4y ago

Same reason Dell adds USB-C, DP, HDMI to their monitors: so you can use their product in preference to someone else’s.

Buy the Apple monitor, be impressed, buy the Studio to go with it.

hbn4y ago

I have one and somehow managed to get it into a mode where the UI was an appropriate size and it ran at 120Hz. Worked perfectly for almost a year, then I updated to Monterey and cannot for the life of me get it to run in HiDPI mode at my old preferred scaling. Tried all the third party monitor controlling apps (EasyRes doesn't have the scaling I'd like in the HiDPI list of resolutions)

I might just get rid of the monitor. I'm not convinced I loved it for my workflow anyway compared to 2 monitors where I can switch my Mac workspaces independently

account424y ago

110dpi can work without any scaling depending on your eyesight.

alwillis4y ago

Yes—give me the resolution vs refresh rate if I have to pick.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

noahtallen4y ago

That’s fair, but the overall point is that Apple could have added a standard connector (normal Display Port) without sacrificing quality.

jolux4y ago

Thunderbolt 4 is a standard interface, and it supports DisplayPort 1.4 as well as 2.0.

noahtallen4y ago

And while I acknowledge that Apple made a trade off for pixel density, they weren’t forced to make tradeoffs for other features that are common on high end monitors.

1 more reply

fckgw4y ago

Why would Apple add a connector that none of their computers use?

function_seven4y ago

So people like me would consider buying it.

I have a Mac. I also have a work-issued PC. I have both machines connected to the same displays, and switch between them.

DisplayPort isn't some obsolete technology here. I understand why this display doesn't have HDMI, or DVI, or VGA, or Composite, or S-Video, etc. But DisplayPort would be nice.

3 more replies

manicdee4y ago

Same reason Dell adds USB-C, DP, HDMI to their monitors: so you can use their product in preference to someone else’s.

Buy the Apple monitor, be impressed, buy the Studio to go with it.

hbn4y ago

I might just get rid of the monitor. I'm not convinced I loved it for my workflow anyway compared to 2 monitors where I can switch my Mac workspaces independently

account424y ago

110dpi can work without any scaling depending on your eyesight.

alwillis4y ago

Yes—give me the resolution vs refresh rate if I have to pick.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse