User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

Apple displays...


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Apple displays...
Page 2 of 3 Previous 1 [2] 3  Next Thread Tools
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-02-15, 10:36

This will pair nicely with their $799 keyboard.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-02-15, 11:19

And the $999 wheel for the Mac Pro.

Let’s face it, Apple isn’t going to make a low cost panel, there are thousands of those already on the market.
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Vieira
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-02-15, 11:40

They did it before. Nobody’s asking/expecting them to sell a $279 display. I certainly don’t.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-02-15, 11:47

The least expensive display Apple has made in the last 15 years was the 24" ACD at $899. Even that is not an inexpensive display, nor is it priced as a "consumer" display. Anything above $500 is pushing into pro territory.

All they need to do is remove the iMac from the 24" iMac and they have the best display in the class that cannot conceivably cost more than $799, and even that is pushing it as far as price is concerned. The 27" thing sounds like it's going to be a mini version of the Pro Display XDR, so that's already more expensive than the computer it's sitting next too.

And here is a guarantee/fear: Apple will make a 24" and 27" display, but they will forget to make them the same height as the iMacs, so we will — once again — have to prop them up on a stack of books to make them work right.

Methinks that Apple forgot how to make displays about ten years ago, and they may never find those chops again.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-02-15, 12:10

Quote:
Originally Posted by psmith2.0 View Post
They did it before. Nobody’s asking/expecting them to sell a $279 display. I certainly don’t.
The key difference is that, in those days, any third-party display would offer a decent experience. Retina Macs weren't a thing yet, and subpixel rendering helped text look nice.

Now, with subpixel rendering gone, most third-party displays look like garbage.

(I still can't believe I'm the only person who's willing to die on this hill. )
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-02-15, 12:22

Hey, it just occurred to me that the solution to this problem is absolutely dirt cheap. Probably wouldn't cost Apple more than $7.68 to implement.

JUST ENABLE TARGET DISPLAY MODE ON IMACS, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!

See? Buy a base model 24" iMac with Target Display mode, and you get the best 24" display in the industry for $1299. And you get a free server for Minecraft!

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
psmith2.0
Mr. Vieira
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
 
2022-02-15, 12:39

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
The key difference is that, in those days, any third-party display would offer a decent experience. Retina Macs weren't a thing yet, and subpixel rendering helped text look nice.

Now, with subpixel rendering gone, most third-party displays look like garbage.

(I still can't believe I'm the only person who's willing to die on this hill. )
That’s all the more reason needs to offer a decent sub-$1,000 display to better mate/play nice with their own products (Mac minis and 13”-14” notebooks, primarily).

And yes on the “matching” thing re: 24” and 27” so they seamlessly pair with an iMac of that size. I mocked all that up a while back.

Reminder (and back when it was assumed a larger iMac might be more in the 30" range...just pretend any 30-inch references say "27-inch" if that matches current rumors/expectations better. ):





No books or $129 "solutions" from Twelve South required. Just design stuff so the display positioning matches across 24" and 27" products (iMacs and standalone displays). It's hardly rocket science, Apple.

Last edited by psmith2.0 : 2022-02-15 at 12:54.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-02-15, 15:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
The key difference is that, in those days, any third-party display would offer a decent experience. Retina Macs weren't a thing yet, and subpixel rendering helped text look nice.
Now, with subpixel rendering gone, most third-party displays look like garbage.

(I still can't believe I'm the only person who's willing to die on this hill. )
Never owned a Retina display Mac, so I’ll likely never know the difference
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-02-20, 20:40

I haven't really been following the Display thing closely. Has the LG UltraFine 5K been officially out of stock for a while now, or is this new?
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-02-20, 21:10

I think that's an older model, isn't the current one 6k or 8k?
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-02-20, 21:12

4K, last I checked.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-02-20, 21:14

The 5k one was the same one used in the 27" Intel iMac's for years, I believe LG discontinued it.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-02-21, 11:48

They did, and then they replace it with a $749 27" 4K model. Thunderbolt 3 connection and all the other bits were nearly identical to the 27" 5K version ($1299?). There was also a 24" 4K USB-C version that was $799, I think. Something like that.

The LG 5K thing used the same panel internally, but had different glass and didn't look as good as the iMac, although it was pretty close (at least, closer than anything else on the market — then or now).

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-02-21, 13:56

They discontinued the 21.5-inch 4K in favor of a non-Retina 24-inch 4K. The 27-inch 5K isn’t discontinued.
  quote
kieran
@kk@pennytucker.social
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2022-08-17, 09:01

I finally got the Studio Display I ordered back in June yesterday. Set it up as my main monitor and moved the iMac to the side and replaced the LG 27" monitor I was using.

This is a very nice monitor, definitely an evolution of the Thunderbolt Display. Never understood why Apple got out of the display market, but this is a nice re-entry into the market.

Everything is super nice about this, except the webcam. I really don't understand how it can be this bad, but if it doesn't improve in software, I'll just use continuity camera whenever I need to actually be on video.

No more Twitter. It's Mastodon now.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-08-17, 09:18

Quote:
Originally Posted by kieran View Post
I really don't understand how it can be this bad
Unusual choice of lens, in order to enable Center Stage. IMHO, a bad prioritization — few people buy such a pricey display, and even fewer buy such a pricey display and then use its webcam for Center Stage "kid / dog / cat walks in" scenarios. And without those scenarios, what's the point? Ergonomically speaking, you should be sitting front and center anyway.

Hopefully, they can do more machine learning to improve it a little further in software.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-08-17, 10:49

Hopefully, they can just get their priorities straight.

We've tested it out on our floor model, and it's just … a dumb gimmick?
  quote
kieran
@kk@pennytucker.social
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2022-08-17, 11:12

I completely get Center Stage on iPads and iPhones, where it's being moved and there are different scenarios at play, but for a monitor where 99% of the time it's one person sitting at a fixed distance away, they should have bagged Center Stage and put in a decent lens.

While it's a dumb solution, Continuity Camera should fixe this problem for me.

No more Twitter. It's Mastodon now.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-08-17, 12:40

I get it on iPads. I would get it even more on the iMac. Those two are perfect for "oh hey, your niece just casually walked by in the back" scenarios.

Something must've gone wrong in the coördination or planning between the iMac and iPad Pro (they literally showed off Center Stage on the iPad Pro at the same event as the new 24-inch iMac… awkward) for the iMac not to have it. The iMac is thicker than the iPad, so it can't be that an ultra-wide camera wouldn't have fit. Center Stage doesn't exist as software on macOS, yet, but they could've put the camera in there and added the feature via software later.

But the ASD? I get it from a "this display should have our very best webcam, and very best implies Center Stage support" angle. But that backfired hard. Did anyone review the thing and go "oh, and it has a pretty good webcam"? No.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-08-17, 14:37

Apples always had less than the best when comes to webcams. Why does the poor performance surprise anyone? $100 cameras at best buy are better.
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2022-08-17, 15:13

Probably because they seem to take such pride in their iPhone cameras – seems like more than an oversight that they wouldn't translate that somehow to their displays.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-08-17, 15:14

It's a surprise because the price of the ASD telegraphs that it should come with a best-in-class camera.
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2022-08-17, 15:17

Quote:
Originally Posted by kieran View Post
Set it up as my main monitor and moved the iMac to the side and replaced the LG 27" monitor I was using.
I've never been able to move to a 2-monitor setup with my iMac. For some reason, the arrangement seems weird to me.

It's a big reason I was disappointed that Apple didn't introduce a 29-32" iMac upgrade with the switch to Apple Silicon.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-08-17, 15:26

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
Apples always had less than the best when comes to webcams.
In their size class? Not really.

Quote:
$100 cameras at best buy are better.
And bulkier.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-08-17, 15:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
And bulkier.
And cable-y-er.

The camera in the ASD is quite good. It's the lens and the software that are mucked up. Apple spent too much money on finicky "look at me" solutions in search of problems, and not enough money on problems in search of solutions, i.e. a pro web cam in a pro display.

This, to me, is an "oops" on too high an order. The gimmicky bits belong in iPads, not professional production systems. A $1600 display does not need a children's toy installed front and center. It's too bad, because the display is very good. And, without all that finicky camera business, you don't need the A13 or all the other meaningless logic/iOS crap, and perhaps the display could just be $999 like it needs to be.

I simply do not understand this move by Apple. Granted, we've sold every one we've been able to get in, but the longterm viability of sales is hampered by the price tag.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
kieran
@kk@pennytucker.social
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2022-08-17, 15:50

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
I've never been able to move to a 2-monitor setup with my iMac. For some reason, the arrangement seems weird to me.

It's a big reason I was disappointed that Apple didn't introduce a 29-32" iMac upgrade with the switch to Apple Silicon.
I've had two monitors for a long time, so it's working for me so far. I constantly need multiple documents open and one monitor just hasn't been workable for me in the past.

I'm going to make a concerted effort to try and use the Studio Display to show everything and see how that works for me and make my setup a bit easier if I can ditch the iMac.

No more Twitter. It's Mastodon now.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-08-18, 07:18

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker View Post
In their size class? Not really.
For the most part, actually yes they have been well behind the curve in terms of image quality and resolution. Least we forget Apple only upgraded Mac webcams from same poor 720p cam (which fist shipped in the late 2000s I might add) to a 1080p one 2 years ago with the M1 Macs. The rest of the industry did that 6-7 years ago or more. Some are now moving to 4K cams. The external units might be bulky, but they have been better for a long time. It’s kind of embarrassing to be honest.
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-08-18, 07:44

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
For the most part, actually yes they have been well behind the curve in terms of image quality and resolution. Least we forget Apple only upgraded Mac webcams from same poor 720p cam (which fist shipped in the late 2000s I might add) to a 1080p one 2 years ago with the M1 Macs. The rest of the industry did that 6-7 years ago or more. Some are now moving to 4K cams.
Must be an unusual segment of the industry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daqPLDDAntA

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
The external units might be bulky, but they have been better for a long time. It’s kind of embarrassing to be honest.
No, it's physics. Of course a webcam with a much deeper sensor can produce a better image. And that's simply not practical on laptops. On the iMac, sure, that's less forgivable.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-08-18, 09:00

I wonder how committed Apple is to their 220ppi “Retina” pixel density? I think their pro laptops are 245ish ppi, which if grafted into 27 and 32” sizes would result in 6k and 7k displays respectively…
  quote
chucker
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near Bremen, Germany
Send a message via ICQ to chucker Send a message via AIM to chucker Send a message via MSN to chucker Send a message via Yahoo to chucker Send a message via Skype™ to chucker 
2022-08-18, 09:29

It's slightly higher on smaller devices, because you're more likely to hold those closer.

(Retina iPhones have at least 326 ppi. The iPhone 6 Plus hda 401 ppi. OLED iPhones have, depending on how you look at it, either 326 ppi or 458 ppi.)

But I think they want to avoid going below 200, even if it would presumably make for much cheaper panels.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 2 of 3 Previous 1 [2] 3  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future Apple Displays — Should they change aspect ratios? Robo Speculation and Rumors 6 2019-08-01 03:16
Apple Cinema Displays surjones Speculation and Rumors 38 2008-08-27 13:54
Apple displays..is it a good time to buy?? djmasters Purchasing Advice 8 2006-06-06 16:18
Questions about Apple Cinema Displays. holbox Apple Products 4 2005-04-02 09:47
New Aluminum Apple Displays: 23" 30" Brad Apple Products 181 2004-08-14 12:10


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova