3 ms·

It seems like those writing about this monitor are like "look it's got all these problems, but at least it doesn't have a notch so I'm keeping it."

jmull 5y ago
This reviewer has three "cons". (1) stand too low; (2) screen is glossy; (3) speakers have too much bass for video conferences. (1) and (2) are addressed by the options Apple provides, so they are really complaints about the price (and those options are pricy!). (3) seems pretty minor (notice the author also has the speakers in the "pros" column) and can maybe be addressed with a basic equalizer of some some. In other words, all three cons are actually tradeoffs, which exist for all options (these are an individual call we all need to make).
- sp332 5y ago
  Also the camera is bad.
  - jmull 5y ago
    That looks like a temporary software issue.
    - coder543 5y ago
      Disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057
      - jmull 5y ago
        Sure, but it should be perfectly possible to improve it to the level of the front-facing camera on the iPad Pro, which has an "ultra-wide" camera for "center stage" as well.
        coder543 5y ago
        Yes, but the quality of the iPad Pro front camera is exactly what the Reddit post I linked to was complaining about... and I saw a lot of other similarly negative discussions online when I was googling it. At best, the Studio Display’s camera can reach that level of quality. I personally have one of the new iPad minis with Center Stage, and I don't consider the front camera quality to be anything better than "acceptable".
        jmull 5y ago
        Acceptable isn't bad, so I guess we're actually pretty much agreeing.
        coder543 5y ago
        Depends on who you talk to. If it is barely clearing the bar of acceptability for some people, it will likely be considered bad by a lot of people. I don’t really think Apple should be striving for “acceptable” on a $1600 monitor where the webcam is a significant part of the marketing. Apple literally calls it a “sensational camera”. The display itself doesn’t even have any kind of local dimming zones or HDR at all, which seems like a huge miss for a monitor released at that price point in 2022. I played with one at an Apple Store a few days ago. I loved the build quality of the height adjustable model, and the screen was pleasant to use in that well lit environment (a relatively low bar to clear), but Apple seems to have worked overtime to make it hard to justify spending $1600+ on that monitor, in my opinion. There have been rumors of a Studio Display Pro, and I’m curious to see what happens there.
rsynnott 5y ago
It basically fits into the same niche as the LG 5K; it is profoundly meh, and far too expensive, but if you want a 5K screen you don't have many options. I have, and am basically happy with, an LG 5K. If I didn't, though, I'd buy this. Not because it's amazing; it's not, by any means. But because it is the only game on town (except for the LG, and it is at least better than _that_).

jmull 5y ago

This reviewer has three "cons". (1) stand too low; (2) screen is glossy; (3) speakers have too much bass for video conferences. (1) and (2) are addressed by the options Apple provides, so they are really complaints about the price (and those options are pricy!). (3) seems pretty minor (notice the author also has the speakers in the "pros" column) and can maybe be addressed with a basic equalizer of some some. In other words, all three cons are actually tradeoffs, which exist for all options (these are an individual call we all need to make).

sp332 5y ago
Also the camera is bad.
- jmull 5y ago
  That looks like a temporary software issue.
  - coder543 5y ago
    Disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30880057
    - jmull 5y ago
      Sure, but it should be perfectly possible to improve it to the level of the front-facing camera on the iPad Pro, which has an "ultra-wide" camera for "center stage" as well.
      - coder543 5y ago
        Yes, but the quality of the iPad Pro front camera is exactly what the Reddit post I linked to was complaining about... and I saw a lot of other similarly negative discussions online when I was googling it. At best, the Studio Display’s camera can reach that level of quality. I personally have one of the new iPad minis with Center Stage, and I don't consider the front camera quality to be anything better than "acceptable".
        jmull 5y ago
        Acceptable isn't bad, so I guess we're actually pretty much agreeing.
        coder543 5y ago
        Depends on who you talk to. If it is barely clearing the bar of acceptability for some people, it will likely be considered bad by a lot of people. I don’t really think Apple should be striving for “acceptable” on a $1600 monitor where the webcam is a significant part of the marketing. Apple literally calls it a “sensational camera”. The display itself doesn’t even have any kind of local dimming zones or HDR at all, which seems like a huge miss for a monitor released at that price point in 2022. I played with one at an Apple Store a few days ago. I loved the build quality of the height adjustable model, and the screen was pleasant to use in that well lit environment (a relatively low bar to clear), but Apple seems to have worked overtime to make it hard to justify spending $1600+ on that monitor, in my opinion. There have been rumors of a Studio Display Pro, and I’m curious to see what happens there.

rsynnott 5y ago

It basically fits into the same niche as the LG 5K; it is profoundly meh, and far too expensive, but if you want a 5K screen you don't have many options. I have, and am basically happy with, an LG 5K. If I didn't, though, I'd buy this. Not because it's amazing; it's not, by any means. But because it is the only game on town (except for the LG, and it is at least better than _that_).