Did you Pre-Order the Studio Display Monitor?

26

I really want it, but I just got a Samsung G9 ultrawide half a year ago, and I can’t make the two displays fit together in my mind.
The G9 and 5K next to each other → neck issues
G9 on the bottom and 5K on top → Won’t actually use the 5K
The 5K on the bottom and the G9 on top → Have to reenact scenes from Swordfish

Also, it’s really expensive. They basically took the Intel iMac out of the case and hardly changed the price!
It’s not that it’s not worth it - it is. It’s just that I’ll probably wait.

27

I ordered two - standard glass, vesa mounts. I really wanted an Apple-made 38 to 40 inch ultra wide 5k monitor, but that probably will never exist. The Studio Display has so many desirable features that I couldn’t resist.

These will be mounted as a pair on Dell MDA20 dual monitor arms. They will replace a newly-purchased Dell U4021QW 40” ultra wide monitor that is still within its return window. The Dell 40” ultra wide was recently purchased because I was not expecting such a nice and reasonably-priced monitor to be available so soon from Apple. The Dell 40” ultra wide is very nice, but the 5120 x 2160 resolution (140 pixels/inch) is good but noticeably less than the Studio Display resolution of 214 pixels/inch.

The Dell ultrawide mounted on a single monitor arm is probably more attractive in appearance on the desk than the two Apple displays on a dual arm, but the Studio Display resolution, brightness, great speakers, new camera and seamless compatibility with a Mac won the day.

I’m looking forward to using these with the new Mac Studio computer. After 12 years using iMacs I thought I would continue with them forever, but the new Mac Studio and Studio Display were too good to pass up.

2 Likes
28

The stand of the LG is a wobbly piece of garbage. The speaker system of the LG is only stereo, the Apple monitor should sound better.

1 Like
29

100% agree. Within hours of using it, I moved to mounting the LG on VESA and it’s been great. I also like the floating monitor look. Almost five years since I got my LG and not using the stand provided was the best decision ever .

2 Likes
30

I just wish it was interchangeable. I don’t currently have a VESA mount, but I may move to one one day. But my current monitor (which is just a simple Dell Ultrasharp which is loaded with ports and acts as a USB-C hub) has options for desktop stand or VESA mount. I know it’s not the Apple way, but you can’t say something is modular and then give people no modular options after you buy it, right?

1 Like
31

This.

I just need a monitor. I do not need these extras. I already have a speaker and camera setup which meets my needs.

32

No Apple Display for me, I will most likely by this instead later this year: https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/dell-ultrasharp-49-curved-monitor-u4919dw/apd/210-arnw/monitors-monitor-accessories

But I would rather by one with retina display, don’t know if there’s a curved monitor that has it though…?

34

given the ports available on the new Studio Display, what’s the best cabling strategy if you wished to use this with an M1 Macbook Air in clamshell mode, including a doc/hub for things like ethernet and external data and backup drives?

35

So go into settings and turn it off. Problem solved.

1 Like
37

It’s not a “problem”. If you want to use True Tone, turn it on. If you don’t, turn it off.

You’re overthinking it. It’s not the Riddle of the Sphinx.

38

People doing graphics work wouldn’t want True Tone, but they’re just a small subset of the target audience for the Studio Display.

2 Likes
40

I think even if you were to keep True Tone disabled, it’s good it exists because it signals a complete and reliable integration between the monitor and the computer and that the monitor can do accurate color profiling out of the box (because True Tone can’t work without accurate automatic base calibration.)

41

I do graphics work all the time and would leave it on quite happily.

I think you could make a good argument that True Tone is presenting a more natural white based on your lighting, so the colours you’re working with are more likely to map to what you’ll see in the end result. Especially on a printed page.

I typically prefer True Tone on to off for my MacBook Air, and wish I had it on my iMac Pro.

43

I have researched higher-resolution Ultrawide monitors recently, with particular attention to pixel resolution, and have not found any with Apple’s so-called “Retina” resolution.

I have been spoiled by high-resolution displays after using a 27" Retina iMac since 2014 and more recently a 13" M1 MacBook Pro. These feature pixel per inch (PPI) resolution of 218 ppi for the 27" iMac and 227 ppi for the MacBook Pro. The text resolution of both is extremely sharp, even when scaled or magnified to a larger font size.

For me, using a lower-resolution display for productivity work - text, spreadsheets - is tiring and unpleasant. This is quite personal - some users are not bothered by lower-resolution displays and value other qualities such as high refresh rates (especially prized by gamers).

Your suggested Dell 49-inch Super Ultrawide monitor U4919DW has a resolution of 5120x1440 and a ppi resolution of approximately 109 ppi. The height of the monitor’s actual viewing area is 13.2", relatively short for productivity work such as text documents and spreadsheets. Since you mentioned preference for a Retina display, I would point out that the resolution of that monitor is nowhere near “retina”.

You might have a look at Dell’s 40" Ultrawide U4021QW. The PPI resolution of 140, while not “retina” quality, is relatively good and much better than the Dell 49" Ultrawide. Another good feature of the U4021QW a viewing area height of 15.5", similar to that of standard 16:9 ratio 27" monitors and a good height for viewing text documents, spreadsheets, etc.

Another consideration would be one of LG’s 34" Ultrawide monitors, the 34WK95U. Like the 40" Dell mentioned above, the resolution is so-called “5k2k”, or 5120 x 2160. With a vertical viewing area height of approximately 13.5", that translates to a PPI resolution of approximately 160. The height of the monitor’s viewing area is only 13.5", though.

Like you, I would like an Ultrawide monitor but have found none that approach Apple’s “retina” resolution. My order is in for a pair of Apple’s Studio Displays, to be mounted side-by-side.

2 Likes
44

I’d love to order one, I’m really happy that Apple is doing a first-party monitor again and it looks great, but…

It’s still too expensive for what it is. Unfortunately there’s no competition in this segment, as all the other manufacturers cater to the gaming crowd, where 5K resolution is not popular. The market standard is a 4K panel on a 27 or 32-inch screen, making the ppi count lower than what it should be for those sizes.

I use a Dell 27-inch 4K with the resolution scaled to “looks like 2560 x 1440” on a Mac mini M1. This gives me the same amount of information as a native 5K, and it’s fine for my aging eyes.
I had a 27-inch iMac before this setup and I was able to compare it with the 4K monitor before I sold it. In my case, If I really look, I could see the difference between 5K native vs simulated.
Native 5K is better? Of course, but I rather have this setup than the old iMac.

Also, The Studio Display has only one input, so it’s not possible to connect two Macs at the same time.
My Mac mini is connected to the monitor via HDMI, and I also connect a MacBook Air via USB-C. The monitor seamlessly switches the input to the USB-C connection and when the MacBook Air is disconnected, it switches back to HDMI.

I know it’s not Apple’s modus operandi but It would be great to have a “Let it Be… Naked” version of this monitor, stripping it down to the essence of just a great quality (and good looking) display with a lower price tag.

2 Likes
45

This is very interesting. But I don’t think it would change anything except your perception, and in theory your colours could be more accurate because you’re no longer compensating for your display’s 6500 kelvin.

Our eyes get Used to different perceptual whites really quickly.

I could be wrong though. I’ve been wrong many times.

1 Like
46

I have two on the way. The plan is only to keep one but I wanted to try out both stands. I’m hoping the nicer stand meets my needs, but at that price, it’ll have to be about perfect for me to keep it and not just go with the “included” stand.

47

I’m curious, what are your needs for the nicer stand?

It’s a basic question, but: is the “tilt- and height-adjustable stand” mostly intended for those with standing desks?

My desk setup is pretty standard, but I still wonder which stand I should get, considering I cannot change it later (except for returning it now, as you suggest).

48

I have a standing desk and have ordered the tilt and height adjustable stand, but even with just a sitting desk, I’d order the height adjustable one. My iMac’s screen is way too low for me. If my wife ever uses my machine or sits at the desk, the iMac is right for her. So one size isn’t really a good use case.

(And if you adjust your body throughout the day, proper ergonomics suggest you should be able to adjust your display too.)

3 Likes
49

Good points, thanks! As I sit here and stare at my monitor, it probably is just a bit low.

I have the Thunderbolt Display, which is aging just in time for the Studio Display to replace it…

2 Likes