Setting aside this embarrassing bug, I think it's clear that this monitor is not for most people. It's very nice, but also fairly expensive. I have to admit that I have no need for 5k instead of 4k. At work, I plug my MacBook Pro into a Dell 4k which I run in scaled 1440 mode and that works great.
And yet... if it wasn't for the parasites (aka children) bleeding my bank account, I'd buy this thing in a heartbeat. Sometimes it's just nice to have things that are very nice.
yup, that's why you can't have nice things!
Agree with your first statement - this is a pretty basic thing for them to miss before a new product is released.
Multiple little birdies familiar with the Studio Display, each birdie independent of the others, tell me that the image quality problems really are a software problem, not hardware — a bug introduced at the last minute
I know what the thread is about, but your statement was absolute, with no mention of screen size, or even any reference to it: "No one can use a 4K or 5K screen at native resolution without scaling."
I know what the thread is about, but your statement was absolute, with no mention of screen size, or even any reference to it: "No one can use a 4K or 5K screen at native resolution without scaling."
But considering zero-day exploits, of which there have been a bunch related to Messages alone, why would you include the entire iPhone OS in a device that cannot utilize many of those features? Doing so leaves the avenue for exploits, without any obvious benefit. It's a monitor -- it doesn't need 90% of iPhone's iOS.
It’s probably easier and safer for Apple to QA a single build across its product lines than it is to create a custom build for the Studio Display.
Who knows if it’s running the messaging service or whether there’s a something inside iOS 15.4 that detects the devices and only loads the services it needs. I’m sure someone will find out though!
Setting aside this embarrassing bug, I think it's clear that this monitor is not for most people. It's very nice, but also fairly expensive. I have to admit that I have no need for 5k instead of 4k. At work, I plug my MacBook Pro into a Dell 4k which I run in scaled 1440 mode and that works great.
And yet... if it wasn't for the parasites (aka children) bleeding my bank account, I'd buy this thing in a heartbeat. Sometimes it's just nice to have things that are very nice.
Running at 1440 on a large monitor is like going back to a CRT TV and watching a VHS movie from the 70’s.
That's intentionally egregious hyperbole, right? You realize CRTs were running 20"+ screen sizes at 480i resolution, so the idea that a 1440p on a 27" display is in any way equivalent is pretty asinine. Also, OP was talking about scaling to 1440p equivalent, which is pretty typical. My main display is a 27" 4K panel, and I can't imagine running at 100% resolution scaling; the UI is just comically tiny at that point (and note that Macs with 4K and 5K displays ship with resolution scaling automatically enabled because of course they do, it's a vastly better user experience).
Anyway, lots of us plebeians out here use displays that are 1080p, and somehow our eyes haven't melted out of our sockets. My father in-law switched from an iMac with a 1440p panel to a 4K screen and I asked him after a month if he noticed a difference. Answer: he didn't notice and didn't care. As long as one doesn't see pixels on a regular basis, most users don't. That's why the iPhone ran ~720p "retina" displays for so long, and it's why 1440p monitors still exist.
Setting aside this embarrassing bug, I think it's clear that this monitor is not for most people. It's very nice, but also fairly expensive. I have to admit that I have no need for 5k instead of 4k. At work, I plug my MacBook Pro into a Dell 4k which I run in scaled 1440 mode and that works great.
And yet... if it wasn't for the parasites (aka children) bleeding my bank account, I'd buy this thing in a heartbeat. Sometimes it's just nice to have things that are very nice.
yup, that's why you can't have nice things!
Agree with your first statement - this is a pretty basic thing for them to miss before a new product is released.
Can’t wait till someone jailbreaks the Studio Display and installs malware on it. oߘবt;/div>
Or jailbreaks it and turns it into a 27" 5K iPad!
The display runs iOS. iPads run iPadOS - two different OS's. Details matter.
I mean, not as different as you think. The build number of the OS is what matters most in this case, as it's all the same XNU/Darwin kernel underneath powering everything from watchOS to AppleTVs to iPhones/iOS. The difference forks of the software come into play with features that are added/enabled for different hardware (e.g. screen size for multi-window support on iPads vs. iPhones; touch sample rates, bluetooth version, and digitizer hardware for Apple Pencil support; etc.). So, older iPads that now run iPadOS but don't really have any fundamental differences hardware-wise from older iPhones (and indeed originally shipped with iOS) basically just run iOS.
In any case, the real question will be how hard it is to actually access things system storage and install a clean image of iOS/iPadOS while also enabling support for the various peripherals (e.g. the camera, speakers, and bluetooth if it has it) and more importantly the built in I/O (the USB-C and Thunderbolt ports), as no access to the I/O or bluetooth means no way to actually interact with the SoC and OS once it's installed (i.e. you'll need to plug in a mouse and keyboard and have them work). Still, keep in mind that the Apple developer kit for the transition to Macs with Apple Silicon was just a Mac mini husk with an A12Z as the SoC, so the possibility is definitely there. More likely, I'd think it would be easier to get macOS running on the display rather than iOS or iPadOS, but the kernels are honestly very similar at this point, so who knows.
Comments
Who knows if it’s running the messaging service or whether there’s a something inside iOS 15.4 that detects the devices and only loads the services it needs. I’m sure someone will find out though!
Anyway, lots of us plebeians out here use displays that are 1080p, and somehow our eyes haven't melted out of our sockets. My father in-law switched from an iMac with a 1440p panel to a 4K screen and I asked him after a month if he noticed a difference. Answer: he didn't notice and didn't care. As long as one doesn't see pixels on a regular basis, most users don't. That's why the iPhone ran ~720p "retina" displays for so long, and it's why 1440p monitors still exist.
In any case, the real question will be how hard it is to actually access things system storage and install a clean image of iOS/iPadOS while also enabling support for the various peripherals (e.g. the camera, speakers, and bluetooth if it has it) and more importantly the built in I/O (the USB-C and Thunderbolt ports), as no access to the I/O or bluetooth means no way to actually interact with the SoC and OS once it's installed (i.e. you'll need to plug in a mouse and keyboard and have them work). Still, keep in mind that the Apple developer kit for the transition to Macs with Apple Silicon was just a Mac mini husk with an A12Z as the SoC, so the possibility is definitely there. More likely, I'd think it would be easier to get macOS running on the display rather than iOS or iPadOS, but the kernels are honestly very similar at this point, so who knows.