Compared: Apple Studio Display versus Porsche Design AOC Agon Pro monitor

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 32
    mr lizardmr lizard Posts: 349member
    Mondain said:
    I guess we've come a long way away from the young and rebellious Apple shown in the 1984 commercial.



    That happened when Apple sold a $10K watch. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 32
    rob53 said:
    Nope, not for that amount of money. 
    Because you never used professional monitors for graphics and publishing. They are several times more expensive than cheap monitors even for gaming. I recall some argument with pretty ignorant businessman who claimed his wife uses less expensive and she is "graphic designer". probably hobby designer and not professional studio designer who spent thousands of hours on content for serious clients.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 32
    AOC hands down. It is typical graphic design monitor. Apple needs to work more. It is not about resolution packed in smaller monitor. You are not tabbing to  navigate between tools and views when you do graphics design with Adobe tools. You have to have space and see what you are doing. 32 inch is minimum these days for this kind of work. and horizontal and vertical orientation of screen is absolutely indication it was designed for publishing. Not so with Apple display.
  • Reply 24 of 32
    It is not about resolution packed in smaller monitor. 
    Yes, it is. Apple has chosen the Retina Display standard for their hardware lineup. 5K at 27 inch or 6K at 32 inch is required for that. Anyone who has used 4K at 27 inch knows that it's easy to see pixels, so 32 inch is going to make it even more obvious. 
    dewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 32
    neilmneilm Posts: 951member

    [The Apple Studio Display's] L-shaped tilt-adjustable stand can be switched out for a VESA mount adapter or a tilt and height-adjustable version. 
    That's incorrect: in no way can the other mounts be "switched out".

    The Apple Studio Display's normal tilt stand can instead be optioned at time of purchase for a VESA mount at no cost, or for the tilt/height version at a $400 premium. Whichever mount is chosen is permanent.
    dewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 32
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,143member
    neilm said:

    [The Apple Studio Display's] L-shaped tilt-adjustable stand can be switched out for a VESA mount adapter or a tilt and height-adjustable version. 
    That's incorrect: in no way can the other mounts be "switched out".

    The Apple Studio Display's normal tilt stand can instead be optioned at time of purchase for a VESA mount at no cost, or for the tilt/height version at a $400 premium. Whichever mount is chosen is permanent.
    You can reportedly get it switched at an Apple Store or with a certified technician.  No details about how much it would cost yet, but you can do it.
    edited April 18 watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 32
    Been using the Studio display since launch.   Best monitor I have used for our business 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 32
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 1,223member
    5k is a HUGE improvement over 4K. Huge. 

    If it’s not 5k or more, don’t bother. 

    You’re looking for a big monitor with sharp resolution and lots of real estate. 

    Macs have retina capability, supersampling visuals to get a ridiculously razor sharp image. 

    When you do this on 4K, things get a little big. And you lose real estate. 

    You also loose s ton of pixel density on a bigger monitor with only 4K. 

    I like the Porsche features. But the panel itself is the main thing. I don’t care how bright it is when it’s not sharp enough or manages retina to a crayola scale. 

    That said, I love the aesthetic of the studio display. Just the look of it makes me want one. But I’m not buying yet as 27 inches is too small now. And promotion/mini led should be standard. 

    Waiting for v2. No other monitor even has my attention. Well…except maybe the pro display, but I can buy multiple Macs for that price. 
    Luthers95Reeseswatto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 32
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,252member
    This is an expensive gaming monitor. That’s fine. But for me, 32” is a bit too large, and the resolution is too low. The rest, I don’t care about. Apple’s monitor is for creatives, so it doesn’t have hdmi, or some of these old ports, and that silly gaming LED nonsense.
    ‘’but it does have HDR, and that’s something I would like. But we do t know how many sectors it’s broken into, and we do t have any tests on this yet. A lot of monitors have good specs, but don’t l8ve up to them.

    by the way, my Studio Ultra came in today. But my Studio monitor, which was supposed to be here the 7th to the 14th was pushed back to the 22nd to the 29th. That was odd, because the order had already been updated to the next step, and then moved back to the first. Unfortunately, I don’t have a monitor I can directly use with this now, and I haven’t found an adapter that will allow it. So I’m stuck with the computer sitting by itself looking mournful.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 32
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,252member
    eriamjh said:
    I appreciate these reviews because they show compromises are to be made one way or the other.  
    32” big, but only 2K resolution.
    For $100 more, what do you really get?  A bunch of ports you probably only ever use the ONE you need and a gimmicky lighting system.  

    Sometimes comparing apples to oranges is useful.

    in 5 years, a used Apple 27” display will command far more in price than any other brand.  The Quality will show in time to be far better than the original cost.  
    This isn’t a review. It’s a discussion of manufacturer’s specs, nothing more.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 32
    rob53 said:
    Nope, not for that amount of money. 
    Because you never used professional monitors for graphics and publishing. They are several times more expensive than cheap monitors even for gaming. I recall some argument with pretty ignorant businessman who claimed his wife uses less expensive and she is "graphic designer". probably hobby designer and not professional studio designer who spent thousands of hours on content for serious clients.
    And you have? SD has better P3 coverage than the AOC monitor, as well as a substantially higher pixel density. I know which monitor I would pick if I were doing serious design work. If I needed more space, I’d get 2.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 32
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,241member
    It is not about resolution packed in smaller monitor. 
    Yes, it is. Apple has chosen the Retina Display standard for their hardware lineup. 5K at 27 inch or 6K at 32 inch is required for that. Anyone who has used 4K at 27 inch knows that it's easy to see pixels, so 32 inch is going to make it even more obvious. 
    Totally agree. I was surprised by the original post. The only benefit to making the screen larger while maintaining the same native resolution is to allow viewers/users to sit further away from the monitor. The native resolution defines the maximum available workspace, although the maximum usable workspace with very high resolution monitors is usually less because most people can’t handle using a very high resolution monitor in its native pixel scaling and must resort to lower scaling to make text comfortably readable by humans.

    I’m kind of surprised the “bigger must be better” argument keeps coming up. My iPhone 6 Plus had the same native resolution as my 60” 1080p TV. The 60” panel allowed me to sit 6-10 feet away from the screen and see everything clearly while I had to be within a foot or so of the iPhone 6 Plus screen to enjoy the same viewing experience. 

    I’m not discounting larger monitors by any means. If you need your monitor(s) to be situated further away from you, perhaps when mounted on VESA arms across a deeper desk, then it may be a distinct advantage to go with a larger panel of the same resolution as one that you would be using closer to your eyes. 
    edited April 19 thtforegoneconclusionwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.