blastdoor said: I don’t understand the relevance of that comparison.
looking at currently shipping Samsung monitors, very few are more than $1k (https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/all-monitors/), and those few have very high refresh rates (gamers). If you look at the $999 price point specifically, there’s the 32” G70B, which is a 144hz gaming monitor. That monitor is $799 at Amazon.
So I don’t think it’s crazy to think one could get the S9 for $999 on Amazon.
The relevance is that the $1599 2K ultra wide that RTINGS.com recommended is considered a professional use monitor. Studio Display is a professional use monitor. So if Samsung is trying to position the S9 as an alternative to other professional use monitors then it's going to be above $1K.
Also -- Dell Ultrasharp is a "professional use monitor".
blastdoor said: A 5k 27" monitor for $999 seems reasonable compared to that.
Except that nobody actually sells 5K 27" monitors for $999. The best you're going to do is something like an LG for $1100. Go to RTINGS.com and look at what their choices for the three best 5K monitors are. The Studio Display is the only one that isn't a 5K/2K ultra wide and all three are above $1500.
Think about it: if you're Samsung management and you view the S9 as a legitimate alternate to the Studio Display...why would you price it below $1K? It's not like they're going to be producing large quantities of that monitor.
anonconformist said: Other than color accuracy or lack thereof, what are you presuming to judge as to whether someone is in a profession that defines the difference between a Studio Display at 5k resolution being a “need” versus a “want” anyway?
I am not a graphics artist, so perfect color accuracy isn’t vital for my typical use-case. I’ll let you guess what my use-case scenario is, by telling you this much: it can work much better than cheaper, smaller, lower-resolution monitors.
Also, as another clue: depending on what I choose to work on, color accuracy may actually be vitally important.
i just find it pretentious that someone would talk about “need” versus “want” for a solid display that’s not aimed at super high-end use-cases like movie editing with perfect color rendering for motion pictures, in the Apple realm. Apple has never aimed at the bottom of the barrel commodity pricing market in its history, from the Apple ][ onward. It’s easily argued that nobody “needs” Apple hardware, they just “want” it going by what seems to be your reasoning.
I’m not really the target market, so I care more about overall ‘real estate’. I don’t want it to be wildly off in terms of colour, but most displays aren’t any more (I actually worked for a high-end CRT company years ago… we’re not in those days any longer).
My main complaint about the Studio Display, is I guess I was hoping for a better-priced and plain display, more like an 5k iMac sans the iMac part. They also didn’t go a good job with the camera, etc. But, I’m glad it exists for the people that like it and have the budget.
I just want a good panel, and in many ways, absence of poor features are a plus (ie. if the web-cam sucks, I’d rather it not be there). I’m going to mount it on an arm, so the stand is irrelevant (yes, most stands suck). I’d also like it to have multiple inputs, which Apple usually fails at.
I own the Studio Display (with the height adjustable stand) and I am very happy with it. I also like it's price since design, camera and sound is great.
The Apple Studio Display is a flawed product but I love mine and wouldn’t swap it for any other monitor on the market.
I know we’re not supposed to care so much about aesthetics but it looks amazing and has done a great job of decluttering my desk of wires.
My wife has a Dell ultrawide monitor and everything apart from screen size is garbage - build quality, vertical resolution, webcam quality, speaker quality, etc., etc., etc.
The only "flaw" that the tech press could come up with is the entirely bogus web cam criticism.
Well, that and the stand issue that can only really be overcome with spending even more money. And I am sure the margin Apple gets is pretty good.
blastdoor said: A 5k 27" monitor for $999 seems reasonable compared to that.
Except that nobody actually sells 5K 27" monitors for $999. The best you're going to do is something like an LG for $1100. Go to RTINGS.com and look at what their choices for the three best 5K monitors are. The Studio Display is the only one that isn't a 5K/2K ultra wide and all three are above $1500.
Think about it: if you're Samsung management and you view the S9 as a legitimate alternate to the Studio Display...why would you price it below $1K? It's not like they're going to be producing large quantities of that monitor.
If they follow your pricing advice they definitely won't be producing large quantities, so that's kind of circular logic.
Now that a 'true' 5k monitor doesn't have bandwidth requirements that exceed the capacity of standard cables (which was the case when the first 27" 5k iMac came out), it's much easier to make 5k monitors. I'm actually kind of surprised it's taken this long for Samsung (and others) to figure out that there's a potential marketing benefit to 5k. The market for these monitors could be much larger than Mac users -- unless of course they price it only to appeal to Mac users.
blastdoor said: I don’t understand the relevance of that comparison.
looking at currently shipping Samsung monitors, very few are more than $1k (https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/all-monitors/), and those few have very high refresh rates (gamers). If you look at the $999 price point specifically, there’s the 32” G70B, which is a 144hz gaming monitor. That monitor is $799 at Amazon.
So I don’t think it’s crazy to think one could get the S9 for $999 on Amazon.
The relevance is that the $1599 2K ultra wide that RTINGS.com recommended is considered a professional use monitor. Studio Display is a professional use monitor. So if Samsung is trying to position the S9 as an alternative to other professional use monitors then it's going to be above $1K.
Unless of course they'd like to sell a lot of them...
Which they won’t. Most of the complaints have been by people saying that the monitor should cost 500 bucks, maybe 700 bucks tops. Basically in their minds it should be free, some of the Youtubers complaining about the monitor are sitting there with not one but two Apple XDR monitors on their desk (Brownlee?), and are complaining about the price of the Studio Display hypocrisy.
When I did my system upgrade from a 2013 MacPro with two 27" Thunderbolt displays, (one had just died), I went for the fully loaded Mac Studio and two Studio Displays with VESA mounts. This system works for me and there is only one company to deal with if there are any tech issues with a free call to an understandable English speaking support person and ever more talented support upstream if needed (from personal experience)
danox said: … some of the Youtubers complaining about the monitor are sitting there with not one but two Apple XDR monitors on their desk (Brownlee?), and are complaining about the price of the Studio Display hypocrisy.
Not really hypocrisy if he’s speaking in his role of an influencer, evaluating products/markets. It certainly isn’t too expensive for him, but giving his opinion that it is too expensive for others isn’t hypocrisy. I don’t think it had to be $500 either, but it is pricier than I would have anticipated it being, given what it is.
I’d rather see them have a more base, high-quality ‘monitor for everyone’ (at least in the Apple target market), and then a ‘Studio/Pro’ version with all the bells and whistles. This kind of sits in-between, being too pricy for many Apple users, but not high-end enough for people who need to jump to the true pro option. If they made 3 models, this would be a good mid option. But, for only two, it should have been more like a 5k iMac sans Mac, IMO.
Comments
I've been thinking about this one: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-ultrasharp-32-4k-usb-c-hub-monitor-u3223qe/apd/210-bdph/monitors-monitor-accessories
it's $860. 4k, 32 inches, professional specs.
A 5k 27" monitor for $999 seems reasonable compared to that.
Think about it: if you're Samsung management and you view the S9 as a legitimate alternate to the Studio Display...why would you price it below $1K? It's not like they're going to be producing large quantities of that monitor.
My main complaint about the Studio Display, is I guess I was hoping for a better-priced and plain display, more like an 5k iMac sans the iMac part. They also didn’t go a good job with the camera, etc. But, I’m glad it exists for the people that like it and have the budget.
I just want a good panel, and in many ways, absence of poor features are a plus (ie. if the web-cam sucks, I’d rather it not be there). I’m going to mount it on an arm, so the stand is irrelevant (yes, most stands suck). I’d also like it to have multiple inputs, which Apple usually fails at.
Now that a 'true' 5k monitor doesn't have bandwidth requirements that exceed the capacity of standard cables (which was the case when the first 27" 5k iMac came out), it's much easier to make 5k monitors. I'm actually kind of surprised it's taken this long for Samsung (and others) to figure out that there's a potential marketing benefit to 5k. The market for these monitors could be much larger than Mac users -- unless of course they price it only to appeal to Mac users.
I’d rather see them have a more base, high-quality ‘monitor for everyone’ (at least in the Apple target market), and then a ‘Studio/Pro’ version with all the bells and whistles. This kind of sits in-between, being too pricy for many Apple users, but not high-end enough for people who need to jump to the true pro option. If they made 3 models, this would be a good mid option. But, for only two, it should have been more like a 5k iMac sans Mac, IMO.