cgWerks

Detnator said:
For most people 4K, 350nits, clunky build quality, and woeful customer support is enough.  That's what you get for $500-$1000.  Some of us want more than that. When the onIy 5K monitor around that's remotely Mac compatible was the LG I tried that, had multiple hardware issues with it, and dealing with LG's support probably took years off my life.  I tried 4K as an alternative, but for me at least, it just doesn't cut it.  Some people say they can't tell the difference between 150 and 220dpi, or 350 and 500 nits.  I don't get it. It's night and day for me. The extra pixels (it's almost twice as many) and increased brightness of the LG 5K make a significant difference to my productivity (when it's not going through LG's warranty repair processes).

Yeah, I can tell the difference between my display (currently a 1080p BenQ) and my iPhone or wife's new MBP. I'll certainly want a better display someday, if for no other reason than to get more screen real-estate. But, I just meant I don't care if it is some exact ppi. When I've heard people talking about *needing* the LG even if it sucks, and wishing Apple had a monitor, they seem to be almost saying it has to be 27" at that exact resolution or something, and that every other monitor isn't - almost as you worded it - remotely Mac compatible.

Having a bit more brightness and color accuracy would be nice as well, but displays have come so far, the difference doesn't seem to me like the wide gap that it used to be. The quality on my cheap BenQ has been quite nice... AND it even has multiple inputs! I've heard horror stories about the LG. I've had a few BenQs over the years along with a couple others, and I kind of stick with that brand now if I don't know otherwise. So, I'd probably do one of their 4K monitors, or the Apple if I decide to part with that much money.

Detnator said:
... If I only wanted it on my desk I'd just get the height adjustable mount, but I need it to move around in a few directions etc. in my home office, so I have a really long industrial arm attached to a pole mount, handling my LG 5K.  This will be a simple swap out.

Yeah, I also have an arm. I drilled a hole in the desk and installed it. It's crazy solid/stable. I don't think I'll ever go to a stand again. I love this setup. I can put the display exactly where I want it, or move it out of the way. The whole desk under it is free, though to be fair, you can't go too high or things would get into the swing-path.

saarek said:

It’s a shame about the price jump from £999 on the old displays to £1499, but it is what it is. The bit that stopped me preordering last night was the £400 extra for the tilt/height mechanism. As with the Mac Pro wheels they’re just taking the piss out of everyone right there!

Hehe, I guess it is perspective. I would have thought that was too expensive too. I'm looking at it from the other direction. 5k iMac minus the Mac part, should equal less than $1600. Apple is looking at it as a money-making main accessory to their computers, or pricing the long-term value into it, etc.

rundhvid said:

What is going on here?

• Weight (M1 Max): 5.9 pounds (2.7 kg)2
• Weight (M1 Ultra): 7.9 pounds (3.6 kg)2

Huh? I wonder if the Max has less power-supply/cooling/heatsink, etc. than they showed, as it doesn't need them? Interesting.

sflocal said:

$1,599 considering what one gets for this display is not that bad a deal.  

I own three of Apple's 27" Thunderbolt monitor for my two iMacs and still use them to this day.  Those brand new costed $999 back in the day.  Currently, LG's 5K display is running $1,299 and I'll gladly pay the premium for Apple's offerings and support compared to LG's plastic ugliness.

Not sure what people are complaining about.  It's a 5K monitor and priced appropriated for what one gets.  Sure, I'd love it to be the $999 price that my current thunderbolt monitors were priced, but everything is expensive now.

I'm just glad Apple finally came out with updated monitors.  When it's time to upgrade my monitors, Apple-branded monitors are the only ones I use.  They just last forever.

I guess $1299 seems a bit closer to iMac 5k minus the Mac, but more the issues - for me - seems that I don't get the need for this spec monitor (compared to a lot of other monitors that cost considerably less). I'll probably end up with 1 or 2 BenQ 4k or something like that. But, I also get investing in something really good that is what you need, and it lasting a long time.

techaccident said:
It is most certainly only USB-C/TB, that's the way things have been going. I have no idea what is on a PS5.

I'm not certain either (I have a PS4), but I assume HDMI. I suppose there are converters to run that into it, but I wonder if you'd have to do the input switching with external gear as well?

crowley said:
There's only one upstream Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) port, so you won't have much luck with the PS5.  The Mac mini might be fine if it has TB3.

The lack of inputs makes it a non starter for me.  Shame, it's quite a nice design in other ways.

Yeah, kind of like the iMac dropping video in, it seems like Apple doesn't consider people using multiple devices. This should have definitely been considered with the move to Apple Silicon where one might need to run an Intel Mac for some time along with a new Apple Silicon one. I'd have to look into it more, but I'm sure there are external units that can do the switching. (At least I hope!)

GeorgeBMac said:

Bad move for the staff.  They face infection everyday.  They need protection.

Would you tell a nurse to not bother masking in the face of a patient spewing disease?

It is a different situation. A patient in the hospital is likely quite sick and coughing, etc. The mask will stop a good portion of droplet based transmission. However, since Covid-19 spreads via aerosol as well, the mask won't help much there. The store worker is mostly going to be exposed to aerosol spread, not droplet like the nurse.

That said, most of the real-world evidence - primarily done in hospital settings, with influenza - shows masks haven't helped much. A lot of that likely applies to Covid-19 as well. If you want to see how easily Covid-19 spreads even with the use of full PPE, this Israeli study is quite telling:
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.39.2100822#html_fulltext
(it also shows how useless vaccination was, as well)

OK, that isn't nearly as positive as I had hoped (and not as good as some previous estimates I've seen).

That means the Pro is more entry-level dGPU, and the Max is kind of middle-of-the-road dGPU. I guess that's fine in laptops, but then hopefully we'll see more cores in the desktops that are coming (mini 'Pro', bigger iMac, etc.). I'm sure we'll see another 'Uber' version for the new Mac Pro, but I'm disappointed in terms of anything below that level if these same chips will go in them. Maybe there is still hope for eGPUs?

And, then there is still the issue Metal (vs OpenGL, etc.) and apps kind of emulating until they get ported (if they ever do), which further degrades performance.