But it's resolution is quite high. At this resolution, I think there's only one other monitor, the LG Ultra Fine 5k is which is like only $200 cheaper.
I think for people that care about resolution/pixel density, this monitor has basically zero competition? There's plenty of lower resolution monitors with higher refresh rates.
The LG has its problems. It’s kind of wobbly, cheap feeling, and the USB-C ports can fail over time from strain/use. The extra $200 for the quality and features of the Apple display sounds reasonable to me given that benchmark.
Is it expensive in absolute terms? Yeah. The LG is too. But it’s those two options or step up to the Pro Display at $5k.
$300 cheaper and 8 years old now, so likely can find used examples if you wanted. It's pretty clear that 5k / 218ppi just has no significant market appeal at this point outside of the Apple ecosystem. There were a few other 5k displays, but they've all packed up since (including LG, they don't make that 5k Ultrafine anymore afaict)
Although arguably since the LG comes with a height adjustable stand it's $700 cheaper than the Studio Display 27"
This is apparently true, and it's baffling. I was able to pick up one of the now-discontinued 5k PC displays a few years ago, and it's fantastic in Linux and Windows with 2x scaling.
You'll likely see 8k as the next common step up from that (it's already happening with TVs). Who knows, maybe we'll have this same conversation again then because Apple will release a 9k display at that point.
All of these are pathetically small numbers compared to the >400ppi we all carry in our pockets, though.
That may be your opinion. I'd say it's downright terrible.
I would not expect any Windows users to chose this display unless they are the few who would make the same quality vs price choice that an Apple customer might.
That's a pretty elitest take that doesn't really hold up to any scrunity at all. Other than the resolution, this is a pretty mediocre quality display. At this price point there are no shortage of displays with much better overall image quality, other than the resolution. You're paying for that 5k in more ways than just the price at checkout. Even within Apple's own ecosystem it's pretty weak. It's bigger than the display on the MacBook Pro you're probably docking to it, obviously, but it also looks way, way worse than the display on that MacBook Pro.
The resolution is the essential feature of this display. And it's an important one due to the way macOS handles scaling. You basically always want to use 2x scaling in macOS. On a 4k / 27" display (which are ubiquitous) that results in an effective screen real estate of 1080p which makes the UI feel too large and cramped.
One of the bad qualities of the LG UltraFine was it's stand was not very stable and prone to wobble. I had one.
In fast paced games the difference between 4k and 5k is going to be barely noticeable, but the higher framerate will be pretty a pretty obvious improvement (both because of the higher refresh rate, and because the GPU can run the game faster at the lower resolution).
Everyone: Yeah, not particularly common, nor do they really add much.
PC gamers specifically (and series/ps5 now too, with those consoles supporting 120hz with compatible tvs and games): Quite popular, and they do significantly add to the gaming experience.
The banwidth for 4k at 60hz is only now becoming mainstream.
That means when I bought my current laptop, still under the 3-year warranty, I would have had to get something worse to get HDMI 2.0 support, since I compared everything available.
IME even non-techies find 30Hz uncomfortable to use.
Definitely not my thing too, I'm all in for 120Hz, but it does have some niche uses at 30Hz.