Studio Display 2: The Latest Rumors About Apple's Next Monitor

I didn't understand the market for the current version of this, and I still don't understand the target audience for this version. For the price, you can buy the LG 5k2k OLED. 45", OS-agnostic, HDR support, 165 hz, color-accurate, supports PBP. Granted, no camera and crap speakers though. I understand the XDR because of the professional level of color accuracy and features (and competitive pricing!), but I don't understand this product at all.

It's so simple and straightforward that I can only assume people who claim not to understand it are doing so deliberately—at release, the Studio Display was the only monitor available with a native "Retina" resolution that could render macOS without scaling (and even now there are only a few). The LG you mentioned is 5K but 45 inches, which is a) far too large for probably 99% of people; and b) not Retina resolution (it also appears to cost $2000, which is >> $1600 Studio Display).

That's it. It's not hard.

@deadspider187 5k2k is not the same resolution, that is much lower at 125ppi. ASD is 218ppi

Too small at 27” only, why they can’t make a 32” option as well I don’t know, I mean there is a price gap of around 3500 between the Studio Display and Pro Display XDR for a new 32” to fit in. But they are going to have to really offer something special if they update the Pro Display XDR and keep or even increase its price tag!
Then again MSI and LG both have displays coming that will match this new Studio Display. So you’ll be paying for the fruit logo and design aesthetics.

So stupid that Apple isn't putting an M5 in both this and the 24-inch iMac and calling them the iMac Studio and iMac, and making them both support Thunderbolt input Target Display Mode.
I had uninformed fanbois arguing with me about doing this on previous Studio Display rumors threads that the chassis couldn't support the M4… but the even thinner iMac chassis seemingly supports the M4 just fine, so that's garbage. And with what we're seeing with the M4 Mac mini and the proliferation of using them as standalone LLM boxes, there is ZERO REASON any >$1000 device Apple sells should have less computing power at this point than an M4 Mac mini that has been selling for $400. At some point, cabling 2 or 3 or 4 of these panels together to create a home super-computer-cluster will be 'the norm', and the longer Apple waits to do this just extends the mockery of their "we save the environment" PR narrative.
Instead of buying a new iMac every few years, you'll just purchase a new Mac mini or Mac Studio (and/or cloud instances) and 'attach' it to the cluster. The cluster will automagically dispatch jobs to the computing units based on resource needs and power cost.

ADDITION: And lest anyone say something like "I don't need for my Studio Display to have $400 worth of parts in it!" you're missing the point… flew completely over your head. You're *ALREADY PAYING* that $400 extra, over the price of 'dumb' displays… you're just not getting any M4-level performance. Derp. And once they're IN there, put them to use… and magically—something Apple -used to be- known for—you start to see an incredible increase in 'value' from your Apple ecosystem that other computer vendors cannot match.

Based on the distance from the monitor (24+ inches), I believe this meets the "Retina" requirements for PPI for that view distance, but I may be incorrect.

We don't really care about that, we care about scaling—I can immediately tell if macOS is rendered with non-integer scaling. I know most people either can't tell or don't care, but I do and so do a lot of other Apple users.

So basically, a monitor (ASD 2) and a laptop (the new MacBook) will be running on the same chip.

When things get really demanding like trying to open 5 tabs on safari, can the laptop can politely borrow some processing power from the monitor.

I’m not sure if the monitor is monumentally overpowered for what it is or the laptop is unbearably underpowered.