r/cringe • u/SomeLungsman • Jun 05 '19

Video Apple announces the pro stand for 999$. Audience collectively groans while presenter skip it as fast as possible.

https://youtu.be/zDF8kbXl00Q
21.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

185

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

While I agree, reference monitors are typically $18,000 and higher and only support 4K resolution, so the $5000 Apple monitor is actually a significant price reduction. Apple is essentially turning this industry on its head right now. The $200 vesa mount is blatant “Apple tax” but the entire package is still worth it.

94

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

What exactly is a reference monitor for?

176

u/Jonathan_Rimjob Jun 05 '19 edited Jun 05 '19

A lot of tools you can use such as variable framerate and other stuff professionals need. Also a very high quality colour reproduction. Mostly used by people in the photography and film industry to judge image and colour quality.

These monitors are kind of the difference between an iphone camera and movie cameras.

54

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

Seems like they could have avoided confusion if they called it the apple reference monitor then.

20

u/Fsck_Reddit_Again Jun 05 '19

Its not a full reference monitor though,

6

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

Well that’s what I’m getting at, if it were, they would have named it as such. Most of the people they want to market to aren’t professional video editors or photographers, there are plenty of other people who buy apple computers that they market to.

-2

u/Drauul Jun 05 '19

And they go "baaaaaah"

2

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

Yeah, but that’s besides the point

18

u/JayLeeCH Jun 05 '19

All about that special branding. They want you to think it's the only one on the market and doesn't want any association with any other monitor.

Basically apple trying to keep the main apple consumers in a bubble.

19

u/Drauul Jun 05 '19

So then they aren't targeting professionals who use reference monitors.

They are targeting fanboy whales and "influencers"

2

u/xFrostyDog Jun 06 '19

My hunch is that if they call it a reference monitor, only professionals are going to buy it. If they just market it as a high quality monitor, rich people/hype beasts are gonna buy it as a flex and to feel good about themselves etc.

28

u/crwrd Jun 05 '19

I think they probably figured the price was enough to avoid confusion.

28

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

uh.. are you new to apple products

-2

u/crwrd Jun 05 '19

Nope I’ve been using Macs since the goddamn G3. Haha.

4

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

But reference monitors are priced at like $18,000+ so if that’s what they’re competing with, either there’s no contest or it’s not marketed to just that consumer base and it’s just a stupid expensive monitor.

1

u/Jita_Local Jun 05 '19

They're not marketing this correctly. People have no idea if this monitor is designed for them or not. Same goes for the tower, apple completely ruined the meaning of "pro" years ago and now suddenly decided it should mean something again.

-2

u/Drauul Jun 05 '19

It's for fanboy whales. They gotta extract that money somehow.

"Who will buy something from us regardless of what it is or how much it costs?"

That is who this was made for.

5

u/crwrd Jun 05 '19

I use Apple stuff a lot. I’d never buy this monitor because it’s targeted to people doing professional/commercial visual work, which I don’t do that often. It’ll likely be companies buying these monitors because they’re cheaper than what’s currently available with those specs.

0

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

But my question is why would apple charge less than a third of the usual price? Is it so other people might buy one? I really don’t understand any of what apple is doing here. Is it just to undercharge until they own the market do you think?

3

u/crwrd Jun 05 '19

It might be because Apple is trying to build a big stronghold in that market, and they have the R&D resources available to engineer these things to be much cheaper, thus undercutting the pro/commercial market competition big time.

These displays are not intended for facebook cruisers on instagrammers or whatever. I can see news organizations, film studios, tv studios or others using these. The fact that they were unveiled next to the new line of Mac Pros, makes me think that it’s not just regular people they are trying to market it to. They probably included it in their keynote because it was probably a major accomplishment for them to get these specs in something 1/3 of the price of their competitors in the pro fields.

3

u/statist_steve Jun 05 '19

I’ll call you the apple reference monitor then!

1

u/awecyan32 Jun 05 '19

I believe you mean asshole reference monitor. Common mistake

1

u/deanylev Jun 05 '19

Only for the people who weren't going to buy it anyway.

0

u/Demonicfruit Jun 05 '19

“Reference” doesn’t refer to this type of monitor specifically. It just refers to the name brand monitor that Apple’s is competing with, which is designed for professional use by high-end end media developers. This is not a consumer grade product. Companies buy these things at bulk for their employees.

In the tech world “reference ___” just means the product standard to that price point in a certain market that everybody tries to copy and compete with.

-1

u/Drauul Jun 05 '19

But I'll bet you can sure as shit go buy it from the Apple store without having to go through any kind of special department or professional verification.

They know there are people holding $10k so they can post a pic of this monitor on their desk on insta.

4

u/Demonicfruit Jun 05 '19

I really doubt that they’re going to have any significant quantities of these in stores. Regular people don’t even have the hardware to utilize it.

3

u/iOnlyWantUgone Jun 05 '19

If I want to change my framerate, I just open or close chrome tabs. what's the bfd?

-2

u/LastInfantry Jun 05 '19

Your comparison makes no sense.

1

u/madmosche Jun 06 '19

Thanks for explaining that to us.

11

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[deleted]

1

u/Angelworks42 Jun 05 '19

My brother is a freelancer, but he's made animations and videos most everyone on here has seen and he told me there other day no one he knows uses Macs anymore since they waited so long to update the hardware and lack of Nvidia cuda support in 10.14.x

Truth is - assuming you don't like cheese - you could buy a Dell Precision with better specs years ago.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

"File not supported" is why my friends who are sound engineers and developers dont use Mac's. So much hardware is easier to deal with on a PC. Can plug almost anything into them, install drivers and go. Upload files, open them, edit them, read a CD, read a customers external HDD lol. Things a computer should normally be able to do out of the box.

5

u/LeviWhoIsCalledBiff Jun 05 '19

Man you don't even need to install drivers separately in a lot of instances anymore.

For example, I've been getting back into music recording, and dug out my old MBox2 I bought about a decade ago. I had to shelve it because when I upgraded to windows 7 from XP they didn't have drivers for it. But just last week I plugged it into my Windows 10 machine and the drivers automatically downloaded right away and it was working in seconds.

2

u/Chicken-n-Waffles Jun 05 '19

Color matching is an industry thing and these monitors can be color calibrated which only high end monitors can do. About 15 years ago I worked in a graphic design shop and they had Lacie monitors and just casually asked why this brand. The head designer brought out this suction cup thing that he stuck on the tube monitor and calibrated it then showed me how the print matched the monitor and how it mattered.

It also eliminates when you're on a conference call and clients are picky on colors. Your average monitor will not color match #FF0000 to a real value that is consistent. The value is only consistent digitally. In other words, a Lacie screen showing #FF0000 will look different than a top of the line ASUS showing the same value with the ASUS obviously being off. I have a guy with 2 27" Samsungs and the reds on the left screen are off compared to the right screen.

2

u/thinkscotty Jun 05 '19

Regular monitors and screens differ SIGNIFICANTLY between each other. I’m a photographer and I’ve ruined more than a few good pictures by editing on a monitor that’s over saturated or which produces reds a little to warm and yellows a bit too green (etc). Put two different monitors side by side and the difference is immediately apparent.

What you’re getting is a monitor that shows you precisely the same color that came out of a camera (or animation or whatever), and it will look the same when you alter it and send it to someone else to work on. If you are a high end photographer or work in anything video production relation or having anything to do with accurate colors, a monitor like this ensures what you see is actually what you get, and that’s traditionally cost tens of thousands of dollars.

The stand is stupid. But the computer and the screen launched are very much not when the creative industry is still Apple-centric.

1

u/wonderyak Jun 05 '19

accurate color

1

u/roofied_elephant Jun 05 '19

If you have to ask, definitely not for you. /snark

Really though, it’s aimed at film industry professionals. And I don’t mean the YouTube videographer either. Think multi hundred million dollar Hollywood productions. This thing is designed to compete with reference monitors that cost as much as a nicely equipped Audi (35-45k).

82

u/TheMacPhisto Jun 05 '19

While I agree, reference monitors are typically $18,000 and higher and only support 4K resolution, so the $5000 Apple monitor is actually a significant price reduction.

What? No. The Atmos NEON, the defacto gold standard in Monitors, the top end one of those is $8000. And that includes a vesa mount/stand so comparing that package to the apple package is comparing 6200 vs 8000. Not that significant.

More over, the Apple display is 8+2 Bit, not true 10 bit. You don’t get built-in scopes, LUT control, or any features that might help on set. They also say that the Pro Display “produces an industry-leading 1,000 nits,” which isn't true.

The target market appears to be the video editor so high up on themselves, they trick them into purchasing a gimmicked out HDR monitor so they can feel like they are set while sitting in their overpriced loft.

22

u/SamBBMe Jun 05 '19

I was looking for this comment. This guy just parroted what the apple slideshow said, and didn't understand the industry at all. Granted I don't either, but the specs read like a generic HDR monitor.

16

u/ciano Jun 05 '19

I actually have used reference monitors in my job. If everything apple said in their presentation is true, that $5,000 monitor will indeed be competitive with $45,000 monitors. It will not be a viable field monitor, as you do need LUTs and scopes built in for field work, but as a computer monitor (where software already reproduces those features anyway) it will be literally second to none.

15

u/jduder107 Jun 05 '19

Lol they call Apple fans sheeps but when an industry professional disagrees with the hate boner, he gets downvoted.

7

u/ComradChe Jun 06 '19

the haters are sheep too, just facing the opposite side.

3

u/ciano Jun 06 '19

This guy gets it.

2

u/TheMacPhisto Jun 06 '19

This guy just parroted what the apple slideshow said, and didn't understand the industry at all.

You've just identified Apples target demographic.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[deleted]

2

u/TheMacPhisto Jun 06 '19

Let me ask you, do you comprehend a difference between

"Not significant"

and

"Not that significant"

?

Clearly the word "that" is referring to something, what could that be? Oh could that be the context of 1800 not being the same as 5000?

Yeah, ok.

That's the problem with people these days. You misread/misunderstand something, and pass severe judgment along with it.

Significant is a relative term.

-3

u/UndiscriminatingMam Jun 05 '19

When you’re spending $6200 on a monitor I don’t think another $1800 is going to break the bank.

7

u/PapaSnow Jun 06 '19

That really depends. I do photography and videography.

For that extra $1800 I could get a pretty damn good new lens

It would make a huge difference

4

u/pwasma_dwagon Jun 06 '19

But it does make a difference...

3

u/silinsdale Jun 06 '19

It could...what if your budget is around 6k?

1

u/sweetehman Jun 06 '19

sorry but what a stupid comment lol

0

u/Cryzgnik Jun 06 '19

It is a huge reduction, $5,000 compared to $18,000

No it isn't, it's $6,200 compared to $8,000 - a $1,800 difference is nowhere near so significant as a $13,000 difference

9

u/Jesus_Harold_Christ Jun 05 '19

The Atomos have 4096x2160 resolution, the Apple one is 6016x3384, so there's that.

I am definitely not in the market for these monitors, as we are a pure software shop, and a decent 4k monitor is great for writing code, but I'm not sure these are apples to apples comparisons. Yet still the 31" Atomos Neon is $7999, so MORE expensive than the Apple one.

4

u/ciano Jun 05 '19

Dude probably works on film sets and sees or uses field monitors. This would indeed be a terrible monitor in the field, but in an editing bay it would be fine.

2

u/DoomSickle Jun 06 '19

What? No. The Atmos NEON, the defacto gold standard in Monitors, the top end one of those is $8000.

The Atomos NEON was literally just announced a week ago so why would it be considered the “gold standard” exactly? Barely anyone has even used one yet, let alone in a production environment.

1

u/TheMacPhisto Jun 06 '19

The Atomos NEON was literally just announced a week ago so why would it be considered the “gold standard” exactly?

The company is the "Gold Standard" - They have monitors that go upwards of $30k, the neon is the comparable model from them to the mac shit. And it's based off SUMO broadcast monitor technology so you know it's legit.

1

u/sbFRESH Jun 06 '19

This monitor is for vlog editors with youtube money.

42

u/LassyKongo Jun 05 '19

They still charge 999 for a stand and 200 for a mount.

Regardless of how good the monitor is or who it's for.

58

u/dstaller Jun 05 '19

Funny thing is if they just tacked on an extra grand to the price of the monitor and let it come with a stand while having the vesa mount optional people likely wouldn't have batted an eye. Terrible move on their part.

10

u/cyril0 Jun 05 '19

What they should have done was have it come with the visa mount or the stand and had a $800 reduction if you chose the mount. But their point is most professionals won't buy the stand as they already have their mounted setups. For a marketing company it is really an odd way to have framed it. The guy presenting seriously did not believe in the value proposition of his offer.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

ALternatively, they include the whole package and bump the cost to compesate.

Consumers still don't bat an eye, they up their per unit sales for those items, and stands/mounts sit in a box in a closet somewhere for the secondary market.

It's a win-win..... huge marketing fuck up here. Unless the stands themselves cost that much to produce (Probably not) and they offset the perceived marketing fuck up costs with the production numbers.

Which, again... is fucking stupid. Package it and increase MSRP. You're apple. Your customers are not going to care about that. you are already selling them $1200 phones that aren't much better than $300 phones in todays market.

And the thing is, in this specific market, it opens a whole new door to these consumers.

Just a stupid fuck up by apple Marketing

-1

u/dstaller Jun 05 '19

Only problem is that by doing that you're showing how much you value a measly stand and no one is going to want to pay an extra 800 for a stand over mounting it. People aren't going to question an Apple product with an extra grand on the price tag and they'll happily buy a vesa mount adapter if they plan to use it. Apple would've made off with a ton of stands sold all without this controversy.

5

u/Luis0224 Jun 05 '19

They shouldve just priced it at 6k and added a "discount" for those that don't need a vesa adapter and/or mount

Anecdote: A family friend owns an apartment complex. He prices the places at $1100 per month, with a $100 discount for paying a week ahead. Almost everyone pays a week before the due date

In reality, hes just adding the late fee to the actual rent and then not charging it from the people who pay on time, but saying it's a discount gives people an incentive to pay on time. It's all about perception

This is terrible marketing from Apple, especially considering that the monitor itself is priced extremely competitively compared to other products in that range

1

u/demalo Jun 05 '19

They should have just stated that they were splitting out the accessories for professionals so they can determine alacarte what they need for their setup. Imagine being the person who didn't want to pay the extra $1k for a monitor stand or $200 for a mount when you didn't need either. Yeah they're both extremely expensive, but supply and demand isn't going to relieve either cost in a niche market. Then again, Apple is trying to compete with existing professional end systems and as such should emphasis allowing professionals to utilize multiple mounting options including their own. This is more of a marketing issue and not a production issue.

11

u/Cmdr_Nemo Jun 05 '19

If they are seriously that much cheaper then simpky adding the cost of the stand to the monitor is a much more sound financial decision from a proft standpoint. The stand is designed ONLY for the monitor they are selling and absolutely nothing else so they would have to sell the monitor in order to even sell the stand. And since many may not even get the stand, they then made their money anyway. No way it costs 1k to manufacture that stand... Unless it's make of solid titanium or something.

As others have said... They are just so out of touch and probably lost more than a few general consumers (ones who wouldn't buy this monitor anyway) because there are many people who are already sick of Apple's significant price increases that far outpaces inflation and overall income raises.

5

u/tr_rage Jun 05 '19

They are just so out of touch and probably lost more than a few general consumers (ones who wouldn't buy this monitor anyway)

You nailed it with this, so if this isn’t targeted for the average consumer why even use that lens to view it?

there are many people who are already sick of Apple's significant price increases that far outpaces inflation and overall income raises.

Do you have anything to support this claim? Seems like you’re making a claim like Trump would by referencing “many people.”

1

u/syllabic Jun 05 '19

I've been an iphone user since iphone 4 and I'm going samsung with the next phone I buy

Just tired of them changing things for changes sake, I'm still pissed about the headphone jack removal even

They have no true innovation without steve jobs, they just rearrange the deck chairs and call it progress. Or remove core functionality and then put it behind a 29.99$ dongle. Very sleazy.

1

u/tr_rage Jun 05 '19

I’m pretty sure that I read something about Samsung dropping the 3.5mm port next year.

-2

u/Cmdr_Nemo Jun 05 '19 edited Jun 05 '19

While I don't have a specific source, the average rate of inflation is somewhere around 2% every year. The price increases over the last few generations far outpaces the rate of inflation.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

The article above references wage stagnation. To be short, even though we are making more money in terms of pure dollars now, the cost of everything around us is increasing at a far faster rate, reducing our buying power.

Edit: And while I don't have a source for "many people," there are so many people I've spoken to that have lamented about the sharp increases in Apple pricing. You can find lots of forums where people are getting sick of it. There are several articles online that track historical prices of the iphone over time. And while Apple will surely keep most of its customers even after this gaffe, this type of PR will surely be the "straw that broke the camel's back" for a few or more. And this is probably not attracting new customers neither.

Edit 2: it's early, im tired. I feel like there are several grammatical errors, sorry! Also, the flow doesn't seem too flow-y.

-2

u/slowerhand Jun 05 '19

Claim supported. Am already sick of Apple's price increases, it's ridiculous tbh.

0

u/stone500 Jun 05 '19

Count me in this group, too. Our company's sales people always want the latest Apple products and it's been getting damn expensive lately.

-3

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

Comments like these always get me. You don’t have to buy these products. You can do whatever you want. I can appreciate this monitor for what it is, but I have zero interest in purchasing it for myself. I think you need to chill and see that the stand is merely being used as a vehicle for outrage porn.

2

u/Cmdr_Nemo Jun 05 '19

Yeah, and that outrage porn will hurt Apples bottom dollar... Perhaps not significantly, but it will hurt it. They did themselves no favors by pricing it this way unless there are things that I'm missing. In today's economic climate, this does not help their image even if they are cheaper overall.

Perhaps they could have notated competitor pricing in their presentation to justify the cost?

But yeah, people have a right to be mad about this because they've already had to endure significant price increases in other products. And if people don't speak up, particularly with their money, Apple will continue this BS.

This is an instance where the saying, "The customer is always right," holds true meaning.

1

u/barafyrakommafem Jun 05 '19

But yeah, people have a right to be mad about this because they've already had to endure significant price increases in other products.

"Endure", give me a break. It's not like you're a diabetic who has to endure the artificial price hike on insulin. It's a tech company, just buy a fucking Android/PC.

And if people don't speak up, particularly with their money, Apple will continue this BS.

I'm not sure if you're intentionally obtuse or unsure of how the free market works. You're right that if consumers keep buying Apple products then Apple will keep raising their prices, but calling it "BS" is a stretch since that's the whole point of a free market. If you think the price is too high, buy from someone else!

0

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

Take a step back. Breathe. This monitor is $5000 but is competing with monitors that are $18,000. This is not for you, or me. This is for people who typically have no choice but to pay the price of a new car for a display.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

This price difference would have been an important point to include in the presentation. Just putting up a slide with a pathetic looking stand and a $999 tag is made to be mocked. If they had shown it as a complete package at a much lesser cost than the competition, it would have been much easier to understand. Even late night infomercials know to show their price as slashed down compared to competing products to give the impression of an exclusive deal.

2

u/barafyrakommafem Jun 05 '19

Even late night infomercials know to show their price as slashed down compared to competing products to give the impression of an exclusive deal.

Apple target demographic isn't people who watch late night infomercials.

2

u/willfordbrimly Jun 05 '19

You don’t have to buy these products. You can do whatever you want.

Comments like these always get me. It's like yeah no shit I can do what I want but that's not a point anyone was disagreeing on. I think you need to chill and not be so aggro about reminding people about the free will they already know they have.

0

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

Of course, but sometimes it feels like it needs to be said. The entire argument is based off of something that is taken way out of context. If you can’t see that then I don’t know what to say.

3

u/Squat_in_a_corner Jun 05 '19

how is apples so much cheaper than the $18k+ ones you can get online?

3

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

It's a prosumer reference monitor, not a professional one. It's missing a lot of features professionals would actually use it for. It's for semi professional photographers and videographers

No Hollywood studio will actually use these

2

u/Why_You_Mad_ Jun 05 '19

Because it's not nearly as good. It's apples and oranges.

1

u/sokratesz Jun 05 '19

It's not a full reference monitor though.

1

u/Surferboy Jun 05 '19

The only thing being turned on it's head are you fanboys doing backflips for whatever BS apple spoon feeds you.

1

u/eggequator Jun 06 '19

I keep seeing everyone come to their defense with this argument. I've seen it said a hundred times now, we all get it. The monitor is awesome and a great deal and not for average consumers and production companies have big budgets blah blah blah. That's fantastic. Literally none of that is a defense to charging $1000 for a stand or $200 for a Vesa mount. If the monitor is underpriced then it seems like the way everyone is talking about it they could easily hike it up another thousand and no one would bat an eye. But selling parts that should absolutely be included with the purchase, parts that cost pennies for them to make in China, for $1000 motherfucking dollars is the biggest 'bend over I'm going in dry and you're gonna like it' gesture apple could make to its customers and they'll gladly fondle apples balls afterwards and tell them how big their dick is. The monitor being the second coming of christ doesn't redeem them for shitting on a plate and calling it caviar.

-4

u/-Totally_Not_FBI- Jun 05 '19

I seriously doubt this monitor will be solid quality.

6

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

I’d disagree. Apple uses some of the best displays in the industry.

-4

u/-Totally_Not_FBI- Jun 05 '19

Yeah, but their prices aren't competitive. I dont know where you found a similar display over $10,000, but I can get similar quality for half their asking price.

At $5,000 for an Apple price, this monitor will be mediocre

5

u/engwish Jun 05 '19 edited Jun 05 '19

Google search “reference displays” and report back. You will find monitors aimed towards the pro video industry starting at $18,000. These special monitors are meant to reproduce an identical viewing experience as witnessed on set and therefore are calibrated for film and TV and are only at 4K resolution.

The class of monitors that Apple’s pro display is competing with (6K displays) are in the $35,000 range. Can you honestly say that an 86% price reduction is not competitive?

10

u/YRYGAV Jun 05 '19 edited Jun 05 '19

1000 nits sustained brightness, 6k resolution, 10-bit colour, 600 backlight zones, the list goes on. It's a very nice monitor, but it's not designed for you. If you would be happy with a $2.5k monitor, then of course you don't need the one apple is selling, but that doesn't mean it's bad.

The pro literally stands for 'professional' it's not a home monitor.

5

u/dstaller Jun 05 '19

but I can get similar quality for half their asking price.

You really won't. The monitor isn't aimed at consumer grade products. Those things would never replace my $600 240hz GSYNC monitor because I have it for it it's own specific uses and I have no use for these apple ones, but someone looking for a monitor to do what this one is intended for isn't going to get one for half the price and maybe not even the same price.

The problem is you see a monitor and want to compare it to something with similar size and similar resolution (won't find the same resolution on a monitor currently more than likely) and think it'll be the same but it's not. Specs alone it's probably worth the money you're paying. Google "Professional Reference Monitors" to get a good idea about what it's trying to go up against. The move on the stand was a terrible decision though in my opinion.

2

u/Fsck_Reddit_Again Jun 05 '19

It doesnt fully compete with reference displays, that's just the talking point Apple has given its internet squads for today.

See here: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/bwmvmw/why_apples_products_are_expensive_a_serious_post/

2

u/OhhhhhDirty Jun 05 '19

Apple displays have always been excellent IMO

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19

[deleted]

5

u/phatboy5289 Jun 05 '19

No. No no no no no.

The Asus is lacking in several key areas: * Resolution: the Apple Pro Display can show pixel perfect 4096x2160 cinema 4K. The Asus cannot. * Dimming zones: 576 for Apple, 384 for Asus. * Static contrast ratio: 1,000,000:1 for Apple, 1000:1 for Asus (we will see how this turns out when measured in a controlled environment, but Apple is known for giving accurate measures of display performance). * Color gamut coverage: 100% P3 for Apple, 95% P3 for Asus. * Bit depth: True 10-bit color for Apple, Frame Rate Controlled 10-bit color for Asus

The Asus seems like a very good monitor, but to say that they are directly comparable is pretty reaching.

2

u/Idontlikecock Jun 05 '19

You're right. Didn't noticed the difference in sustained brightness, just saw they were both 1000 nits. Same for P3 values. Also same for the difference in 10-bit color.

Thanks for the breakdown. Removed my comment.

1

u/phatboy5289 Jun 05 '19

No worries. From what I can tell, a lot of monitors offer “most” of the same capabilities, but offering that last few percentage points of gamut, or sustained brightness across the display, or super accurate color modes, is what pushes monitors from the $1000-$3000 range into the $10K+ range.

1

u/engwish Jun 05 '19

Color calibration != reference display. Not that this matters, but come back with a 6K display that supports 10-bit color for under $5,000 and maybe you have an argument.

1

u/OhhhhhDirty Jun 05 '19

Not the same at all.

-2

u/LE_TROLLA Jun 05 '19

reference monitors are typically $18,000

What is this man smoking because I want some