https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/ - your statement looks right to me - that requires the MBP.I don't think any MacBook Air models can drive 8K displays. Maybe I'm wrong.
https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/ - your statement looks right to me - that requires the MBP.I don't think any MacBook Air models can drive 8K displays. Maybe I'm wrong.
You specifically need the M2 Pro or better.https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/ - your statement looks right to me - that requires the MBP.
Easy to see the difference here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/102194You specifically need the M2 Pro or better.
I don't think any MacBook Air models can drive 8K displays. Maybe I'm wrong.
But no MacBook Air has either of those chips.yes, the M2 Pro/Max can drive the UP3218k using two ThunderBolt ports. See above… @Pressure has it running.
I just recently upgraded to 14.4 and can confirm the same behavior with my Mac Mini M2 Pro, i.e., that the HDR button only appears if I switch down to 30Hz when using HDMI. The HDR button is always there when connected via Thunderbolt.Looks like MacOS 14.4 update broke HDR support over HDMI. I can only see the option if I switch to 30Hz now. I had been pretty happy until this point since they fixed some issues earlier on.
All the normal disclaimers - YMMV, this is a bit of a "hack", don't do it if you're not comfortable, etc.@tstafford can you describe the hack with BetterDisplay? I override the default settings to make 3008x1692 be the 'default' resolution for hiDPI but I still did not see the HDR option come back. Curious if there is more to it than that.
I reported a bug to Apple with Feedback Assistant at least. Those rarely seem to do any good.
Yeah, same thing thing for me: HDR is broken again over TB. I was not using it much, but still...
Based on empirical evidence, I get the impression that the GPU software stack on apple silicon seems pretty unstable or maybe more exactly lacking maturity: On a M2 pro mini 14.2 introduced pretty severe GPU performance issues across the system that were not entirely fixed until 14.4... (for example: It couldn't run google earth smoothly.... Lightroom was slower in a mesurable way, etc)
Same thing again with the M3 driving 2 displays: If the hardware was capable from the start, why was the software not ready for this feature at launch?
It does not paint a great picture for the priorities of the teams in charge of this part of the OS...
Mostly yes, although it is useful anywhere you need to display an extended dynamic range: HDR image editing in adobe Lightroom, for example.HDR is really only useful for watching HDR videos, is that correct?
Agreed. And why it doesn't bother me that the ASD doesn't have it.HDR is really only useful for watching HDR videos, is that correct?
We have it on our LG TV, and I love it there for the Netflix, etc., shows/movies that offer it.
But for my Mac, which is not a content consumption device, it's not a big deal to me.
I share the exact same opinion.Agreed. And why it doesn't bother me that the ASD doesn't have it.
But on the Dell I want it to work because it's supposed to. It's an OCD thing. Just bugs me that it isn't working.
Especially given that it's worked perfectly for months. Something in 14.4 broke it.I share the exact same opinion.
I think the blame here lies squarely on Apple: if the hardware on both sides supports it (per specs), the software should work well enough to allow you to fully exploit those specs.
I think that is the bare minimum in terms of expectations.
It's almost a year since I returned my U3224KB last year, and I decided to try it again since the price has dropped. I've been using both a U3223QE and a Studio Display, and the coating on the U3223QE is great even though it is only a lighter matte and not glass like the Studio Display. I had forgotten how bad the coating is on the U3224KB, but it is completely unacceptable to me. It's like the old school matte displays and not the lighter matte of newer IPS panels. It's really annoying to stare at sparkle all day. I assume these are produced for office use, but I wish they'd produce a panel with the same semi-gloss as other Ultrasharp displays.I returned my U3224KB. If I didn't already have an ASD I probably would have kept it, but I didn't feel that it was worth the asking price. The camera quality was horrible and always overexposed, which made it pointless to have such a huge bezel at the top of the screen if I couldn't get any use out of it, and the anti-glare coating really started to bother me the more time I spent with it. At first I thought I was going to get used to the AG, but in comparison to the ASD it just looked like a dirty screen and it reduced the sharpness.
It may depend on the DAC being used, but that is the case with mine as well. I use the volume knob on my powered speakers to adjust the volume.
Yes, I have tried that with the ASD, and it's not bad. Everything is slightly smaller but not unreasonably so. Everything is also slightly softer and not as sharp due to the way macOS scaling works.Anyone tried running the Apple Studio Display at higher-than-default resolution like 2880x1620? I think purists would resist but I'm just considering effective resolutions between the ASD and this Dell 6k display. The Dell is 3072x1692, right? So .. it's not a huge difference if you just ran the ASD at a slightly higher resolution. I need to go try this in the store and see how it looks to my eyes. Just thinking that this is another option for those trying to find the right balance between screen real estate + crisp text + cost. I assume the bigger difference to the eyes is the 32" vs 27" as far as legibility.
I have and sometimes do. It’s not bad. Just small. If you have good eyes, you can probably get by full time with that.Anyone tried running the Apple Studio Display at higher-than-default resolution like 2880x1620? I think purists would resist but I'm just considering effective resolutions between the ASD and this Dell 6k display. The Dell is 3072x1692, right? So .. it's not a huge difference if you just ran the ASD at a slightly higher resolution. I need to go try this in the store and see how it looks to my eyes. Just thinking that this is another option for those trying to find the right balance between screen real estate + crisp text + cost. I assume the bigger difference to the eyes is the 32" vs 27" as far as legibility.