Monitor costs over $20,000 brand new

>monitor costs over $20,000 brand new
>looks like a piece of shit from 2003
why do they do this? why do these super-monitors look so shitty?

Attached: referencemonitor.jpg (500x500, 19K)

So that you don't need a $1k stand and it's still stable

They cost so much because they generally have much higher quality components that are capable of delivering performance at very tight tolerances.

This takes up space, and they're not being sold to sit in your living room, they're sold to be used in dark editing rooms for movie production and similar. Aesthetics don't mean a thing.

for the same reason most servers dont have RGB, its a serious product not some meme gaymer monitor

>spend $20G to save $999
Just try and tell me the new Apple monitor isn't a good deal. You can't because there's no comparable monitors even within the $10,000 range.

No one is arguing the mac pro isn't good for people making amateur YouTube videos and such. Maybe some epic gaymer videos too. It's just not good for big boy work.

Based

Reference monitors are used by production studios/news networks to see if enhancements are as accurate as possible for airing.
Not a workstation monitor for soundcloud rappers/youtube video creators.

Purpose built for an industry
>reference tv
>guaranteed color accuracy
>industrial specifications
>industry specific i/o
>warranty, and service
That tv isn't meant for consumers.

This, it's gaymer repellent.

the apple monitor is not a fucking reference monitor for the last time. FALD is unusable for reference work. turn it off and you would be lucky to get even 2000:1 contrast ratio.

It's a fucking studio/reference monitor. Are you going to ask why audio studio monitors are so expensive next?

Attached: 1542413189991.png (645x729, 72K)

>guys why do semi trucks look so ugly? why are they so needlessly expensive?

>wonderful professional utilitarian sturdy aesthetic
>"ugly"
Zoomers these days, I swear

That's a terrible comparison. Semis aren't that expensive compared to day-to-day cars.

Apple is entering the bottom of the reference monitor market. The monitor is better than their regular displays but it isn't near the level of professional production reference monitors.

but audio studio monitors aren't that expensive. They're like 600-700$. Enthusiast home audio typically goes way up in price.

Wish they had one of these on the set of GoT S8E3

I should say, relatively. Not all studio monitors are

why do you expect bleeding edge technology to be slimmed down and minimalist? This was never the case.

Attached: 234234234.jpg (229x220, 8K)

> why do these super-monitors look so shitty?
> looks are more important than performance
Fuck off consumercunt, this hardware is not built for aesthetics, it is built to perform to a specification.

They're about $130-150k+ average new, and trailers are maybe $30k+. Maybe heavy machinery, or some other industry specialty equipment with a consumer analogue would have been better for anons comparison though.

This monitor goes to real world productions since new Zealand to sahara desert, usually director,photography / cinematograph check film results in this monitors.

>Nice aviation grade looks
>vs
>Fucking trypophobia thing
kek

Some people like their expensive things to look expensive.

They probably did, and I'm sure it looked good on it. Problem is, you average consumer LCD TV is complete dog shit at displaying dark scenes well. That combined with the horrible artifacting from HBO's overcompressed streams is why it looked so bad.

Imagine being scared of holes lmao