Most monitors don't support more than 60Hz, so 120Hz is still is bit iffy sometimes. Apple can't help some monitor vendors take their time to get their stuff together.
None of the 64 bits versions of Windows run 16 bits code. And lots of games are broken because the DRM used a kernel driver or some other stupid assumption.
I've got no dog in this series, but consider LCD monitors greater than 60hz have been around for I'd estimate at least 13-14 years
I had a 2233RZ in 2009 - one of the first at 120hz. Prior to that 75hz was commonplace.
The modes are presented by the display through EDID.
This is messy at times, but they [Apple] simply need to look there. Windows/Linux respect these just fine.
This is more on Apple than it is the vendors. The only mistake the vendors made was marketing these to the gamer niche. Office work benefits from high refresh rate too
You had a 3d monitor for gaming. You need a high refresh rate for 3d with shutterglasses since you only get half or it for each eye.
Office work benefitted in the CRT time when <85Hz would cause perceptible flickering giving you a headache. Since TFT's are slower there's no flickering anymore. Scrolling benefits slightly with higher refresh, and of course the top 10% of gamers will care about the latency, but I don't think I'll be typing any faster on a gaming screen ;)
> None of the 64 bits versions of Windows run 16 bits code.
Because it's impossible due to how x86-64 CPUs work.
And the statement does nothing to refute my point - that code compiled for Windows keeps working 4 times as long as it does on MacOS. It's an empirical fact, that can be measured in the real world, denying it is like denying gravity.
Backwards comparability is a priority for Windows because all the line of business apllications must keep chugging along. Corporates don't upgrade their office PCs if it breaks their terrible software.
> Apple can't help some monitor vendors take their time to get their stuff together.
Whats is wrong with them? They work fine on Windows, Linux and Android(!), sounds like an Apple problem
> code compiled for Windows keeps working 4 times as long
That might have been true in the NT/XP days but how long will 'the new Microsoft' that decided '10 would be the last Windows version' and now decides it will be phased out in 3 years keep that promise?
Corporates are going all-in on terrible cloud offerings now so the best move for MS is to lock down their desktop OS.
> Whats is wrong with them?
There are lots of monitors with incorrect EDID information or buggy behaviour. Yesterday I crashed a Dell monitor's firmware while trying to find the optimal displayport settings. That's not a macOS problem...
Try setting 120 hz refresh rate
"Apple works harder at maintaining backwards compatibility than any other major vendor in existence."
That's the same Apple that dropped support for 32 bit applications, while on Windows I can play a game released in 1999 and run 16 bit software?