View Full Version : New Aluminum Apple Displays: 23" 30"
Well, the rumors were true. Apple finally made those aluminum-enclosure non-ADC LCDs with a split cable.
From MacRumors' updates at the WWDC:
Today: completely new version of the 23" display. Showing it. Aluminum enclosure. one piece alumnium stand. Small bevel. One cable from the monitor which then splits. Also a 20" display. Same quality/enclosure. 20" - $1299, 23" - $1999. avail next month.
Also - now - largest display ever. 30" Display. 4.1 million pixels. same one piece alumn enclosure. firewire/usb. only works with PowerMac since needed a new graphics card. existing cards could not drive it. needs two dvi connections running in parallel.
New graphics card costs $599. Additional notes. they all share the one cable out which provides DVI, Firewire, USB.Emphasis mine.
http://www.apple.com/displays/
All the info is there, folks. :)
thegelding
2004-06-28, 12:31
30 inch is 3299 and you have to buy a 599 graphics card to run the dual dvi...
still if you have the money it would be sweet
g
Does anyone have pictures?
Color me very disappointed. There's no mention of the 17" LCD -- is it being dropped? And there's no price drop or quality bump on the 20". These screens are how many years old?
*sigh* Well, at least Apple pulled its head out of its butt and figured out how to split the cable and drop ADC.
SonOfSylvanus
2004-06-28, 12:37
So I spose the dual dvi connector means it is impossible to have a dual 30" set-up
curiousuburb
2004-06-28, 12:50
Color me very disappointed. There's no mention of the 17" LCD -- is it being dropped? And there's no price drop or quality bump on the 20". These screens are how many years old?
*sigh* Well, at least Apple pulled its head out of its butt and figured out how to split the cable and drop ADC.
Yep... the 17" display in no longer being sold.
Refurbs or old stock only.
edit: removed wishful thinking about iMac
LudwigVan
2004-06-28, 12:59
Yep... the 17" display in no longer being sold.
Refurbs or old stock only.
An all widescreen lineup now...
(except low end PB/iBook for form factor)...
and 15" iMac... which will also be discontinued today...
to be replaced (as "one more thing") by all widescreen iMacG5 -for anniversary purposes.
Fact or speculation? The Apple Store isn't online yet...
Messiahtosh
2004-06-28, 13:06
Fact or speculation? The Apple Store isn't online yet...Yeah, how sweet would that be if it were true...waiting, waiting...
No iMac G5s. Keep the speculation in the Speculation and Rumors forum, please.
alcimedes
2004-06-28, 13:14
actually, they said that with two of these video cards, you'd be able to run dual 30" displays. go figure.
http://images.apple.com/displays/images/indextop06282004.jpg
http://images.apple.com/home/images/2004/06/display30image06282004.jpg
:) :) :)
thegelding
2004-06-28, 13:49
wow....how heavy is that stand to hold that???
and how much did the old displays weigh??
g
current info:
Size and weight
* 20-inch Apple Cinema Display
o Height: 16.1 inches (41 cm)
o Width: 18.5 inches (47.1 cm)
o Depth: 6.8 inches (17.4 cm)
o Weight: 14.5 pounds (6.6 kg)
* 23-inch Apple Cinema HD Display
o Height: 17.7 inches (45 cm)
o Width: 21.1 inches (53.6 cm)
o Depth: 7.3 inches (18.7 cm)
o Weight: 15.5 pounds (7.03 kg)
* 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Display
o Height: 21.3 inches (54.3 cm)
o Width: 27.2 inches (68.8 cm)
o Depth: 8.46 inches (21.5 cm)
o Weight: 27.5 pounds (12.47 kg)
Last edited by Brad : Today at 14:50. Reason: Posting huge bastard images like these inline is really bad etequitte.
I take it you're not back to your 'real' machine then...hmmm Mr. Grumpy? :p
curiousuburb
2004-06-28, 14:05
Specs of the new Nvidia card are here (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M9593G/A)
:eek:
DMBand0026
2004-06-28, 14:07
So how can this thing drive two 30" displays if each display requires 2 DVI ports?
It can't, not as far as I can figure. Not as long as we only have one AGP slot.
otoh, does anybody really need two 30" displays? :wow:
Specs of the new Nvidia card are here (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M9593G/A)
:eek:Apparently you can drive 2 30" screens from this beast. :eek: I took it from the keynote that you would need 1 GPU per 30". Interesting.
Yep... the 17" display in no longer being sold.
Refurbs or old stock only.
edit: removed wishful thinking about iMac
Hmm... you can buy it at the Canadian Apple Store still for $999 CDN. The 20" is $1799 CDN.
Apparently you can drive 2 30" screens from this beast. :eek: .
Holy bejeezus, you're right.
The combination of a GeForce 6800 Ultra with a dual processor Power Mac G5 driving two 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Displays is the definitive tool for the creative professional.
:wow: :wow: :wow:
:smokey:
BrandonAllan
2004-06-28, 14:40
Also from the system requirements:
"Windows-based PCs with graphics card that supports DVI ports with full single link digital bandwidth and VESA DDC standard for plug and play setup."
I guess it makes sense now that it's gone to DVI
windowsblowsass
2004-06-28, 14:40
The optional VESA mount lets you put a flat panel in surprising new places. So you can make your Apple display a seamless part of a museum kiosk, mount it on a wall in a office lobby or swivel changes to a client via an articulating arm
looks like wall mounted apple displays were real after all
DMBand0026
2004-06-28, 14:40
Question still remains...how?
If you only have 2 DVI plugs on the card and you have 2 DVI cables per display...that doesn't add up to me.
windowsblowsass
2004-06-28, 14:42
the display doesnt use two dvi plugs it uses one dual-link dvi plug (basically twodvi streamsin one plug) and the card has two dual-link plugs so there thats how
Without seeing pics I don't know, but it says right on the page that it supports two 30" displays. So I'm guessing the 30" display only has one DVI connector... it's just that it requires the dual DVI card in order to function.
BrandonAllan
2004-06-28, 15:12
from DDWG.org:
Dual Link
Dual Link DVI supports 2x165 MHz (2048x1536 at 60 Hz, 1920x1080 at 85 Hz). A dual link implementation utilizes all 24 of the available pins.
Single Link
Single Link DVI supports a maximum bandwidth of 165 MHz (1920x1080 at 60 Hz, 1280x1024 at 85Hz). A single link implementation utilizes 12 of the 24 available pins.
so it looks like it's one connector that packs twice the punch.
(the DDWG site says the dual-link DVI supports 2048x1536 but the new 30" display is 2560x1600. hmm)
MacUsers
2004-06-28, 15:16
I really want one... It's just too bad there is no price drop. There really could have been a price drop. I want a price drop. Now.
Major ball-buster of an announcement if you ask me. Not even so much as $100 mark down on either the 20" or 23" displays, and their specs are barely more impressive than the last generation. In fact, isn't the previous 23" model also a 400:1 screen in terms of contrast ratio? Seems like the only thing that has improved are the response time and the overall brightness threshold.
Obviously they were too cheap to use this screen (http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/) or something comparable... unless they just marked the specs down which seems unlikely knowing the RDF is in full effect.
OMFG !11! More screen ports!!!¡¡¡¡¡¡
[Correction: The old contrast ratio was 350:1 not 400:1, still a minor improvement given the current state of the art is closer to 600:1 for large monitors. The cd/m2 is 70 units higher as well. Anyone else underwhelmed?]
curiousuburb
2004-06-28, 19:20
Have you noticed the response rate of the new displays?
now 16ms... fastest refresh available.
They're now officially SWOP Certified (also industry leading).
Colour accuracy is more important than pure contrast ratio for most designers.
Actually, the prior variants are also SWOP-certified. You can get a brand new 23" ACD from Small Dog for $1799 now. Might be worth it if you're a graphics pro.
The response time is nice but that's purely a gaming thing. You are not likely to notice it in other aspects of usage IMO. Not saying these are crummy specs, just that they seem to be rather middling improvements over the previous specs... except maybe where response time is concerned I admit.
Thank God! -- no more ADC!
psmith2.0
2004-06-28, 19:42
First, that Think Secret drawing form a week or so ago was dead on. Wow.
Second, I think Tiger is going to be really nice, but I was stunned at the "available in 2005" stuff. Yikes. I just assumed, as in the past couple of years, he'd show it off today and we'd all be buying it in September.
Hard to get torqued up - OR disappointed - in Tiger, either way. As 2005 draws closer, bound to be more cool stuff coming out about Tiger.
Okay, now for the displays: I think they're really snazzy. Just now starting to poke around and read the details (that 25-page PDF is kinda nice), but I won't lie: I was completely heartbroken with a) the 17" was yanked and b) the price on the 20" wasn't lower. Psychologically, I can easily justify (and talk myself into) $999...but $1299?
I think they look nice. I love the thinner area around the display...not as much wasted space and added size/bulk. Something about that leg bothers me. The flare of it? The way it looks so small? It's a nice look, but when I first saw them, it just hit me as odd. However, it's kinda similar to that 17" Eyegonomic display I've been cooing over for a year now.
The display itself is thicker and boxier than I was imagine (and hoping for), but all-in-all, I think they're quite nice. Hell, I'm just happy they FINALLY - after an entire year - look as though they're supposed to go with the G5 (and the PowerBook). I'm big on looks, and can't help it. A company as style-conscious as Apple has been these past 5 or so years, that old plastic and clear display just bugged the shit out of me, sitting next to a G5.
Will I get one? I'd like to, sure. The 20" is what I had my eye on all this time. I won't buy it outright and on this like this - cool, luxury add-ons and nonessential purchases (iPod, Creature speakers, AirPort, etc.) I always pay for with money I make from freelance work. Just a nice little self-imposed "carrot/stick" thing I do, so I have to get off my ass and rustle up some design or illustration side jobs if I want cool stuff.
Keeps me honest...and makes me work extra for the nice little things in life. I could charge it today, but it would bother me deep down.
I'll go on into fall, most likely, and see if there are any price cuts in the next 3-4 months. Or maybe get a 4-month-old refurb, even?
The lack of a 17" makes me sad (I would've been happy with a wide (1440x900) 17" also, in this new styling/DVI set-up.
This kinda does one of two things:
a) Either the new iMac will continue to be an AIO (I think it will), or...
b) If there is a new "headless iMac" (or whatever you want to call it), perhaps there will be 15" and 17" white displays meant for THAT, rolled out upon the new iMac's introduction, whenever that is.
Just a thought. I haven't given up on the 17" just yet. Maybe it's just not going to appear swathed in aluminum and sporting a $1,000-plus price tag.
Next couple of months should be interesting, either way.
I like the new displays a lot, and if the 20" was $999 (as rumored), I would've bought it today, no question, the moment the store came back online. Something about that extra $300 just zaps the fun out of it for me, and makes me feel like I can wait...
:(
thegelding
2004-06-28, 19:54
cool idea paul of apple releasing a headless iMac and 15 and 17 monitors...have them slightly different in design...pro vs consumer etc
applestore still sells the 17" in the old style...doesn't seem to be going anywhere just yet
g
psmith2.0
2004-06-28, 20:31
I'm just saying...you never know (although I give it, honestly, about a 7% chance of happening).
Just seems so odd that they'd boot the 17". Although I suppose the thinking is "hey, if you're not a pro, we have TWO computers - three if you count the iBook - for you with monitors already in them...and if you ARE a pro, then 20" should be the minimum you'd want".
I mean, I don't know if they'd come right out and SAY that, but I'm sure it's the current line of thinking at Infinite Loop. Sure seems to be.
I think option "a" in my post above is most likely to be the case (the iMac - in whatever chip/design - staying AIO). And I guess that's okay (I'm not buying one, either way, so I don't care). But there IS indeed a bit of a hole, but I'm not sure how important or critical it is to fill (the lack of a sub-$1000 tower/pizza box/cube, sans display.
:confused:
Personally, I prefer AIO desktops (when have I EVER added a drive, changed out a card, added PCI cards, etc.), but I might be in the minority on that one.
I didn't mention this above, but I also think it's supremely cool that Windows users - if so inclined - might consider getting one of these new Apple Displays! How does Apple new stuff compare with what designers on the PC side might buy, LCD-wise? Pricing, features, size, etc.?
I'm sure more than a few will find themselves perched next to a Dell or some custom system. That can't be bad. Hit 'em with the iPod, hit 'em with iTunes. Dangle our displays in front of them, maybe show some leg - metaphorically speaking - with Tiger, a little cleavage with the new iMac, etc.
Kinda amusing that Apple's most successful "switch" efforts have been when they ditched those horrible commercials and just started making really a really neat three-pronged solution (iPod, iTunes, iTMS), and making it for everyone.
A lesson in there somewhere, I'm sure (but don't get me wrong: I don't think I'd want to go much more further than, say, iSight/iChat and MAYBE iPhoto...only because those two areas tend to suck on the other side and would benefit from Apple's approach. I DO NOT care to see OS X available for PCs. Ever. Screw 'em...they wanna see what all the fuss is about, they gotta buy a Mac.)
:devil:
Actually, the prior variants are also SWOP-certified. You can get a brand new 23" ACD from Small Dog for $1799 now. Might be worth it if you're a graphics pro.
The response time is nice but that's purely a gaming thing. You are not likely to notice it in other aspects of usage IMO. Not saying these are crummy specs, just that they seem to be rather middling improvements over the previous specs... except maybe where response time is concerned I admit.
Fast response time does not bode well for viewing angle and color quality, alas. Then again, maybe Apple has somehow been able to do it. I have got to play with one of those.
curiousuburb
2004-06-28, 20:46
The old 17 was 4:3 aspect ratio...
not widescreen 16:10 like the Lapzilla and iMac17
LCD cost is a function of area, and the square shape of the old 17 is larger,
therefore more expensive to manufacture than a widescreen 17.
I could see a case based on economies of scale for rereleasing the wide 17 used in iMac/PB, but the bezel and framing of the new displays might dwarf a 17 for those used to a slender iMac arm.
EDS66:
Maybe. They have been known to work directly with panel manufacturers to achieve a certain combination of specs that result in a higher image quality than what you see from 3rd party panels with similar characteristics. Maybe that's what the trade-off was: contrast ratio kept relatively low in order to not degrade performance with a higher response time?
I don't really understand the physics of LCD panels that well so I could be talking out me bum, but it's possible there is a relationship there somewhere.
I will definitely wait to hear the verdict on how the new displays' color gamut and clarity compare to the prior generation before buying one. Might make more sense to get the older variant at a lower cost.
psmith2.0
2004-06-28, 20:48
I called the Alpharetta Apple store today, following the keynote, and asked if they'd have display models arriving by the weekend. The guy said he wasn't sure, but to call back Thursday or Friday. I will, and I'll include Lenox Mall store too.
I might be taking a ride down to Atlanta Saturday, to see these things in person, if these stores get some display models in.
I've got nothing else to do, and I'll just make an afternoon of it...
:)
I'll go down there and end up wanting one, I know it...and be begging to buy their floor model.
:D
Pscates:
I think Apple is doing the right thing about dropping the standard 17-inch display. There are just too many other 17-inch flat panels out there that you can buy; and they are cheaper. Samsung has a 12-millisecond response time 17-incher out there. It is still a $100.00 less expensive that the slow and atavistic Apple 17.
Apple's claim to fame is the letterbox flat panel. Can you blame them for sticking to the Studio Display form factor across the whole line? I can't. I think it's a good thing. And a 17-inch cinema display would be just too small in my opinion.
Good riddance to all those square displays. Who wants them? Not me.
Oh, and yes, thank God the ADC is dead. Another Apple brain fart that has finally cleared.
psgamer0921
2004-06-28, 21:03
Jesus. Just imagine (if you have the space and money) if you had 3 30 " monitors linked together, you'd have a resolution of 7680*1600. ugh.....
(Is 2560*1600 the maximum resolution, or just the native?)
Jesus. Just imagine (if you have the space and money) if you had 3 30 " monitors linked together, you'd have a resolution of 7680*1600. ugh.....
(Is 2560*1600 the maximum resolution, or just the native?)
I think with what's out there, you can only do two. Although, on PCs, I wonder if you couldn't trick Matrox Parthelia to support something like that? .....
Nah.
Have you noticed the response rate of the new displays?
now 16ms... fastest refresh available.
They're now officially SWOP Certified (also industry leading).
Colour accuracy is more important than pure contrast ratio for most designers.
Not quite. Samsung has a 12-milli refresh 17-incher out there. Rave reviews from everywhere.
psmith2.0
2004-06-29, 13:21
So I'm curious...have any of you guys placed an order yet for one of these new displays? I'm sitting here, looking at them and trying my best to not be an idiot (and go against everything I said earlier in this thread).
:D
I really, really like how getting rid of that 2-plus inches of plastic around the screen has made these things seem really tight and compact. I mean, during that keynote video, when the 20" and 23" came up out of the floor, they almost looked SMALL. Amazing what getting rid of some extra plastic can do.
That 20" is only 18.5 wide. That'll be SO nice on a desk, next to my iCurve-perched PowerBook.
Quick, someone send a AppleAnonymous sponsor my way to talk me down...I feel myself getting weaker by the hour.
:p
BTW, would the 64MB ATi card in my PowerBook (previous generation 1.25GHz 15") drive both those screens okay (the 15" @ 1280x854 and the 20" @ 1680x1050)? Any foreseeable issues or problems of any kind here (I'm not a gamer of any sort, so do not factor that in to your answer...just want crisp, clear millions of colors).
So I'm curious...have any of you guys placed an order yet for one of these new displays? I'm sitting here, looking at them and trying my best to not be an idiot (and go against everything I said earlier in this thread).
:D
I really, really like how getting rid of that 2-plus inches of plastic around the screen has made these things seem really tight and compact. I mean, during that keynote video, when the 20" and 23" came up out of the floor, they almost looked SMALL. Amazing what getting rid of some extra plastic can do.
That 20" is only 18.5 wide. That'll be SO nice on a desk, next to my iCurve-perched PowerBook.
Quick, someone send a AppleAnonymous sponsor my way to talk me down...I feel myself getting weaker by the hour.
:p
BTW, would the 64MB ATi card in my PowerBook (previous generation 1.25GHz 15") drive both those screens okay (the 15" @ 1280x854 and the 20" @ 1680x1050)? Any foreseeable issues or problems of any kind here (I'm not a gamer of any sort, so do not factor that in to your answer...just want crisp, clear millions of colors).
I would need to look at them first. As I said earlier, those fast response times USUALLY carry a hefty penalty in terms of visual quality and viewing angle. I own one of the better ones, NEC’s 16-millisecond 17-inch TFT monitor (1760NX), and it's vastly inferior to any of the current Apple flat panels in terms of color uniformity, viewing angle, contrast, etc. Games look good on it, though; absolutely no ghosting in fps games.
Maybe, just maybe Apple has somehow been able to deliver both fast response time and excellent visual quality in these incredible looking displays.
I would also like to compare the new flat panels with each other in terms of visual quality. Currently, in my opinion, the Apple 20-inch Cinema display uses the best panel of all Apple flat panel monitors. The 23-inch one is not nearly as good in terms of color saturation and contrast.
So I wonder if Apple will be buying panels for their new aluminum 20 and 23-inch monitors from the same manufacturer. If the 23 uses the same glass as the 20, I think I would buy the 23. It’s HD and with that thin bezel, the extra screen real estate does not translate into that much extra bulk and size.
Needless to say I will be running to my local Apple Store as soon as they have some of these new beauties on display.
BTW, would the 64MB ATi card in my PowerBook (previous generation 1.25GHz 15") drive both those screens okay (the 15" @ 1280x854 and the 20" @ 1680x1050)? Any foreseeable issues or problems of any kind here (I'm not a gamer of any sort, so do not factor that in to your answer...just want crisp, clear millions of colors).
I think that 64 megs of video RAM is enough for both monitors. You might take a performance hit when using expose a lot, but in therms of doing everyday work, I think everythings will be just as fast.
Scates: I'm almost guaranteed to buy one before the end of the year. My CRT is about to hit the 5 year mark (which will officially make it unreliable as the phosphors do dwindle in intensity over time) and the thing just takes up too much space on my desk.
I will probably go for the 23" model, although entirely possible I would go for 2 20" models if I was really feeling like an idiot, as you put it. I have always wanted to put all my photoshop palettes on one screen while I work in another and now that it's my profession much of the time, I feel I could make real use of two.
But I won't buy anything until I read a couple reviews and hear from you guys and/or other Mac users who try them out first. So go ahead Paul, by all means test the waters!
:)
I agree the thin bezel is one of the best new features btw.
psmith2.0
2004-06-29, 21:24
Well, I'm going to give them a few weeks to arrive at the stores (called Lenox Mall in Atlanta today and was told they didn't see any on any "upcoming arrival" list, even for demo/display).
:(
But he said we expect to get them in about two weeks, so I'll go down some Saturday in mid-July and see what's what.
I understand why they're $1299 (I think), but man...I let that $999 rumor get wedged into my head too much. Oh well, just incentive to scrounge up some freelance work...
But if I waited until late autumn, that wouldn't kill me either. Would just like to see one in person. I figure that'll either calm me down/cool me on the idea OR really make me want it, then and there.
Could go either way.
:)
Heh. You'll probably get yourself worked into a geek-ware frenzy and not be able to resist purchase once you see one in person. I really can't afford one now either - I *don't* understand the $1299 price tag btw. Not at this point. They shouldn't be more than $1000 IMO, although the two firewire ports will be a nice addition. Still, adding a FW bus for them costs about $15 a monitor basically... that and the fact that LCD prices have been steadily declining over the last year or so leads me to believe they're gouging us a bit on this.
I really wonder how well the 30" will sell. I think very poorly after the first month (when all the "gotta get mine first" buyers will get them). I am willing to bet the 30" model at least, will be reduced in price by at least $300 within a year. You basically have to pay $4000 for that monitor because of the required card... that's fucking insane.
psmith2.0
2004-06-29, 21:57
Was the very first Cinema Display (22") something like $3999 when it first came out? Or am I imagining that? :confused:
Concerning the price of the 20", and I rarely say this about Apple, it's right on target mainly due to the response time of the panel (16ms). Almost all cheaper 20" panels out there are 25ms (= 40 fps). Take note of the 20" 16ms panel (http://www.sharpsystems.com/products/lcd_monitors/18-20_inch/ll-t2015/) from Sharp. Their price $1299. And that's a 4:3 panel.
Pscates, you are correct.
Screed
NosferaDrew
2004-06-29, 23:05
So I'm curious...have any of you guys placed an order yet for one of these new displays? I'm sitting here, looking at them and trying my best to not be an idiot (and go against everything I said earlier in this thread).
I'm waiting until I can go into the store and grab one.
I'm getting a 23" and a dual 2.5
My 12" PB seems dead since I dropped it off a table (and tried to install a new HD), so I think I'm going to get a refurbished 12" iBook from PowerMax (http://www.powermax.com/) just so I can get functional again (I've been a month without my PB!)
If the next Power Mac G5 has PCI Express ports and graphics cards, you can have as many displays as there are ports. So if you've got 2 ports that's 4 displays. Which is 4 more than I have money for.
Moogs' Law: If you have to crane or swivel your neck to view all the screen real estate available to your Mac... you have too much screen real estate.
:eek:
Hey I got a question... now that we're DVI-based... should Apple have an "ADC to DVI" connector dongle on this page? (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/72304/wo/OSV8FITz4Ty32NnQxRp1AXrcL3O/0.0.7.1.0.6.13.0.2.1.3.0.7.5.1.1.0) That is, supposing we want to power two new monitors off of a card with one ADC port and one DVI port? Or, would it have to be more than just a dongle (one of those converter brick things)?
Or is it even worse than that (you have to either buy a PC card with two DVI ports and flash it for Mac, praying that it works... or buy that stupid $600 NVidia card, which evidently doesn't have the GPU juice to outperform even a Radeon 9800 with CoreImage tasks)?
Every Mac that Apple has shipped with dual-display capability and an ADC port has had an ADC to DVI adapter included.
Also a GeForce 6800 will easily outperform (http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-27.html)a Radeon 9800.
You're thinking of the ADC-to-VGA adapter aren't you? [I didn't receive one with my G5...] As for the Nvidia card, I [screwed up.... I was thinking of the 5200, not the new dual port power card... supposedly the 5200 is relatively poor at performing the kinds of tasks CoreImage requires. Sorry].
The Power Mac specs page tells me you're right. My bad. I used to work in a Mac service centre and I always assumed the glossy white ADC to DVI adapters were from Apple, turns out they were from Belkin.
Barto
No worries. Maybe the new displays themselves will ship with an ADC-to-DVI dongle?
thegelding
2004-07-01, 15:47
thinksecret has put back up the drawings they had of the new screens...dang, it is exactly the same as what came out...nice job nick
here (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/newdisplays.html)
in my memory i knew they were close, but i didn't think it was that close....down to the hole in the middle of the rear support for the single cord
g
psmith2.0
2004-07-02, 20:06
Yeah, that was pretty righteous. Closest pre-release rendering I've ever seen, in the four-plus years I've paid attention to rumors and stuff.
On a related note, any of these screens popping up in your local Apple stores yet, even as floor/demo models? Was curious if anyone's had any real-life time spent with them.
Are they sturdy and stable? I guess it'll take seeing it in real life, but I still can't quite shake the feeling that they look wobbly or top-heavy. But I'm sure they're balanced nicely...and Apple thought of that plenty, before going into production.
:p
Then again, they've had weirder problems (Cube cracks, PowerBook white spots, iBook logic boards, etc.). Would hate to visit macminute.com one day and hear about a national epidemic of new Cinema Displays falling off people's desk when they sneezed or walked by it too fast...
:D
thegelding
2004-07-02, 20:21
ha....
there will be an epidemic of lawsuits of people who's screen fell over and injured their "privates" when they accidently "bump" their new apple displays while viewing porn
"and sir, could you please tell the court how it happened that you injuried both your right hand and your "delicates" on the night of august 18th?"
g
psmith2.0
2004-07-02, 20:39
"You see, your honor, my client was merely partaking of some adult-oriented visual stimuli, when the apparatus in question - manufactured by the defendANT - was caused, due to a structural and/or design defect, to fall over on Mr. Williams' penis, hereby caus...your honor, could you order the court reporter to control her laughter...I see nothing funny about the tragedy suffered by Mr. Williams. Let the record indicate my strong objections to the snickering from th...your honor, is laughter from you really appropriate at this juncture? May I remind the cou..".
Lawyers. :rolleyes:
I have a similar concern to Paul and that is, if the aluminum's thickness / rigidity is no different than that of the newer PowerBooks, I won't buy one. That stuff is so easy to dent / deform, it's ridiculous. Hopefully the new ACDs are housed inside something more akin to the handles and panels on a G5. Impervious to destruction!
^Bump
Just wanted to let you guys know that I spoke to someone from ATI who said dual-DVI cards for the new ACD displays will be available first quarter next year most likely.
I have a similar concern to Paul and that is, if the aluminum's thickness / rigidity is no different than that of the newer PowerBooks, I won't buy one. That stuff is so easy to dent / deform, it's ridiculous. Hopefully the new ACDs are housed inside something more akin to the handles and panels on a G5. Impervious to destruction!
Does the Aluminum in the G5 case scratch easily? Have you found it prone to small scratches?
Also, a lot of you mentioned that you're happy that ADC is gone... what about ADC was so bad? just curious.. :confused:
BlueRabbit
2004-07-05, 20:18
Also, a lot of you mentioned that you're happy that ADC is gone... what about ADC was so bad? just curious.. :confused:
You couldn't plug an ADC monitor into a powerbook without an expensive adaptor. Plus, there were plenty of PC people who would have bought an Apple monitor, but it wouldn't work on their computers.
Does the Aluminum in the G5 case scratch easily? Have you found it prone to small scratches?
There's a 2 or 3 small scratches on my G5, but nothing to get angry about. It's not like the whole fiasco with the G4 cube.
You couldn't plug an ADC monitor into a powerbook without an expensive adaptor. Plus, there were plenty of PC people who would have bought an Apple monitor, but it wouldn't work on their computers.
I see, so it wasn't performance related, as much as the proprietary nature of the adaptor. Thanks.
There's a 2 or 3 small scratches on my G5, but nothing to get angry about. It's not like the whole fiasco with the G4 cube.
Thanks Porter... the TI was also a bit prone to scratches and chips. :p
No the G5's finish is quite durable, and I wasn't kidding when I said the handles and side panels are pretty much "indestructable". I have banged into the side of my G5 by accident when pulling my steel-legged chair up to my desk several times - a couple times hard - and did nothing to it. I wisely re-arranged my under-desk layout and such but the point is, the aluminum on the G5s is the toughest thing ever to grace a Mac IMO.
By contrast I've seen the aluminum cases of PowerBooks get seriously dinged / permanently dented when exposed to relatively minor impacts from books and whatnot.
Hence my hope that the enclosure for the ACD displays is comparable in thickness to the handles / side plates of a G5.
Frank777
2004-07-06, 18:13
It will be interesting to see if any third parties copy the new form factor and give us a 17" option.
psmith2.0
2004-07-06, 18:52
Give it another two months... ;)
Would like for Apple to give us one, but noooooooo... :err:
hobbit.2
2004-07-07, 06:59
You couldn't plug an ADC monitor into a powerbook without an expensive adaptor. Plus, there were plenty of PC people who would have bought an Apple monitor, but it wouldn't work on their computers.
Well, the PC people's issue is actually identical to the PowerBook's issue. Both needed the very same adapter (DVI to ADC) to use the screen with their built-in DVI port (as neither PowerBooks nor PCs have ADC ports).
But the real issue with ADC, as much as I love the one cable concept, was that the graphics card needed to provide power too. It basically meant that graphic card vendors needed to build Mac specific, and Mac only, graphics card hardware. With the Mac's market share around 3-5% and with the PowerMac market share ca. 1/4 of that, this is not a big enough market.
This was the reason why there are seemingly few graphic cards available and usually introduced many months after the PC variant. If you look at the Apple Store, you will find that Apple offers a whooping 3 (!) different ADC graphic cards, most of them old technology. And that was all the choice we had.
The move back to DVI will hopefully allow many more graphic card vendors to re-enter the Mac market. Or at least allow ATI and nVidia to offer more choices to Mac users.
And the introduction of nVidia's GeForce FX 6800 is a very promising start.
Other than the plastic bezel, how does the old 20" compare to the new 20"? (Response time, contrast ratio, etc.)
My G4 (QS 2x800) has an ADC port, so if the old ones aren't significantly worse, I might pick up an old one to save a few bucks.
hobbit.2
2004-07-07, 16:19
how does the old 20" compare to the new 20"? (Response time, contrast ratio, etc.)
OLD 20" Apple Cinema Display:
Resolution: 1680 x 1050 pixel
Pixel pitch: 0.258 mm
Display colors: 16.7 million
Viewing angle: 170 degree horizontal, 170 degree vertical
Brightness: 230 cd/m2
Contrast: 350:1
Response time: 'ideal for full-motion video editing and playback'
Size (HWD): 17.3" x 21.34" x 6.93" (43.9 cm x 54.2 cm x 17.6 cm)
Weight: 18.9 lb (8.6 kg)
Connectors: 2x selfpowered USB 1
NEW 20" Apple Cinema Display:
Resolution: 1680 x 1050 pixel (same)
Pixel pitch: 0.258 mm (same)
Display colors: 16.7 million (same)
Viewing angle: 170 degree horizontal, 170 degree vertical (same)
Brightness: 250 cd/m2
Contrast: 400:1
Response time: 16ms (probably same)
Size (HWD): 16.1" x 18.5" x 6.8" (41 cm x 47.1 cm x 17.4 cm)
Weight: 14.5 lb (6.6 kg)
Connectors: 2x self-powered USB 2, 2x self-powered FireWire 400
The old 20" ACD was not 16ms. AFAIK, there were no 16ms panels available on the market when it was introduced. Probably it was between 20 and 25, based on what was common at that time.
hobbit.2
2004-07-07, 19:24
The old 20" ACD was not 16ms. AFAIK, there were no 16ms panels available on the market when it was introduced. Probably it was between 20 and 25, based on what was common at that time.
Whatever. Apple in those days didn't state any speed in ms.
Their PDFs said either 'ideal for full-motion video editing and playback' or their web site said 'Lightning-fast pixel response that supports full-motion digital video playback'.
Point is, if it was good enough for full-motion video then, the new one is surely good enough now. What else would one want?
Whether it's suitable for just full-motion digital video playback or super-douper hyper-fast speed-extreme full-motion digital video-blitz? What's the point? :rolleyes:
I put down the information I had for both displays, old and new, so people can easily compare them. But that's that. Nothing more available.
I'm not trying to say one screen or the other wasn't good enough... just pointing out that a claim of "ideal for puroses x, y and z" doesn't carry any weight legally or otherwise. No one can hold them to anything, because that's just a statement of opinion, where giving a ms rating is a measureable thing people can verify. If verified as something other than what's posted, that's false advertising, etc.
The point is, if the original had a great response time, they would've surely posted it. Apple is never shy about telling us when some aspect of their products has better specifications than the competition.
;)
hobbit.2
2004-07-07, 19:50
As you said, false advertising can only ever be claimed if one uses measurable quantities. So it's clear why people want to avoid this. ;)
Although IMHO, not everything needs to be measured. If it says 'poisonous', that's good enough for me. I don't need to know how poisonous, or how many minutes it takes the average man to die from something.
And not everything that can be measured makes sense to measure. For example while it makes sense to measure HD access times in ms, because faster access means faster transfer times, this doesn't work like that for displays. Once they are fast enough for full-motion video, that's it. Or would you want your DVDs to play faster, just because the screen can display them faster? Great, let's pump more frames per second to the screen so we can watch Titanic in just under 20 minutes! And hey, we didn't even skip a single frame of the whole movie! :lol:
But seriously, I think screens weren't measured in ms in those days. That's a new thing, and hence I believe Apple didn't give those numbers in previous display infos. Not because they had anything to hide.
If you look at the brightness or contrast figures they are almost identical between old and new. I expect the response times to be similarly close to each other.
There were many screens which carried response time specs, listed with a ms rating, when the 20" first came out. Most of the good LCDs around that time hovered around 20ms if I recall correctly. And while this was good for video and movies, it wasn't always good enough for gaming. Many people would complain that while their screen had great color and good DVD performance, they would experience ghosting problems when playing 3D video games.
Hence the ms rating is mostly aimed at gamers and letting them know how likely it is a given screen will perform when used with certain types of game titles.
hmurchison
2004-07-07, 21:09
Moving to VESA mounting was a great idea. LCDs are great but they don't always take up less space because most people tend to have the monitor 12-18 inches from their face. There's a bunch of empty room behind the LCD now. That's why i'm getting one of these
http://www.ergotron.com/3_products/flat_panel/neoFlex/images/45-160dizzy.jpg
Now I'll get my desktop space back and the benefits of the iMac screen without the limitations (teehee).
There were many screens which carried response time specs, listed with a ms rating, when the 20" first came out. Most of the good LCDs around that time hovered around 20ms if I recall correctly. And while this was good for video and movies, it wasn't always good enough for gaming. Many people would complain that while their screen had great color and good DVD performance, they would experience ghosting problems when playing 3D video games.
Hence the ms rating is mostly aimed at gamers and letting them know how likely it is a given screen will perform when used with certain types of game titles.
Although of course most "gamers" bragging about their display's response time bought the display for the wank factor, not how good it is.
I saw a $5000 CRT the other day... the owner obviously wanted CRT colour accuracy and response with LCD sharpness. More money than brains, it didn't come close to LCD sharpness.
Anyone who spends more than the $1500 or so required for a Sony Artisan (CRT), is certifiably insane IMO. The difference between that monitor and the Barco monitors or other status brands is not perceptible with the finished product (on screen or paper), let's put it that way. It's like people who buy drum scanners now... you'd have to be retarded almost, given how good Imacon's (and even Nikon's) scanners are.
Although of course most "gamers" bragging about their display's response time bought the display for the wank factor, not how good it is.I wonder... very, very small differences in screen refresh or network lag can be significant in FPS games when they are played on a sufficiently high level. I'm not a competetive player myself but I have played enough to tell some of the difference. Players I know tend to be serious about gaming.
Since the response times are almost invisible to anyone except the owner... I think the "wank factor" buyers are better off buying a larger display than a faster one.
Yah, if you don't play games much there's no reason not to opt for a bigger screen, all other specs being equal (contrast ratio, brightness, dot pitch, etc.)
Here's the ADC-to-DVI dongle that was missing from the Apple Store when these displays were first announced... I wonder if this means they won't ship one with each monitor.
dongle (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/70802/wo/YC7krY744miH2116k6r11rqQpWL/2.7.0.6.3.15.7.9.0)
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 09:58
Well guys, according to apple.com and all the usual Mac news sites, the 20" and 23" are now shipping! Yay! Any of you receiving one are expected to entertain us all with a photo essay of the unpacking and setting up of your new display, including lots of nice "from all angle" shots and perhaps even including a shot or two with some common, well-known objects beside the display so we can all get a sense of scale/size (can of Coke, a CD jewel case, loaf of bread, etc.).
Deal?
:)
MacUsers
2004-07-13, 13:00
I called up the Lenox Square store they said they would have them by next week.
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 13:58
:err:
I called them yesterday morning (Lenox AND Alpharetta) and they both said they expect them THIS week, for the weekend. I was actually planning a trip down on Sunday (lunch with the old man, a movie and an Apple store visit).
:)
Guess I'll call Saturday evening to get the latest...
MacUsers
2004-07-13, 14:31
Well he said next week at the latest but better make sure before driving that far.
Blueflame
2004-07-13, 14:59
My brother and I just bought a dual 2.5 GHz PowerMac with the 20" Aluminum Display. The display will come tomorrow, and I'd be happy to post photographs as we open the box and set it up. However, there is the problem of hosting the images as my new ISP (Adelphia) blocks http requests. If anyone can give me a workaround/place to host I'd be most grateful.
Blueflame
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 15:28
E-mail the photos to me or place them into my public .Mac folder (user name is same as it is here, and e-mail is in my profile) and I'll be happy as a clam to host them on my .Mac account for you, and for everyone to see!
:)
Please feel free...
Here are some good photos:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/resources/moazam/lcdLineup2.jpg
And in the "oh my effing god hide my credit card" category:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/resources/moazam/dual30.jpg
Whoa.
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 22:43
:D
I don't think I'd ever leave the house again if I had those two 30" models...
:eek:
That's borderline ridiculous!
Here are a few more, linked because some are too large for the page here. These are a new and old 20" display... taken from a MacRumors thread, but I don't want to use up their bandwidth so I hosted them myself.
Pic 1 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/1.jpg)
Pic 2 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/2.jpg)
Pic 3 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/3.jpg)
Pic 4 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/4.jpg)
Pic 5 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/5.jpg)
Pic 6 (http://homepage.mac.com/murbot/.Pictures/Displays/6.jpg)
Scates: what do you mean "borderline"? :D That's completely ridiculous, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be cool to have them. Then again, I wonder if even that souped up NVidia card would truly do a good job of driving both monitors....
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 23:09
:eek:
AWESOME pics, murbot. Thanks for posting! Those are exactly the kinds I've been wanting to see (real life pics of these things, as opposed to the staged, retouched-to-death Apple PR shots).
:)
And don't anyone EVER tell me that the old-style displays "went with the G5s just fine". Like hell they did, and this pic shows that clearly. Both absolutely gorgeous displays, but with the soft curves and clear plastic accents and glossy finish, the old style displays went PERFECTLY with the G4 towers, but looked like hell sitting next to the G5. NOTHING alike.
But these new displays are quite awesome and would look great next to a G5 OR a PowerBook (ahem...). Same texture, same clean lines, same color, got the folded/bent aluminum thing going (the display stand and the G5 handles), etc.
No contest which ones belong with a G5!
(but I gotta say: that MDD G4 and old-style Cinema Display really look great together too)
Thanks for posting those shots murbot. :)
The new displays have been a long time coming and I gotta agree with 'scates - the old clear plastic models never went with the new G5's. They were a great match for the G4 towers - but Apple should have been ready to go with a complete "redesigned" set-up first time around I reckon.
Nevertheless, they're here now and look great! I want one. :drool:
psmith2.0
2004-07-13, 23:30
Yeah, so odd that it took an entire year to have a proper display to pair with the G5. I guess they were ironing out design and engineering issues? Not to mention they probably still had gobs of the old-style displays in existence they had to sell off.
Still...never dreamed it would've taken them an entire year. When they didn't appear at MWSF in January, I was pretty shocked.
Those new displays are friggin beautimous. Amazing how Ive's can make his own previous designs look 'dated' :).
Thin bezel Apple displays. Finally. Makes my credit cards itch.
psmith2.0
2004-07-14, 04:01
Yeah, there's a good chance I'm going to be an idiot this weekend... :\
Lord, give me strength to resist temptation...for I know it is best. :p
archanix
2004-07-14, 08:31
My credit card itch was too strong and unfortunately I had no cream or medication for it. So, I have a 20" coming my way to pair with my 12" powerbook. However, the est. ship date is 8/10. Boo to that. :(
These bastards are just too damn nice. I have a feeling I might be posting a G5 + 20" Cinema Display setup pic before too long.
:D
psmith2.0
2004-07-14, 10:22
I think pretty much everyone here is expecting that, m. No surprise, that statement... :D
A perfect stop-gap strategy, merely to hold you over until the new iMac arrives in September! I say go for it.
:lol:
psmith2.0
2004-07-14, 20:48
I have a question about these displays and mirroring/spanning:
If, say, one was using a 12" PowerBook (a square-ish 1024x768) with a new 20" which is more of a widescreen orientation, and you were were doing the mirroring thing, how does that work exactly?
Does the square-ish image from the 12" PowerBook simply scale-up proportionately to fill the 20" and there is black "letterboxing" on the sides where the 20" is much wider than the PowerBook...OR, does the entire screen of the 12" fill up the 20", with the pixels horizontally "stretched" to do fill the entire screen?
Does my question make sense? Is it clear? :confused:
Secondly, about spanning:
Each device runs at it's own, native resolution, right? In my case, a 15" PowerBook and 20" Cinema Display: the PowerBook would be at 1280x854 and the 20" at 1680x1050, right? They don't try to "match" or anything goofy, do they?
As for mirroring, the external monitor will not be stretched, but there will be black bars on the all sides so that it is an exact pixel for pixel mirror of the laptop screen.
As for spanning, both screens will run at their optimal resolution assuming you have a graphics card that can power them both.
Nice! Let us know when it arrives.
psmith2.0
2004-07-14, 21:48
...and thrill us all with some nice pictures too, please! The box, the packaging, all angles, the foot, the cabling, turned on, etc.
I saw at the macnn.com forums a pic of the box...it looks like the PowerBook boxes: black with a pic on the front (life size, or close to it?) and a plastic "suitcase" handle on top.
Looks pretty simple and straightforward when opened up: lying there, surrounded by some form-fitting styrofoam, with the cables and power brick in little cut-outs below it. Probably super easy to get out, set up and running (< three minutes?)
:)
Hey now... let's not forget calibration time.
:)
Some guy on MacNN got his 20" today. The real-life pics are here:
http://homepage.mac.com/waltafalla/PhotoAlbum10.html
I know what I'll be getting for X-mas. ;)
Escher
And ijerry on .COM has posted pics as well.
http://homepage.mac.com/jerrynliz/PhotoAlbum38.html
With a 12-inch PowerBook too!
Escher
Rrrr. This thread is erroding my ability to curtail credit card spending this summer! Those are seriously nice looking.
MacUsers
2004-07-15, 14:34
they sure are...
I just measured out the would-be dimensions of the 30" version relative to my 22" CRT. The thing frickin dwarfs the entire chassis (not just the tube) of my monitor. Honestly, given how my desk is laid out and how tall I am in my chair relative to the monitor... I'd have to get a new swivel chair just to be at the proper height to view the monitor! I'm 6'1" btw. My dekstop stands about 30" above the floor, so do the math. :)
What I can't decide on now, is 2x 20" vs 1 23". Honestly I would only need the dual setup to stow all my Adobe palettes when I use those apps (weekly). But it seems kind of silly to spend $1300 to stow palettes. But OTOH, it would be nice to fill that entire 20" screen with image as I'm working on it. I'm trying to get used to the idea of having keyboard-activated palettes, so I just click them shut when I'm using the stylus, etc.
Have you guys ever set up your Photoshop palettes that way? The only thing is, I like to always have my history and layers palette open because it makes me nervous not to see the steps (I like to have at least 20 or so visible at all times) as they progress / see which layer is active, linked, etc.
psmith2.0
2004-07-15, 21:12
Yeah, on the Adobe stuff - Photoshop and Illustrator in particular...still learning the InDesign keys - I routinely work with all tools/palettes hidden and simply hit the letter key for the tool I want or hit the F key for the palette I'm wanting. In general, that's how I like to work. Sometimes, though, I'll have a few showing so I can monitor something.
As for the one 23" vs. two 20" dilemma (nice problem to have, bastard ;) ), I honestly don't know what I'd do on that. I'd probably opt for the single 23", just because it's less desk space taken up and everything would be right there, in one place, and not split across two planes.
I'm really hoping to see these things, and I really hope the Apple store has a 20" connected to a 15" PowerBook so I can get a really good idea of exactly how it would all look/work in my particular scenario.
:)
Those "real life" photos that are starting to trickle in make these displays look more gorgeous and slick than ANY of the stock Apple PR shots!
:eek:
They just look bad-ass, sitting there on that curved leg, and looking all sleek and tight. While that ThinkSecret illustration nailed the actual design, it didn't do justice to the look itself (the aluminum and white, the hinge connector, the sleek, smooth skin, etc.). I think these are one of the most striking and nicest looking products to come from Apple in a good while! I put it right up there with the summer 2000 iMac DVs (Ruby, Sage, etc.) and the G4 Cube.
I think these are one of the most striking and nicest looking products to come from Apple in a good while! I put it right up there with the summer 2000 iMac DVs (Ruby, Sage, etc.) and the G4 Cube.
Not to mention the iMac G5. :devil:
psmith2.0
2004-07-15, 22:16
Jury kinda out on that one... :err:
I'm kinda leaning in the 23" direction. Don't get me wrong; I technically can't afford either option, but I'm going to have to choose one pretty soon because my CRT is starting to crap out on me. I tried working the invisible palette route for a while and it works OK. But it's almost like the time I save by not having to use the grabby tool to move the image / canvas, is lost by pausing to remember which palette is hooked to which key.
I guess what I should do is stack as many of them together as I can so there are fewer keys to remember, but then the slow down comes when you have to move the mouse to choose a different tab.
One thing I kind of like about that Sketchbook Pro app is the new way of approaching toolsets. They're sort of grouped by general category and stowed invisibly but pop right up with a mouse click. I wonder if Apple could / will do something analogous with the Finder / Desktop / Dock functionality.
psmith2.0
2004-07-16, 08:31
My brother and I just bought a dual 2.5 GHz PowerMac with the 20" Aluminum Display. The display will come tomorrow, and I'd be happy to post photographs as we open the box and set it up. However, there is the problem of hosting the images as my new ISP (Adelphia) blocks http requests. If anyone can give me a workaround/place to host I'd be most grateful.
Blueflame
So let it be written, so let it be done...
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you...Blueflame's snazzy new 20" Cinema Display (http://homepage.mac.com/pscates/PhotoAlbum25.html)
:)
And then the denizens of Aldo Nova saw the light... and it was good.
Onya Paul - thanks for hosting the shots. :)
Damn - it's nice and sleek. Such an improvement on the previous screen in those photos.
Blueflame
2004-07-16, 11:03
Thank you, pscates, for hosting the images.
As it turns out, the LCD is flawless. Not a single bad pixel that I can see. :)
Now if only the G5 were here...
Blueflame
psmith2.0
2004-07-16, 11:15
You're welcome. No problem. Although I dig your old display too! I loved the glass 17" Studio Displays with the funky, "wrap around on itself" base!
DMBand0026
2004-07-16, 11:39
You're welcome. No problem. Although I dig your old display too! I loved the glass 17" Studio Displays with the funky, "wrap around on itself" base!
I love those things too. I still have one hooked up to my Cube. It's an awesome display. Not a single problem with it ever.
And to top it all off, it looks really really cool :)
ShiggyMiyamoto
2004-07-16, 21:42
damnit.. I want that now.. -_-
Got mine today. Hooked up to my 12" Alu. Powerbook.
IT'S. SO. WIDE!
IT'S. SO. BRIGHT!
IT'S. SO. SHARP!
I'm kind of lost on the desktop, rearranging my apps now with all the additional real estate.
...and yes, not a bad pixel among the 1.7 million. :D
Screed
MacUsers
2004-07-16, 23:03
post pix noooooow!
:)
Thank you, pscates, for hosting the images.
As it turns out, the LCD is flawless. Not a single bad pixel that I can see. :)
Now if only the G5 were here...
Blueflame
How's color uniformity. Is the bottom brighter than the top? Any side brighter than the other one. Are the whites pretty accurate? Any dead pixels?
ShiggyMiyamoto
2004-07-16, 23:58
What generation Allu 12" u got? 1 gig? 1.33 gig?
http://www.mindspring.com/~screed/sidebyside_s.jpg (http://www.mindspring.com/~screed/sidebyside.jpg)
Now my camera downplays the brightness a bit due to the flash and the Powerbook is at angle, but still the difference is real.
http://www.mindspring.com/~screed/angle_s.jpg (http://www.mindspring.com/~screed/angle.jpg)
The poor, old (19Kg!!) Syncmaster looking down from its perch. I'm still using it for the Cube peaking out on the right.
I'll connect the ACD to my PC (the shiny black thing the display's power box on the lower left) over the weekend. I want to see how Windows handles the resolution.
If I went truly, truly mad, I might buy a second one... depending on my employment status.
Screed
Madness is not always a bad thing, you know....
;)
NosferaDrew
2004-07-17, 17:59
I just bought a 23". It's all they had at the Apple Store, so I said "Why not!" :)
psmith2.0
2004-07-17, 18:07
Wow! Do you have some pics you can post?
I just called the Alpharetta store in Atlanta and they're completely sold out! They only have ONE 23" demo display.
:(
Rats. I was going down to check out the 20". Still going, just wanted to see the one I'd actually wind up getting at some point...
Would love to see your 23"
Okay, that was the worst thing I could ever type to another guy...
:eek:
:D
NosferaDrew
2004-07-17, 18:22
Heh.
Well, I'll take some pics in a bit - busy cleaning up the desk and changing things around for the new device.
I have to admit, and this is sacrilege I know, that I'm actually going to hook it up to my Pee Cee.
I'm so sorry. Really I am, but my dead 12" PowerBook won't drive it (even if it was functional), my new 12" iBook won't work with it either, so the gaming rig is all I have until I get a new G5 - the store did not have any dual 2.5's in stock.
NosferaDrew
2004-07-17, 19:58
It's beautiful. No dead/stuck pixels.
Now I just need to get some widescreen desktops - oh, and a G5. :D
http://homepage.mac.com/drew1/.Pictures/cinema01.jpg
"derrrrrr. which way did it go George, which way did it go...?"
NICE.
:drool: <- we need this smilie ;)
Blueflame
2004-07-18, 00:02
How's color uniformity. Is the bottom brighter than the top? Any side brighter than the other one. Are the whites pretty accurate? Any dead pixels?
As far as I can tell, the color is uniform on all axes (how it's uniform front to back I leave as an exercise to the reader). No dead pixels, and the white looks white, albeit not quite as white as the old CRT it replaced. The colors tend to shift a bit when the LCD is viewed from extreme angles, but the shift is only noticeable on blacks (it appears slightly reddish).
All in all, money well spent!
Blueflame
MacUsers
2004-07-18, 13:58
I'm at the Apple Store in Lenox Square and these displays are hot!.. I want one now!
Can you play around with them at all? Gaming test to see how the response time fairs? Photoshop for color?
psmith2.0
2004-07-18, 18:52
Ha, I was at the Alpharetta store only hours ago. :)
They only had one 23" in stock, and it was the demo model. No 20" or 23" to sell, but she said they're getting more in this week.
So I only saw the 23". And I love it. Which kinda alters all my plans. I no longer really have the desire for a 20" like I did before today...the 23" was just simply too bodacious and drool-inducing. SO MUCH SPACE TO WORK IN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:D
However, I can't really justify the 23" right now either.
What I'd LOVE to do, honestly, is get a 12" G5 PowerBook a year from now, or whenever they come out. Hopefully, by then, that model will come with the lighted keyboard and the option for 128MB graphics. I'd get that cute little monster AND a 23" Cinema Display and just have the most ass-kicking, best-of-both-worlds setup I could ask for (ultimate portability AND screen real estate).
:eek:
I honestly think I'd rather have a small PowerBook and large display than a mid-range 15" PowerBook and 20" Display. Seems more practical and more of a true, meaningful "difference".
Although this could change by tomorrow morning...
onlyafterdark
2004-07-18, 20:52
What I'd LOVE to do, honestly, is get a 12" G5 PowerBook a year from now, or whenever they come out. Hopefully, by then, that model will come with the lighted keyboard and the option for 128MB graphics. I'd get that cute little monster AND a 23" Cinema Display and just have the most ass-kicking, best-of-both-worlds setup I could ask for (ultimate portability AND screen real estate).
That is exactly what I am going to do. I cant use the new monitors with my rev. a 12" PB anyway so Im going to wait til the G5 PB comes out, whenever that is, and buy a 20" or a 23" screen to go with it. Now thats the stuff dreams are made of.
psmith2.0
2004-07-18, 21:12
They did have a 12" PowerBook hooked to an older 20" (it might've been the 23", I couldn't really tell) Cinema Display (the three-legged design) and it was quite cool to see that side-by-side and imagine having all that nice working space while at home, doing serious stuff, but then closing up that dinky little 12" and heading out the door (so small!).
Yeah, best of both worlds for sure.
I was with my Dad and he'd never really seen Apple's stuff, all of it, in real life and close up (he's only seen my tangerine iMac DV, iMac G4 and 15" PowerBook). But he was in total "jaw drop" mode at the Apple store today.
:D
He kept walking around, and looking at everything from all sides, touching it and just smiling. When he saw the new 23" I thought he was going to start slobbering. He loved the eMacs and was asking lots of questions about the 14" iBook. And he was playing with the iPod minis and seeing how many windows he could open on the 23".
:)
"I can't believe they make one this big!"
"Well, don't forget...they have a 30" coming too, Dad...AND you could put them side-by-side and drive them from one G5".
He couldn't quite get his head around that (I almost can't, and I'm used to this stuff!)
:lol:
Who said you can't teach on old dog new tricks? :)
They did have a 12" PowerBook hooked to an older 20" (it might've been the 23", I couldn't really tell) Cinema Display (the three-legged design) and it was quite cool to see that side-by-side and imagine having all that nice working space while at home, doing serious stuff, but then closing up that dinky little 12" and heading out the door (so small!).
Yeah, best of both worlds for sure.
I was with my Dad and he'd never really seen Apple's stuff, all of it, in real life and close up (he's only seen my tangerine iMac DV, iMac G4 and 15" PowerBook). But he was in total "jaw drop" mode at the Apple store today.
:D
He kept walking around, and looking at everything from all sides, touching it and just smiling. When he saw the new 23" I thought he was going to start slobbering. He loved the eMacs and was asking lots of questions about the 14" iBook. And he was playing with the iPod minis and seeing how many windows he could open on the 23".
:)
"I can't believe they make one this big!"
"Well, don't forget...they have a 30" coming too, Dad...AND you could put them side-by-side and drive them from one G5".
He couldn't quite get his head around that (I almost can't, and I'm used to this stuff!)
:lol:
If you're dad was thinking that about the 23"... he'll go crazy when he sees the 30". It sounds like they didn't have any at the store you went to... the 30" makes the others look like 10" screens. Seeing two of them together at WWDC was awesome. Too bad I don't have 10k for a dual 30" + G5 setup :D
I'd personally go with a 12" PB + 20" as an ideal setup... can't justify the price delta betwen 20" and 23".
MacUsers
2004-07-18, 21:30
If you're dad was thinking that about the 23"... he'll go crazy when he sees the 30". It sounds like they didn't have any at the store you went to... the 30" makes the others look like 10" screens. Seeing two of them together at WWDC was awesome. Too bad I don't have 10k for a dual 30" + G5 setup :D
I'd personally go with a 12" PB + 20" as an ideal setup... can't justify the price delta betwen 20" and 23".
Remember they don't have 30's till August.
Edit: N/M, misunderstood comment.
Regarding the 30" models at retail locations, makes you wonder what they're going to do at CompUSA and other places, where the NVidia 6800 (or whatever it's called) is not going to be shipped as an OEM option with the G5.
Maybe they'll do the old, video card in a white box treatement, perhaps offer a rebate for those buying a G5 and a 30" screen together, in order to get the extra video card / make it easier to stomach since you can't BTO with the card installed from the start.
What I'd LOVE to do, honestly, is get a 12" G5 PowerBook a year from now, or whenever they come out. Hopefully, by then, that model will come with the lighted keyboard and the option for 128MB graphics. I'd get that cute little monster AND a 23" Cinema Display and just have the most ass-kicking, best-of-both-worlds setup I could ask for (ultimate portability AND screen real estate).
That is exactly what I am going to do. I cant use the new monitors with my rev. a 12" PB anyway so Im going to wait til the G5 PB comes out, whenever that is, and buy a 20" or a 23" screen to go with it. Now thats the stuff dreams are made of.
The Best of Both Worlds! That's what Apple's small (but not quite sub-) PowerBooks have been all about since the PowerBook Duo in 1992. The new 20" and 23" ACDs with DVI-in make this even more true.
Even though the Rev.A 12-inch PowerBook came out 18 months ago, I'm glad I waited for Rev.C. I can now get DVI, more Ghz and RAM, and all the little kinks of the Rev.A and Rev.B have been worked out. My wallet and I are also glad that I squeezed a solid three years of use out of my iBook (Dual USB), even though it was a Rev.A machine plagued by a design defect in the backlight cable/hinge.
Even with "just" an external 1280x1024 17" LCD, driven by the 12-inch in clamshell mode, I feel like I have entered a new dimension. The PowerBooks are very ergonomic. But nothing beats a desktop setup when you're at a desk.
I have no doubt that Apple will introduce a 12-inch PowerBook G5 in due time. (My hunch is late summer/fall 2005.) Together with a 20" or 23" ACD the 12-inch G5 will be an even better "best of both worlds." Personally, however, I will likely wait for Rev.B of the 12-inch PowerBook G5 at the very least. Maybe in 2006? I just hope that Apple re-introduces a Duo-style Dock long before then. ;)
Escher
Well, I finally saw the displays. The Apple Store at Tysons Corner just got them. They had both the 20 and 23-inch ones. I was very impressed.
The color is uniform, no hotspots, and the viewing angle is excellent -- perhaps a tad worse than my 20-inch Cinema, but excellent nonetheless. I dragged some windows around to check pixel refresh (window boarders usually betray slow pixel refresh by ghosting all over the place) and saw virtually no ghosting. Very nice! I wish Apple loaded some first shooter game to test the alleged 16-millisecond pixel response.
The white point is decent: better that the 23-inch cinema, but not quite as good as my 20. Color saturation, vibrancy was good; again the older 20-inch cinema display looks a little better to me, but the current crop is still superior to anything else I've seen.
Brightness and contrast seemed very good, especially brightness.
One final thing of note is that there does not seem to be any difference between the displays in terms of quality/color/white point. The new 20 and 23 seem to be made of the same components, only one is bigger than the other. This was not the case with the 20 and 23 plastic cinema displays: the 20 was noticeably better than the 23.
The only thing that I did not like all that much was the feel of the plastics used for the display. The bezel looks very nice; it's thin and matches the G5s perfectly. But when touched, the bezel feels sort of dinky.
These are my impressions.
NosferaDrew
2004-07-20, 20:47
I wish Apple loaded some first shooter game to test the alleged 16-millisecond pixel response.
UT2004 plays beautifully on my 23".
I've played on older, smaller flat panels and compared to this one, it's night and day.
http://homepage.mac.com/drew1/.Pictures/cinema_ut.jpg
UT2004 plays beautifully on my 23".
I've played on older, smaller flat panels and compared to this one, it's night and day.
http://homepage.mac.com/drew1/.Pictures/cinema_ut.jpg
Very nice!
That is seriously impressive looking.
Note: EDS, the new 23" display is 20 cd/m2 brighter than the 20" model, though I don't know how that translates when viewed under the brigh flourescent lights of retail land... either way, by definition the 23" and 30" models should have a slightly larger gamut than the 20" model.
psmith2.0
2004-07-21, 09:57
In all seriousness, what is realistically the limit or shortcomings I'm going to experience with 64MB graphics, trying to drive a 20" or 23" new Cinema Display?
Would closing the PowerBook make a difference?
What about using it open, in spanning mode?
I don't imagine a problem with the 20", but I've heard talk about the other. Can 64MB comfortably drive a 15" PowerBook AND a 23" Cinema Display, with no noticeable loss of performance or response?
I'm guessing no, but I really don't know...
Would LIKE to know, as I'm coming up on a tidy little sum from some side work...
:D
In all seriousness, what is realistically the limit or shortcomings I'm going to experience with 64MB graphics, trying to drive a 20" or 23" new Cinema Display?
Would closing the PowerBook make a difference?
What about using it open, in spanning mode?
I don't imagine a problem with the 20", but I've heard talk about the other. Can 64MB comfortably drive a 15" PowerBook AND a 23" Cinema Display, with no noticeable loss of performance or response?
I'm guessing no, but I really don't know...
Would LIKE to know, as I'm coming up on a tidy little sum from some side work...
:D
None in terms of speed/work flow. Perhaps some slow-down when using expose with lots of windows.
My opinion.
That is seriously impressive looking.
Note: EDS, the new 23" display is 20 cd/m2 brighter than the 20" model, though I don't know how that translates when viewed under the brigh flourescent lights of retail land... either way, by definition the 23" and 30" models should have a slightly larger gamut than the 20" model.
May very well be.
But my 20 has sharper colors and more natural white point than the new Apple displays.
This is uncontestable.
PS: Moogs which 20 are you talking about? I did not see any difference (subjectively) in brightness between the new 20 and 23.
Was talking about the new 20 having slightly lower maximum brightness / white point. BTW White point is an arbitrary thing; there is no "natural" or "unnatural" unless you're considering anything in the range of 5000 - 6500K as "natural" and everything else "unnatural". As for colors, do you mean they're more saturated? Are the monitors you compared both calibrated in the same way and sitting inthe same ambient light? There are lots of factors that might lead me to believe such claims can be contested.... ;)
I would be surprised if in a neutral room with 5000K ambient light, the new displays didn't perform a little better color-wise. Not a lot. I mean the specs are pretty close except for response time, but LCDs have gotten better over the last two years, and presumeably they're using the same or equally good suppliers.
Have you viewed them in teh same environment / multiple environments? Sometimes retail outlets do a crappy job of calibrating monitors for their overhead lights, etc.
I would be surprised if in a neutral room with 5000K ambient light, the new displays didn't perform a little better color-wise. Not a lot. I mean the specs are pretty close except for response time, but LCDs have gotten better over the last two years, and presumeably they're using the same or equally good suppliers.
I am telling you the old 20 is better. Not because I have it but because it's just better. But it's also slow and has a big bezel. Alas.
i am going to buy the new 23 regardless simply because of the aesthetics.
OK. You can tell me that all you like (and be very confident in your assertion) but I have studied a lot of color theory and color management techniques, and I'm telling you: your eyes can play tricks on you if the displays being compared aren't in the same room at the same time, under the same ambient light, with hardware calibrated profiles.
Seriously, the old 20 is an excellent display by all accounts. I have no doubt. However, you cannot judge the color purity or brightness charcteristics of an LCD in a retail store. You just can't. They are rarely calibrated, always in crappy lighting conditions and there can be power supply issues too with lots of monitors drawing from one outlet, etc.
OK. You can tell me that all you like (and be very confident in your assertion) but I have studied a lot of color theory and color management techniques, and I'm telling you: your eyes can play tricks on you if the displays being compared aren't in the same room at the same time, under the same ambient light, with hardware calibrated profiles.
Seriously, the old 20 is an excellent display by all accounts. I have no doubt. However, you cannot judge the color purity or brightness charcteristics of an LCD in a retail store. You just can't. They are rarely calibrated, always in crappy lighting conditions and there can be power supply issues too with lots of monitors drawing from one outlet, etc.
Could be.
But I tell you the white point on the old 20 is colder and more natural than on the new 20. The old white point leans towads the blue -- which is how I like it -- the new, towards the red. I don't like that.
As far as manipulating the color profile...I don't know. I don't think there is much you can do with a TFT. My opionion.
All that said, I feel that the new displays are very good; the 23-inch unit especially.
curiousuburb
2004-07-22, 00:27
In all seriousness, what is realistically the limit or shortcomings I'm going to experience with 64MB graphics, trying to drive a 20" or 23" new Cinema Display?
Would closing the PowerBook make a difference?
What about using it open, in spanning mode?
I don't imagine a problem with the 20", but I've heard talk about the other. Can 64MB comfortably drive a 15" PowerBook AND a 23" Cinema Display, with no noticeable loss of performance or response?
I'm guessing no, but I really don't know...
Would LIKE to know, as I'm coming up on a tidy little sum from some side work...
:D
Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/pb12.html) compares the upgraded 15Al with 128MB VRAM and 5400rpm drive vs identical 'stock' 64MB 15 with 4200rpm drive (both driving a 23")
YMMV.
Could be.
But I tell you the white point on the old 20 is colder and more natural than on the new 20. The old white point leans towads the blue -- which is how I like it -- the new, towards the red. I don't like that.
As far as manipulating the color profile...I don't know. I don't think there is much you can do with a TFT. My opionion.
All that said, I feel that the new displays are very good; the 23-inch unit especially.
moogs is right wrt casual visual perception being unreliable. the white point is easily set by the user in system prefs > displays > color tab > calibrate... > expert mode. you are correct that out of the box they seem to be reddish. that was my experience at the emeryville apple store, but i re-calibrated their 23" display while i was standing there and it's now a gorgeous 6500° neutral white. if they could not be recalibrated this way, they would be worthless, imo.
i'm not sure why you're of the opinion that tfts are not color adjustable - it's a digital interface, so all the system needs to do is adjust the rgb output values to the display based on the curves generated in the calibration procedure. it's true that you can't adjust under/overscan, position, rotation, barrel/pincushion distortion and rgb alignment as you can on a crt, but all of those characteristics are always perfect on an lcd.
Welcome to the forums, tood.
Thinking of making a purchase by chance? :) I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you did get one, in terms of how they perform once calibrated, in a variety of environments. Particularly color-critical environments like graphic design. The more opinions we can get from users the better, as it will help everyone make the best buying decision.
psmith2.0
2004-07-24, 20:15
Well, I'm getting one. No prob, really, on the 20". Anyone care to convince me to get a 23"? Or to not? What's everyone's opinion on the whole thing, 20" vs. 23" (and factoring in price, how I'll be driving it, etc.).
1.25GHz PowerBook G4 with 64MB ATi something-or-other...although for any future PowerBook purchase, I'll be springing for the 128MB VRAM option (if it's not already the default configuration).
Going to 23" worth the extra $700 in anyone's opinion? Worth it for "future-proofing" reasons, maybe? A couple of years from now, a 23" will still be seen as a big-ass, usable display? Or is the 20" - and it's $1299 price - the agreed-upon sweet spot of the bunch?
I could go either way, to be honest...especially after spending some time with that 23" last weekend. :eek:
Could get the 20" tomorrow, if I wanted. But do I do another freelance gig or two and spring for the 23"?
What would you do, if money for the 20" were no object...and money for the 23" is gotten fairly easily (within a month, maybe).
Think Photoshop Palettes. With a 23" display you can actually afford to have a row of them open at all times and still have large image magnification settings active. Not to mention multi-spread space for print work.
Common admit it; you know you're trying to talk yourself into it. Get the 23... the 23... it's calling your name.
MacUsers
2004-07-24, 23:03
Im debating on the same thing right now... but I'm probably going to go for the 20" and get a good printer or something for the rest. $700 is so much money and it's not that big of a difference I guess. I think I'm convincing myself to get the 20" now.. but I'm still not sure myself. Choices choices.
Welcome to the forums, tood.
Thinking of making a purchase by chance? :) I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you did get one, in terms of how they perform once calibrated, in a variety of environments. Particularly color-critical environments like graphic design. The more opinions we can get from users the better, as it will help everyone make the best buying decision.
i am going in for the 23". i would have tried to stretch to the 30" if it could be driven by my 1GHz Ti PB. the radeon mobility 9000 in it maxes out at 2048 x 1536, but there's really not much out there in lcd at that resolution. there's the totoku ccl316, but it's not the prettiest, it's not too easy to go see one in person, i don't like buying displays sight unseen, and the pixels are packed especially tight @ 20.8". so, i'll settle for 1920 x 1200. the 17" eizo tx-c7s crt on my desk has deteriorated to the point of noticeable phosphor burnout - i really stretched it beyond its useful life in holding out for apple's display revision. i'm glad i did now that the nightmare of adc has officially past...
the studio it will be in has 12 windows, so i will be able to use it in a variety of lighting conditions throught the day without moving it, and i'm a designer by trade, so i should be able to give you reasonable info when i have it. of course, by the time i receive it, it may be old news. the order won't be placed until next week.
Well, I'm getting one. No prob, really, on the 20". Anyone care to convince me to get a 23"? Or to not? What's everyone's opinion on the whole thing, 20" vs. 23" (and factoring in price, how I'll be driving it, etc.).
pscates, i've seen your work. you are 23" worthy. you do pay a premium for it in the near term (it's 30% larger in pixels, but about 50% larger in dollars), but it's a purchase that will last over several machines. if you look at it as a 5 year purchase, the difference in dollars is only about 12 bucks a month, but the difference in pleasure between the two is going to be worth much more than that. to me anyway, there's never enough room. the display is the computer.
That's a good way to rationalize the extra expense I'd say. And it's true: the monitor is probably the single biggest element of computer usability for many workflows. And truthfully, I think the 30" might be overkill in the sense that most people - at common viewing distances - will have to swivel their head slightly to see the tools / items that reside near either edge of the screen.
I've worked on the old 23" ACD a fair amount, and the 22" also. I think the 23" is just about the perfect blend of "big screen real estate" and not having to move anything but your eyes. The ideal would be about 24 or 25" IMO. I'm actually kind of surprised Apple jumped up that high (30") from 23.
Sounds like you've got a pretty slick work environment. Look forward to hearing your thoughts once you receive the display....
psmith2.0
2004-07-25, 04:55
pscates, i've seen your work. you are 23" worthy.
Well hell, that's better than being "sponge worthy"! :p
I dunno 'scatesy - if Elaine Benes had given me the nod I'd have taken that as a higher compliment! ;)
I'm going to be deciding between the 23" LCD and the 30" LCD soon and have a question about the "HD" designation. Please don't flame as I know *nothing* about HDTV/HD other then it's a very nice digital signal TV or something.
So my question is, can I use these displays as HDTV displays? i.e., Can I use them standalone to watch fancy TV? What do I need, some sort of receiver? Where does the TV cable plug into the monitors (I dont recall seeing any TV looking ports on these LCDs)?
Or, does this "HD" designation on these LCDs have nothing to do with HDTV?
Thanks
-M
Barracuda
2004-08-11, 21:53
I took a look at the new displays at an Apple store today, and while I like the design quite a bit, I wasn't impressed with the viewing quality of the screens. For instance, the browser windows in Safari looked all washed out, ie: the metal imprinted name of the webpage on top of the browser window was really pale and not very bold. I adjusted the display brightness and it had a spotlight effect leaving the corners of the screens not adjusting as much as the middle...I thought that was TERRIBLE!!! Maybe I'm just used to my old La Cie CRT...it's crystal clear and has much more definition!!! As an artist who notices these kinds of things, I'm just wondering if this is my artist's eye, or maybe the lighting itself is too bright in the Apple store? Can anyone tell me if they have noticed this when they got there display home and in a working environment? The funny thing is, I didn't notice this on the old model flat panel displays in the Apple Store as much. In fact, the 20" iMac display quality was gorgeous, as well as the old 20' Flat panel display! But I think the displays in general would look much better in the Apple Stores, with different kinds of lighting. I also think the notebooks should be closer to eye level instead of hunkering down over the table to look at them.
I'm pretty sure Apple stores use some type of Halogen or Flourescent lighting. Very bright, and much more a blueish cast on their products than a yellow one. This would probably have the effect of making any LCD look slightly flat (because the lights are so intense and everything around you is white).
Another possibility: poorly calibrated or just defective. That said, no LCD is going to compare to a Sony Artisan or other expensive CRT. It should be pretty comparable to LaCie's stuff or Mitsubishi though (which is what I have).
I don't want to put a damper on things here, but I'm wondering how these new displays hold up against those from Sony w/X-brite technology.
Also, given some comments on the heat generated, why didn't Apple add some tiny perforated holes on the top rear portion of the display (like the previous 20")?
That said, if I had the money, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. :)
What?! No speed holes??
That's it... I'm not buying one now. :D
Side Note: NEC will be releasing a high definition LCD for graphic designers which will encompass 100% of the Adobe RGB98 color space and then some. This screen might be preferable to Apple's newest models for designers, however it's likely to use 4:3 format and to have a poor response time (20ms+) relative to other new screens. Should be out around the end of the year.
nguyenhm16
2004-08-13, 13:04
Or, does this "HD" designation on these LCDs have nothing to do with HDTV?
It just means that it can display HD video at full resolution (e.g. 1920x1080 pixels is one of the official HDTV resolutions) or better.
On a related note, lots of HDTV tuners, DVD players, etc. have DVI output. However, it's questionable if they work w/ Cinema Displays (or other computer displays) since many of those devices encrypt the DVI output with HDCP copy protection, at the behest of the MPAA, of course.
Here's more on that 21" (1600x1200) NEC display I was talking about. Seems this is actually an LED-backlit display so the price may well be closer to Apple's 23" model than the 20"... maybe more. Says Q4 of this year, so maybe we'll find out soon since they usually put their new product pages on the site a month or so in advance of shipping dates.
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/press/PressDetail.cfm?document_id=1124
DMBand0026
2004-08-14, 12:10
LED backlit, now that's cool. Those things will have a life on 'em that's unmatched. I bet they look pretty great too. LEDs can give off some pretty awesome light. I look foreword to seeing one, and to seeing if the rest of the industry follows suit.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.