Apple Cinema Display Updates?

[MacRumors]

AppleInsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/news.php?id=216) that "reliable" sources have indicated that Apple will be introducing a new 30" High Definition display in November, featuring a new aluminum based display casing. The 17" LCD is said to be discontiuned at that time.

Meanwhile, ThinkSecret (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/octoberroundup.html) posted an unconfirmed report earlier today that suggests that Apple LCD case revisions are not expected, but merely refreshed internal components.

The 30" Apple LCD rumor first appeared on our 2002 Rumor Reject list (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/01/20030101214437.shtml). Two rumor items (iTunes Music Store and Keynote) have since come true from that list. The 30" LCD rumor was later revived (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/03/20030314111341.shtml) in March 2003 with an unconfirmed resolution from the now-defunct MacWhispers.com.

Both sites hint at iBook and eMac revisions later this year.

[weezer160]

wow, that's pretty big

[tutubibi]

No 17". I don't think so.
Apple needs entry level display for people that are buying PowerMacs and even notebooks. Without 17", the lowest priced apple display would be 20" at almost $2,000 CAD.

Maybe they will replace 17" with 17" wide? :confused:

[DanUk2003]

mmm.... 30" HD Cinema Display....

(drools in Homer Simpson-style)

:D

[arn]

Macwhispers' rumored rez for the 30" was

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/03/20030314111341.shtml

2400x1500

but I wouldn't necessarily count on it.

arn

[Peyote]

Originally posted by tutubibi
No 17". I don't think so.
Apple needs entry level display for people that are buying PowerMacs and even notebooks. Without 17", the lowest priced apple display would be 20" at almost $2,000 CAD.

Maybe they will replace 17" with 17" wide? :confused:


If the 17 is discontinued, there's nothing to say that Apple wouldn't drop the price of the 20"


Even still, I doubt the 17 will be dropped.

[Ambrose Chapel]

yeah i can't see them dropping the 17" either...unless it's just not selling at all. maybe they are dropping it to replace it with a 17" widescreen display?

[Peyote]

Would a 30" screen even be practical?

I mean, how useable would a screen that size be? You would have to constantly turn your head back and forth just to see each edge of the screen.

[1adonis1]

Apple dropping prices?!?!? First the Cubs make the playoffs...now this!:)
Originally posted by Peyote
If the 17 is discontinued, there's nothing to say that Apple wouldn't drop the price of the 20"


Even still, I doubt the 17 will be dropped.

[kryten2000]

Be nice to see a g5 emac or imac in the future.

[aphexist]

Originally posted by Peyote
Would a 30" screen even be practical?

I mean, how useable would a screen that size be? You would have to constantly turn your head back and forth just to see each edge of the screen.

2400x1500

That's why it's usable. Multi-display systems are the standard in my company, and on a good percentange of power-user's home systems. That resolution contains roughly the number of pixels of three 1280x1024 displays (usually 17"-19") in a large format. For users who need multiple windows (code, consoles, web pages, design programs, etc...) this could be an attractive offering. And no screen bezels to get in the way.

On the other hand, I like to have my three LCD's in a curved formation so that each screen is equidistant from my eyes. Having a widescreen of that size *might* be disorienting, but you wouldn't catch me complaining.

[nagromme]

I CAN see the 17" going away--IF it gets replaced by a NEW 17". A widescreen, I'd say, just like the iMac/AlBook.

And all the displays really need a new non-clear look to match the pro towers. Same with the keyboards and mice. (I know, that would make for 4 keyboards AND 4 mice from Apple!)

(As for MacWhispers... it seems to have been little more than a prolonged, painful hoax, created to drive traffic to companies owned by the same guy.)

[Peyote]

Originally posted by 1adonis1
Apple dropping prices?!?!? First the Cubs make the playoffs...now this!:)


Apple drops prices regularly on older technology such as a 17" screen.

[immac]

OOOFAH, that's perty BIG......
I woulda' been happy with a "new improved" 23 that I could rotate vertically..

[beefcake]

Even if it isn't practical, people will buy it, even if for no other reason than to say they have the biggest LCD Apple sells. Apple certainly doesn't aim their products and the middle class- several thousand dollars for a monitor?

[Peyote]

Originally posted by aphexist
2400x1500

That's why it's usable. Multi-display systems are the standard in my company, and on a good percentange of power-user's home systems. That resolution contains roughly the number of pixels of three 1280x1024 displays (usually 17"-19") in a large format. For users who need multiple windows (code, consoles, web pages, design programs, etc...) this could be an attractive offering. And no screen bezels to get in the way.

On the other hand, I like to have my three LCD's in a curved formation so that each screen is equidistant from my eyes. Having a widescreen of that size *might* be disorienting, but you wouldn't catch me complaining.


The resolution of the screen has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I know what resolution is and how it works. I'm not talking about the physical size of the things on the screen. I'm talking about the screen being so wide that in order to look from one edge of the screen to the other you're gonna have to turn your head quite a bit. POSSIBLY enough so that it's not practical. In all likelyhood, most people with a screen that big would just end up putting most windows and floating pallettes on one side of the screen or just in the center so they don't have to turn their heads. But then you're defeating the purpose of the screen size. I just don't see it being practical enough to use. I think the 23" screen is the perfect size.


The only instance I could see using a 30" screen would be for video editing, or when a home user wants to use the screen for tv watching as well. That I could dig. Assuming Apple put out a screen that could display both VGA and NTSC with good quality.

[arn]

Originally posted by Peyote
In all likelyhood, most people with a screen that big would just end up putting most windows and floating pallettes on one side of the screen or just in the center so they don't have to turn their heads. But then you're defeating the purpose of the screen size. I just don't see it being practical enough to use.

I disagree

http://www.macrumors.com/downloads/darkscreen.jpg

arn

[Peyote]

Originally posted by arn
I disagree

http://www.macrumors.com/downloads/darkscreen.jpg

arn



Where do you live Arn, I've been wanting a 23" for a while now....looks like you've got an extra one I'd love to take off your hands!

[machan]

As someone who uses Macs for graphic design, music recording and video editing I would love to have a 30 inch monitor. I likely couldn't afford one, but the good news would be the 23 inch monitor would drop in price and I could get one of those (next year, when I get a dual 3ghz G5). Price drops are always a given with monitors.

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by nagromme


(As for MacWhispers... it seems to have been little more than a prolonged, painful hoax, created to drive traffic to companies owned by the same guy.)


And now it strangely points to yourmaclife.com and there's also this website exposing the owner. I wish I could find out who's responsible, the stories are hillarious.

www.jackwhispers.com

[arn]

Originally posted by Peyote
Where do you live Arn, I've been wanting a 23" for a while now....looks like you've got an extra one I'd love to take off your hands!

they're 20"s actually. But more screen space is like RAM. You can never have too much. :)

Obviously, the 30" display will be for Apple's high end market.... but I'm sure there are those who want/need it.

arn

[evolu]

what better way to make use of osx's ability to run multiple apps without crashing than to be able to see all the apps running without crashing?

I'm in.

[Peyote]

Originally posted by machan
As someone who uses Macs for graphic design, music recording and video editing I would love to have a 30 inch monitor. I likely couldn't afford one, but the good news would be the 23 inch monitor would drop in price and I could get one of those (next year, when I get a dual 3ghz G5). Price drops are always a given with monitors.



Well yeah, I think everyone would love to have a 30" monitor. My point is only Is it practical? I HIGHLY doubt that monitor will cost 1999 like the 23" now does. My guess would be more like $2500. At that point is it practical? I mean, I'd love to have a Lambourghini (sp?), but do people find that car practical? Would it be worth it for Apple to invest the time and R&D into a product that is really just a status symbol? I agree that to an extent, Macs are status symbols, but at what point does it start to become less about usability, and more about "wow"...at which point IMHO, it becomes impractical.

[dongmin]

Along with USB 2.0 ports, stunning color, and faster refresh rates, the new displays will sport an aluminum motif consisting of less body and more screen, sources said. The units will reportedly feature improvements to their versatility and weigh much less than the current models.

Sounds good to me. Lighter, less body, and more screen.

[srobert]

Now if only they could make the frame of their LCDs Narrower. When putting to Apple branded LCD side by side, you got a pretty big GAP between adjacent screen edges. Could they make the frame as thin (or even thinner?) as powerbooks?

[Peyote]

Wait, I just thought of something. Playing Deus Ex or Unreal on a 30" screen might be worth whatever price Apple would put on such a screen. I think it just became practical. :D


Now if Apple develops one that I can watch TV in good quality on, I can MAYBE justify the purchase to the wifey. :D

[jocknerd]

how about a 17" widescreen like the imac for $599 or the 20" for $899. Then we'll talk.

[Peyote]

Originally posted by srobert
Now if only they could make the frame of their LCDs Narrower. When putting to Apple branded LCD side by side, you got a pretty big GAP between adjacent screen edges. Could they make the frame as thin (or even thinner?) as powerbooks?


Or better yet, they could take the existing screens and repackage them in a form factor that places the screens EXTREMELY close together. The screens don't change, just the packaging. Then tie the connections together inside the case and you have 2 screens side by side (maybe angled towards each other) with only one display connection to the mac.

[sososowhat]

I'm looking forward to having multiple desktops without multiple monitors by using the Panther's fast user switch - one desktop on each side of the cube.

It doesn't help for all applications, but for what I do the multiple desktop thing should be great!

[acj]

I actually sold the nice blueberry picture that's on the box for the 17" displays. It's only been used on the bos since the beginning of summer. Apple paid some darn good money for that photo and I believe they purchased rights for 3 years.

[seffis]

I have a 23" Cinema HD now, and yes, it's big. Big enough, in fact, for my everyday tasks like Photoshop, InDesign, and iTunes. But for the folks who use apps like Final Cut, whose interfaces could probably fill 2 or 3 displays, a huge single display could be a welcome addition to the Apple family.

And imagine the size of the iTunes visualizations!

:)

[steveh]

Originally posted by Peyote
Would a 30" screen even be practical?

I mean, how useable would a screen that size be? You would have to constantly turn your head back and forth just to see each edge of the screen.

No problem...I do it all the time while running two monitors.

Hmm...two of the 30" persuasion...

[iLife]

Originally posted by arn
I disagree

http://www.macrumors.com/downloads/darkscreen.jpg

arn

that's my favorite movie.. anyways off topic

i could totally see using all that space... i'm thinking of buying another display in the next year, if they dropped the price of the 20" to that what i bought my 17inch for or introduced a 17.4 or some widescreen variant like that: i'd totally look into getting one, as a web designer when using photoshop or dreamweaver or flash or director and maybe all of them at the same time... that much space really does cut down on time.

--Augz

[evolu]

A monitor the size of a TV pretty much fits into the digital hub idea...

I know there's a lot of apps based around this idea - but the size of the monitor has always been the weakest link.

[wdlove]

I have been wanting to get a Cinema Display. Looks like my timing might be on the correct timing. Wonder if they will have a price decrease also? Can't wait to see what the design will look like! :cool:

[yamabushi]

Well, for a few people it will be practical. Newspaper layouts, etc.

Is it possible to build two AGP 8x slots on the motherboard? It would be great to have two Radeon 9800 pro's running at full speed driving four 23" HD displays. Better cards and bigger displays would be great too, of course.

[kenaustus]

The price reduction of the 23" left the $3,000 to $3,500 price point open for something and a 30" would be a logical addition. Depending on costs the price point may end up below $3,000, but the key is that Apple was selling a $3,500 Cinema display and making money from it. That alone is sufficient for a 30" to be developed.

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by Ambrose Chapel
yeah i can't see them dropping the 17" either...unless it's just not selling at all. maybe they are dropping it to replace it with a 17" widescreen display?
Maybe they are not making enough money on the 17" (competition in that size is fierce) so to them it's not worth the hassle. The rest of the line has the advantage of being WS which is not that common on LCDs.

Oh well...

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by Peyote
Would a 30" screen even be practical?

I mean, how useable would a screen that size be? You would have to constantly turn your head back and forth just to see each edge of the screen.
Then step a few centimetres back... Nowhere does it say that your nose should be touching the screen...;) (you haven't seen MY nose: I can touch the screen with it AND see both sides of the screen...:D)

[e-coli]

Originally posted by tutubibi
No 17". I don't think so.
Apple needs entry level display for people that are buying PowerMacs and even notebooks. Without 17", the lowest priced apple display would be 20" at almost $2,000 CAD.

Maybe they will replace 17" with 17" wide? :confused:

I don't think Apple can or should be competing in low end products. the market is saturated with lower priced 17" LCD screens. Apple should drop it and go with the bigger screens, instead.

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by arn
they're 20"s actually. But more screen space is like RAM. You can never have too much. :)

Obviously, the 30" display will be for Apple's high end market.... but I'm sure there are those who want/need it.

arn

You bet. In my company, we use PowerMac G4 with quad Iiyama AU5131 LCDs (1600*1200 each) configurations for our trading software. 2 of those 30" beasts could replace all that crap...

Any good?

[snahabed]

Nooooo!

I LIKE having the biggest Display :D

It's odd... people gasp when they see it, but it doesn't seem to be all that large to me.

...... The... err... Display. Is it getting hot in here?

[Tenacious B]

I wonder if Quake III or Unreal would be really slow with a 30" display (running at 2400 x 1500, of course). Regardless, it would rock.

[aphexist]

Originally posted by Peyote
The resolution of the screen has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

I think it does. Because the resolution is so high, you can concentratate on a window without turning your head.

There are 42" plasma screens that can be connected to a computer, but they aren't useful on a desktop because the resolution is only 1028x768.

[SiliconAddict]

Anyone think there is a chance of Apple dropping the price of the 23" display a tad? I want to get one when I get my PowerBook but $2000 is painful. :-\

[robotrenegade]

I sign my ass up for that 30". Anyone want to buy a 15" and 22" apple displays? (hahah)

[jayscheuerle]

My dual monitors are not on the same plane. There's an angle in between the two so that the faces are more or less perpendicular to my line of sight.

At 30", I'd want a screen that had a curve to it so that the edges would be as close to my eyes as the center of the display was.

THAT would be sweet. - j

[FlamDrag]

The poster who mentioned shrinking the frame of the monitors is dead-on correct. There is a massive gap b/w two apple monitors. A smaller frame would be quite welcome.

I also agree with the comments that Apple might not want to compete in teh 17" monitor market. To sell 'em, they have to be inexpensive - very unlike Apple. Sell premium monitors at premium prices and make the premium profit from them.

This all sounds very feasible to me. Will it happen? Who knows?

I actually rather LIKE turning my head a bit to look at my two monitors. It allows me to focus on the one area I really need to see while the rest (which is unimportant) blurrs in the periferal vision.

Folks who think that a monitor of any size can be too big for "anyone" is silly. It is likely that these people have not worked extensively on large posters or multiple page spreads where you just want to get a feel of the distance without zooming out to 10%. Video is another excellent point. Using FCE and previewing at 25% is annoying and helps to conceal minute flaws in the footage. Of course, most 'serious' video editors have an external NTSC display attached instead. That is certainly MUCH less expensive than a 30" display.

Furthermore, once you open up the ability to do something new or increase resources, people always come up with creative and sometimes even useful ways to make use of those resourses.

[djacopille]

Originally posted by Peyote
The resolution of the screen has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I know what resolution is and how it works. I'm not talking about the physical size of the things on the screen. I'm talking about the screen being so wide that in order to look from one edge of the screen to the other you're gonna have to turn your head quite a bit.

There are an increasing number of users that utilize dual displays. Many PowerBook users have large display they plug into at the office or home and operate in dual display mode. In each of these scenarios the display width is physically at least as large as any 30" display Apple could come out with.

How do people avoid neck strain. They simply put the application and panels they use most on the screen closest to them, and put the lesser used items, like panels and such, on the secondary display. With large displays like this I'm sure people will move their active work to a comfortable position in front of them and the lesser used items to the side.

[paulc]

A 30 incher is more likely to be in the 3000 dollar plus range.

I HATE those inflexible, huge bezels. They are tired, old, and just plain old bad. Hell, the rest of the industry went to ultra thin bezels over a year ago. Some went to it 2 years ago. For a company that supposedly prides itself on it's design sense, these monstrosities really do stand out as very dated design.

Plus, the guy was spot on about rotating. Both Viewsonic and Samsung LCD have been able to rotate for quite a while. They don't have any Mac software to support that, but the hardware sure rotates. The retail 9800 sure supports that. The OEM doesn't and probably won't ever.

Just watch the third quarter financial... this business of only giving their dwindling customers what apple wants and not what the CUSTOMER wants is the very reason unit shipments fall every quarter. Tight fiscal control has helped them the past 4-5 quarters, but there IS a law of diminishing returns there.

[macshark]

A 30" planar display is simply too big for sitting in front of it and working. Many people who use multiple 20" or 23" displays place them at a slight angle (instead of just parallel) so that when you turn your head one way or another, you will be looking straight at one of the displays.

If Apple is indeed going to come up with a 30" LCD Panel product, it is more likely to be a LCD TV with built-in Airport Extreme that will enable a user to play DVDs from the DVD drive or stream movies from the hard disk of another Mac with Airport Extreme. The introduction of iPod proved that Apple is not afraid of entering consumer electronics business as long as they can add value through SW and computer connectivity. A "connected" LCD TV device will be the perfect entry point into another area of consumer electronics for Apple.

[macMaestro]

Reading that 2002 reject list, I noticed another rumor that came true - Firewire 800. I have no idea what that HDTV thing is about though.

Mac Rumors: 2002: Rumor Rejects and Unconfirmed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/01/20030101214437.shtml)
(Item #3)

[Ja Di ksw]

Originally posted by arn
I disagree

http://www.macrumors.com/downloads/darkscreen.jpg

arn

I guess now we know the answer to whether arn uses a multi or single button mouse :). Good set-up, I like the corner idea.

A 30" would be great, and I would love to have it for my computer, to use as a tv, and to watch dvd's on. My problem with it is apple is going to charge a ton of money, one of my kidneys, and my first born child for it. So now I have to decide, first born child, monitor, first born child, monitor. . . . hmmmmmm. . . . . .

[fixyourthinking]

Originally posted by macshark


If Apple is indeed going to come up with a 30" LCD Panel product, it is more likely to be a LCD TV with built-in Airport Extreme that will enable a user to play DVDs from the DVD drive or stream movies from the hard disk of another Mac with Airport Extreme. The introduction of iPod proved that Apple is not afraid of entering consumer electronics business as long as they can add value through SW and computer connectivity. A "connected" LCD TV device will be the perfect entry point into another area of consumer electronics for Apple.

Nice insight ... Apple & Philips being cozy doesn't seem to be coincidence either. Philips I think wants more out the relationship than just Rendezvous and a couple consortium secrets. They are the number one provider of TV Tuning chips/connections ... so you may indeed have a point. I think Apple may have been working on this type of technology since before the iMac LCD was introduced too. One very credible source of mine swore that they spied a tablet Mac that was similar in design to the iMac - just had a wireless detachable display.

This may also be the timing for a TV Tuner Mac to come out of Apple. I believe the Mac TV was released in 1992 and the TAM was released in 1997. In my opinion those were some of the coolest products Apple has produced - even if both were slightly underpowered.

Think of this concept too. What if iPods were to pick up wireless capability and be able to wirelessly send playlist management via bluetooth to a display like this just like the t68i does or even send the sound file themselves to control built in iTunes visuals. To top it off a future iPod could control the TV itself via the same push technology Salling Clicker uses.

[Chomolungma]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
My dual monitors are not on the same plane. There's an angle in between the two so that the faces are more or less perpendicular to my line of sight.

At 30", I'd want a screen that had a curve to it so that the edges would be as close to my eyes as the center of the display was.

THAT would be sweet. - j

a 30" Curve OLED display would be fantastic!

Would it be cool to have Airport Extreme in future Apple displays so it can communicate with the PowerBook. Apple Display hook to a base station + computer speaker would be perfect, because all you have to do then is to connect your PB to the AC outlet and you are set. Well, it may not be this combination of devices, but I would love to have this set up.

Chom

[tutubibi]

Originally posted by e-coli
I don't think Apple can or should be competing in low end products. the market is saturated with lower priced 17" LCD screens. Apple should drop it and go with the bigger screens, instead.

But how many of 17" LCDs have ADC and DVI? Apple needs something <:D> affordable </:D> for people who are buying 1.6 G5s or second display for PowerBook.
17" as it is now may be discontinued but I hope something else (and better) will be offered by Apple in that price range (17.?" widescreen or price drop on 20").

Edit: spelling

[MacFan25]

I think a 30" display could compliment a G5 quite well. :D

If Apple does come out with a 30" display, I'm sure it won't be cheap, but I think it could sell reasonably well.

[j33pd0g]

Originally posted by yamabushi
Well, for a few people it will be practical. Newspaper layouts, etc.

Oh, I wish that was true. While it would be practical, the price of this 30 incher would have to be like $39.00 before my company would buy them. Price is driving the head office towards the PC. :mad: These guys can buy a whole dell setup for mega-cheap. They don't care that they have to replace them every year. They won't even spring for a banged up used G3 computer... or even ram for the ones we have. However, this could just be the economy in my area dictating these computer atrocities.

I myself would get one if I had the scratch. I hope the 20" goes down in price. I think Apple would end up killing new switcher sales if they ditched the 17". I wouldn't have been able to afford my G4 and anything else if the 17" wasn't an option. Although, there are 3rd party CRTS & LCDS . So maybe that's part of the plan.

[iHack]

Originally posted by Peyote
snip.


The only instance I could see using a 30" screen would be for video editing, or when a home user wants to use the screen for tv watching as well. That I could dig. Assuming Apple put out a screen that could display both VGA and NTSC with good quality.

I want one!
[puts first stash of money in special place]

I've been looking for a LCD or plasma screen this size for my living room, one I can also use with a computer - or rather, my wife, who does receive e-mail regularly, but can't be bothered walking up the stairs to our iMac - I end up citing messages to her, or printing them for her. Quite a nuisance. And it would be great for surfing the web too. Just put a G4 with AE in a cupboard or under the sofa, whip out the BT keyboard and mouse .... :D :cool:

But not "Never The Same Color", please.
PAL, anyone?

M.

BTW, my wife's great - it's just that she can't be bothered to use a computer. Maybe that's because she has such a willing 'secretary'.

[Peyote]

I think you people are missing the most wonderful connection here.

All this talk about Airport and wireless displays can lead to one thing only.




That's right, a 30" TABLET computer!


That's right! Theeeeenk of the possibilities!


Sorry, didn't mean to blow your MINDS!



By the way....when are the G6's coming out?

[VicMacs]

kinda like an iMax cinema display... concave and all? heheh

10.3 is pretty good to start the year's end.. but 30inches is insane...

[iHack]

Originally posted by adzoox
Nice insight ... Apple & Philips being cozy doesn't seem to be coincidence either. Philips I think wants more out the relationship than just Rendezvous and a couple consortium secrets. They are the number one provider of TV Tuning chips/connections ... so you may indeed have a point. I think Apple may have been working on this type of technology since before the iMac LCD was introduced too. One very credible source of mine swore that they spied a tablet Mac that was similar in design to the iMac - just had a wireless detachable display.

This may also be the timing for a TV Tuner Mac to come out of Apple. I believe the Mac TV was released in 1992 and the TAM was released in 1997. In my opinion those were some of the coolest products Apple has produced - even if both were slightly underpowered.

Think of this concept too. What if iPods were to pick up wireless capability and be able to wirelessly send playlist management via bluetooth to a display like this just like the t68i does or even send the sound file themselves to control built in iTunes visuals. To top it off a future iPod could control the TV itself via the same push technology Salling Clicker uses.

Apple and Philips? Philips is one of the largest LCD producers, through LG.Philips LCD (http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/). And I gather they are looking for 'new' markets to put their LCD's in...

Sounds cool...

M.

[tny]

Originally posted by Peyote
I think you people are missing the most wonderful connection here.

All this talk about Airport and wireless displays can lead to one thing only.


I'd be surprised if one could run a real display - let alone a 2400 x 1800 display - on 54 Mbps. I think (just doing the math, 60 Hz x 2400 x 1800 x 24 bits/pixel) you'd need about 1000X the bandwidth of Airport extreme. You could do a virtual desktop, something like VNC, if you also had a processor in the "display," but actual video signal?

[Bear]

Originally posted by macshark
A 30" planar display is simply too big for sitting in front of it and working. Many people who use multiple 20" or 23" displays place them at a slight angle (instead of just parallel) so that when you turn your head one way or another, you will be looking straight at one of the displays.
... I have a 23" Cinema Display. From where I sit, a 30" display would be very usable. It would add 4 or 5 inches to to the horizontal direction. Looking at the 23" I would have no problem working with a 30" screen.

Everybody has different perceptions and work habits. In this case a 30" screen at the aforemention resolution will get more than enough buyers to make it worthwhile.

I have worked with dual (and even triple screens). Some software doesn't like working well on multiple monitors so again, I say my needs differ froms yours as they differ from what others need.

You buy what size you're comfortable with and I'll buy what I want/need/can use.

The one size fits all mentality that some companies have really sucks. Apple has been doing their best to come up with multiple sizes of things.

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by tutubibi
No 17". I don't think so.
Apple needs entry level display for people that are buying PowerMacs and even notebooks. Without 17", the lowest priced apple display would be 20" at almost $2,000 CAD.

Maybe they will replace 17" with 17" wide? :confused:

I do agree that the 17 will probably become a widescreen. They could use the same panel that is in the iMac.

Or they could also lower the price of the 20 and have no 17.

[airbag]

This is exiting ... I hope we'll se a full re-design!

I remember reading somewhere on this forum about a company that makes really good-looking flatscreens, with aluminium (or some sort of steel) ultra thin bezels and a real attention to design, but now I can't find it.

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

:confused:

[xtekdiver]

Originally posted by Peyote
Would a 30" screen even be practical?

I mean, how useable would a screen that size be? You would have to constantly turn your head back and forth just to see each edge of the screen.

I have asked myself that very question. I have a 20" cinema display and love it; I thought the 23" was about as big as you would want to sit in front of; however, I have been going to various stores and looking closely at the 30" flat panel TVs. It's big, not doubt about it. I personally think it's just a matter of getting use to the immersive experiance. Just think of it as your own personal iMax! :D

[kangaroo]

Originally posted by Lanbrown
I do agree that the 17 will probably become a widescreen. They could use the same panel that is in the iMac.
...

:eek:

A standalone iMac 17 won't cut it. The specs aren't there.

[nicmac]

This would be a perfect screen for my Architectural Work. I would buy it the day it becomes available. In fact I would buy two. One would be for reference drawings.

[Chisholm]

Originally posted by adzoox
Nice insight ... Apple & Philips being cozy doesn't seem to be coincidence either. Philips I think wants more out the relationship than just Rendezvous and a couple consortium secrets. They are the number one provider of TV Tuning chips/connections ... so you may indeed have a point. I think Apple may have been working on this type of technology since before the iMac LCD was introduced too. One very credible source of mine swore that they spied a tablet Mac that was similar in design to the iMac - just had a wireless detachable display.

This may also be the timing for a TV Tuner Mac to come out of Apple. I believe the Mac TV was released in 1992 and the TAM was released in 1997. In my opinion those were some of the coolest products Apple has produced - even if both were slightly underpowered.

Think of this concept too. What if iPods were to pick up wireless capability and be able to wirelessly send playlist management via bluetooth to a display like this just like the t68i does or even send the sound file themselves to control built in iTunes visuals. To top it off a future iPod could control the TV itself via the same push technology Salling Clicker uses.

And let us not forget about this http://www.tivo.com/4.9.asp
and this http://www.tivo.com/4.9.4.1.asp

[macphoria]

Is they drop the 17", then 20" will be the smallest model? Wouldn't that be too expensive? Maybe they should lower the price on that.

$999 for 20" perhaps?

I actually want to see 17" iMac style widescreen 17" display. 17" widescreen display for $599, I would go for that.

[Dahl]

I use two 17" monitors and I would love a 30" instead, but if it turns out to be too big, I can settle for a lower priced 23" and one of my old 17".
:)

[WM.]

Originally posted by yamabushi
Is it possible to build two AGP 8x slots on the motherboard?
I don't think so. There's a reason it's called AGP, instead of AGB--"port" means that there can be only one device on that interface, "bus" means there can be several. AGP, obviously, is one of the former.

HTH
WM

[mvc]

Originally posted by nicmac
This would be a perfect screen for my Architectural Work. I would buy it the day it becomes available. In fact I would buy two.…

TWO $3000 displays. At last, proof that architects ARE overpaid :D

[AidenShaw]

Originally posted by WM.
I don't think so. There's a reason it's called AGP, instead of AGB--"port" means that there can be only one device on that interface, "bus" means there can be several. AGP, obviously, is one of the former.

HTH
WM

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by Ja Di ksw
My problem with it is apple is going to charge a ton of money, one of my kidneys, and my first born child for it. So now I have to decide, first born child, monitor, first born child, monitor. . . . hmmmmmm. . . . . .

Hey, sounds like a great pricing scheme to me! I've got two kidneys and well...

"Honey? You want a new monitor?"

:)

[airmac]

Originally posted by Peyote
The resolution of the screen has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I know what resolution is and how it works. I'm not talking about the physical size of the things on the screen. I'm talking about the screen being so wide that in order to look from one edge of the screen to the other you're gonna have to turn your head quite a bit. POSSIBLY enough so that it's not practical. In all likelyhood, most people with a screen that big would just end up putting most windows and floating pallettes on one side of the screen or just in the center so they don't have to turn their heads. But then you're defeating the purpose of the screen size. I just don't see it being practical enough to use. I think the 23" screen is the perfect size.


The only instance I could see using a 30" screen would be for video editing, or when a home user wants to use the screen for tv watching as well. That I could dig. Assuming Apple put out a screen that could display both VGA and NTSC with good quality.

hm...i bought the 23 HD but people here were really annoying with that particular phrase "20 inch is the perfect size"....

:o

When you get used to th 23 hd...you realized it's not really that big afterall...

[cr2sh]

I would love to one day again own an Apple display, but I will not buy a display with the same design. It just doesnt work as well as it should... when I had the cube, sure.. it was cute but..

Panther has gotten rid of the pinstripes...
The G5 is aluminum alloy casing...
The powerbook is aluminum...
There's no way Apple will release the same casing, if they do I'll be buying that Sun 24" I hear such good things about.

Did I also mention there's no way Apple will release a single button BT mouse... err... wait... :p

[iPC]

Originally posted by Peyote
Well yeah, I think everyone would love to have a 30" monitor. My point is only Is it practical? I HIGHLY doubt that monitor will cost 1999 like the 23" now does. My guess would be more like $2500. At that point is it practical? I mean, I'd love to have a Lambourghini (sp?), but do people find that car practical? Would it be worth it for Apple to invest the time and R&D into a product that is really just a status symbol? I agree that to an extent, Macs are status symbols, but at what point does it start to become less about usability, and more about "wow"...at which point IMHO, it becomes impractical.
More than likely pricing will be closer to $3499-3999. 30" LCD TV's usually go for around $4000.

[cr2sh]

Originally posted by iPC
More than likely pricing will be closer to $3499-3999. 30" LCD TV's usually go for around $4000.

They make lcd tvs? At what resolution? <edit> they do.. huh... i dont get it.

I agree, ~$3500 is a reasonable price range for a 30" right now, but at that price, its a hard sell over the "cheap" $2000 23". I'd like to see a price slide down, 20" at $1000, 23" at $1500, and 30" at $2500. Who knows... let's get an adjustable aluminum design. Price isnt as important as a good design. I'd love to have a mounting device that clamps to my desk to secure it, and then a neck so that I can put the 30" at any height or position.. just like the iMac.

<added>

What exactly is high definition? I notice that the 23" is HD but the others are not, many of the other large LCD's on the market are not high def... If they're the same resolution, same size.. what makes one HD and the other not? thanks.

[WM.]

Originally posted by AidenShaw
[That's why you can only have 1 USB port and 1 1394 port, right?]
Well, hopefully you're joking (since I know you're pretty technically knowledgeable), but just in case you're not:

I'm not sure why the PC industry refers to physical connectors as "ports", instead of "connectors" (or "jacks" depending on the kind of connector) like most other electronics industries seem to. But I do know that it's called the Universal Serial Bus, and manufacturers (or at least Apple) tend to refer to "the FireWire bus" (which may be attached to more than one "port").

FWIW
WM

[Analog Kid]

Originally posted by WM.
Well, hopefully you're joking (since I know you're pretty technically knowledgeable), but just in case you're not:

I'm not sure why the PC industry refers to physical connectors as "ports", instead of "connectors" (or "jacks" depending on the kind of connector) like most other electronics industries seem to. But I do know that it's called the Universal Serial Bus, and manufacturers (or at least Apple) tend to refer to "the FireWire bus" (which may be attached to more than one "port").

FWIW
WM


There's no reason a system controller couldn't be designed with dual AGP connectors.

I don't know enough about the AGP spec to know whether you can bus and address several connectors off a single "port", but you should certainly be able to create two independent "ports" from the system controller.

Still think it's a pipe dream though-- use PCI-X if you need a second graphics card...

[WM.]

Originally posted by Analog Kid
There's no reason a system controller couldn't be designed with dual AGP connectors.

I don't know enough about the AGP spec to know whether you can bus and address several connectors off a single "port", but you should certainly be able to create two independent "ports" from the system controller.

Still think it's a pipe dream though-- use PCI-X if you need a second graphics card...
*shrug* I've never heard of a motherboard with dual AGP slots. I seem to remember reading or being told that you could only have one, period. Again, I shrug.

WM

[D*I*S_Frontman]

For video editing using FCP and audio engineering using Logic, ProTools or DP, screen real estate is a huge productivity boon. You bet a 30" LCD display would sell to that crowd.

I currently use two CRTs--a crappy little 15" @1024x768 and a ViewSonic 21" @1920x1400. A 30" would take up less space on my desk, have no ugly screen frame interruptions, AND HAVE 49,000 MORE PIXELS of screen space over my current rig (assuming 2400x1500 as surmised by an earlier post).

BRING IT ON!!!

[mango]

Has anyone attached a 23" ACD to one of the new powerbooks? Does it support the native resolution (1920x1200) of the ACD?

[Sabbath]

I would be surprised if the 20" and 23" faced significant price drops as in the UK at least the prices are reasonably competitive with monitors offering similar resolutions, when you take the widescreen aspect into account.

On the other hand the 17" seems expensive and as a result maybe apple wish to drop it, although you would have to believe they would replace it with the 17" widescreen from the iMac and PB, especially if as others have mentioned this is cheaper than the standard 4:3 17" and as can be seen from the market you can charge a premium for a widescreen as apposed to a 4:3

If the 17 is dropped pro macs are going to seem very expensive to switchers, and remember some switchers will feel more at home with a tower and separate monitor than an AIO.

On the issue of bezels I dont think it really matters on screens how big they are unless youre using multiple monitors. I feel often people just want them to be small because they can be made small. I must say I actually really like the apple cinema displays, even though others feel theyre dated, it fells like youre working on a canvas rather than on a monitor, maybe its one of those humanisation designs from Mr Ive that us regular people dont understand but apparently make all the difference, like the handles on the old iMacs. :confused:

Although I have no doubt the 20" price will be dropped by something in the region of 90% as I finally could afford to buy one last month :rolleyes:

[airmac]

Originally posted by mango
Has anyone attached a 23" ACD to one of the new powerbooks? Does it support the native resolution (1920x1200) of the ACD?

if the graphic card support it, which it does...sure...

[wdlove]

I'm interested in purchasing a new Cinema Display. Any idea when Apple will make the announcement? Will the it be worth it to wait?

[ITMediaCo]

Originally posted by wdlove
I'm interested in purchasing a new Cinema Display. Any idea when Apple will make the announcement? Will the it be worth it to wait?

I've been holding off on a 23" for several months now. It seemed like Apple would have released new displays a while ago...

In any case, I'm still waiting. This rumor seems more legit than those back in 2002.

[Julianne]

Has anyone heard anything more about this rumor or anything about a new TFT or the DVI to ADC Display Adapter to hook up the 23" to a 17" Powerbook? It says early November for the cable and without the cable whats the point of getting the 23"tft?

Any thoughts welcomed!

[frinky23]

I wonder, has any new news come out? Good thing I don't need a new monitor any time soon. I just like seeing new things introduced.

[wdlove]

Originally posted by frinky23
I wonder, has any new news come out? Good thing I don't need a new monitor any time soon. I just like seeing new things introduced.

I don't really expect any news about an update for the Cinema Display till MWSF. Since we are now less than 2 months away.

[billyboy]

With regards to cutting out a 17" display from the range, if that is the case, it would have a couple of advantages to Apple. Dump an entry level product which, although more geared to the masses, doesnt have the wow factor, probably doesnt have a high profit margin and faces stiff competition. They replace it with a typically "ahead of the game" Apple product ie a 30" screen that will sell in smaller numbers to the high end users but generate good margins. It will also make a big impression with punters who go to Apple stores ie, create the wow factor, create excitement in a store, and increase the quality of the Apple cinema display range overall.

I would rather see a 17" wide format display, but if they dont, I dont think they can be accused of alienating Mac users, seing as there is a lot of choice now in the 17" line from other suppliers.

I just measured up what a 30 inch screen would like sat on my desk which is in front of a window. Id have to add another window in my room else it´ll be too dark.

[Drifter]

Dump the 17" Studio. No "Wow" factor, stated above.
Change it to the increasingly popular (for mac geeks at least) 17" widescreen, aka, 1440x900.
Drop the 20" Cinema to $900.
Drop the 23" Cinema HD to $1,400-$1,600.

As for the 30", I don't know. I have a 23" HD, and for the first couple months, it was like "Holy **** this thing is ****ing huge!". No I can't even use a monitor with 1024. In fact, using my dad's 17" PB looks small to me, but wows others.

Personally, architects (ArchiCAD), video editing (FCP4), audio (Logic, Soundtrack), and Photoshop will benefit from such a huge ass screen. But it would be kinda weird having that slight look left or right. Maybe you guys just have your fat heads to close to the screen. :)
I'd like something like–oh, let's say, 27 inches. That'd be good. What resolution would that be? 2100x1300? Donno.

Something true: "Big is good. Bigger dreams. Bigger land. Bigger house. But sometimes it becomes unwieldy. Like a dick. Big is good, but there is something called too big."
:D

Other improvements:
Please, make it a color scheme like Aluminum Alloy (the theme from maxthemes.com) or at least the sweet sweet brushed aluminum.
And we need to have less of the outside and more of the screen on the monitor.
Make it a little more adjustable.
USB 2.0

We really need the smaller overall monitor size, so if someone uses a dual display, it's not so odd, like having that little spot where screen should be, but it's
plastic.

?Drifter

[Cooknn]

With all the talk on the Apple support forums about dead and stuck pixels I wonder how much worse it will be on a display that large. I went through two 20" Cinema displays before I gave up for the time being. Bought from Best Buy for that very reason. It doesn't matter if it's one stuck green pixel out of 1.7 million. It will be the one you look at.

I understand the argument about cost going up if they were to guarantee perfect displays. But I read somewhere (or heard) that Apple strives over "every pixel" of the UI. Too bad they don't do the same with their displays. Maybe they should be making them somewhere else other than Taiwan...

Typing on my new G5 and my old 22" Viewsonic P225fb.

[Drifter]

It's not the size of the screen in inches that makes the most difference. Let's not forget about screen resolution.
It's 2400x1500, right?

Now, that's 500 more horizontal, 300 vertical. That is 150,000 more pixels than the 23''. It is also a hair wider in ratio that the 23''. And for pro customers, they need more screen horizontally. Pictures are usually landscape. Movie editing is a long timeline. Logic is self explanatory. ArchiCAD building are more wide, since most houses designed by architects are two stories, and wider or deeper.

So pro customers want wider screens. Hell, Cinema Displays are pretty ****ing tall too. 768 vs 1200(or even 1500). No competition. And 1024 is a little less than half the size of a 23'', when it is usually a 15'' screen.

So, screen resolution is more important than the size. Example: A 42'' plasma I saw awhile ago had a resolution less than my old 17'' iMac. :p

[thabridawg]

Has anyone heard any new rumors about the new displays recently?

[Brundlefly]

that the 1280 lcd are being discontinued, but the 17 will be kept alive via a 1440x900 17 inch FP......like the imac or the 17 inch pbook, starting at $749 US.

I cannot release my source though :(

I believe it, I believe him

[Drifter]

Well, just when you thought the 17 was nice, you get a 20.

As for release, I expect a MacWorld 04. It seems reasonable. Get rid of alot during Christmas to make room for new ones. Or at least a good upgrade or two.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

[iMeowbot]

Originally posted by WM.
*shrug* I've never heard of a motherboard with dual AGP slots. I seem to remember reading or being told that you could only have one, period. Again, I shrug.

It can be done. There are Alpha systems with multiple AGP slots, but the prices are terrifying.

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by iMeowbot
It can be done. There are Alpha systems with multiple AGP slots, but the prices are terrifying.
And ATI are EoL'ing their 7000 Mac Edition (PCI), so how are we supposed to achieve multiple monitors now (I need 4)?? The stock dual-monitor card with two 7000 was a cheap way to have 4 monitors on the Mac...

Ideas anyone?

[Drifter]

We need an S-Video input as a TV!!!!!
And I'd also like a high quality microphone aswell. :D