PDA

View Full Version : New Cinema Displays - Still A Chance?


Mr.PS
Jan 16, 2008, 01:36 AM
Is there still a chance that we might see a new Cinema Display before the 18th?

babboxy
Jan 16, 2008, 02:24 AM
dream on (me too)

Mr.PS
Jan 16, 2008, 02:45 AM
:( I was hopeing.

theLimit
Jan 16, 2008, 02:49 AM
Maybe around WWDC...2009 :(

eddx
Jan 16, 2008, 03:42 AM
I have been waiting for a major upgrade to the cinema displays since I got my laptop in June 2006 - since waiting like the rest of you.

I wonder if eventually the iMac will be thinner than the current cinema displays, then they will have to upgrade.

To be honest, it doesn't need to be a major upgrade, take the price down by a third and half the thickness of the screen and I would be happy.

One day my friends...one day :confused:

mrfaize
Jan 16, 2008, 03:43 AM
Yeah I was holding off on an ACD. When's the next big Apple gig where Jobs does a similar keynote?

Devil's Refugee
Jan 16, 2008, 05:13 AM
One of the other rumor sites (AppleInsider I think) is speculating that there is a secret announcement to be made today by Steve at the Final Cut Pro meeting.

newkeyboard
Jan 16, 2008, 05:38 AM
One of the other rumor sites (AppleInsider I think) is speculating that there is a secret announcement to be made today by Steve at the Final Cut Pro meeting.

Sounds like wishful thinking to me :(

Gloor
Jan 16, 2008, 05:59 AM
I have to say that my loyalty to Apple dropped a bit. Mac Pro really tested my patience and the update was definately worth it but why in the hell did they not update ACDs to go with it? I really hope they will do silent update this week so I can buy my MP+ACD and forget Apple for few months (until I have money for a notebook) :)

ErikAndre
Jan 16, 2008, 06:00 AM
It will be this year. Most likely WWDC, along with a new refreshed, redesigned Nehalem Mac Pro (no kidding, another one will be out then). Don't listen to the others. I think Apple is holding off till this date.

Gloor
Jan 16, 2008, 06:05 AM
It will be this year. Most likely WWDC, along with a new refreshed, redesigned Nehalem Mac Pro (no kidding, another one will be out then). Don't listen to the others. I think Apple is holding off till this date.

Well, if they don't release in January then I hope you are right. There is nothing worse than buying something and 1 month later Apple updates it. If ACD gets update at the end of the year with Nehalem (don't expect Nehalem sooner) then I will be more than happy with my february purchase. :)

volvoben
Jan 16, 2008, 10:43 AM
too bad about the lack of acd updates. i'm not ready to buy one myself, but a friend i work with was buying a new setup for herself, so I told her of the upcoming mac pro refresh and possible acds, but i just told her this morning to go ahead and head up to NH to get a tax free MP (she also gets edu because she takes a few classes every year). In good news she's buying a HP 30" monitor from IT at work for $900. She also claims that ebay has some HP 30"ers for $900 shipped, but i try to stay away from the fleabay these days. Still, it was tough to tell her to pay $800 for a 23" when she could get a 30" for $100 more. The HP is ugly, but she's a designer with a rather picky eye and she used it all day yesterday to test it and just loved the actual screen.

Avatar74
Jan 16, 2008, 10:49 AM
Just out of curiosity, what do you want a new Cinema Display for, exactly, that the current ones aren't doing?

Reason I ask is because you seem pretty eager about it, but haven't really clarified your need.

gallagb
Jan 16, 2008, 10:56 AM
built in isight & ir receiver


& i'm sure folks want faster reaction time better graphics capabilities

& somewhere, someone wants it glossy

Avatar74
Jan 16, 2008, 11:10 AM
built in isight & ir receiver

If they had them, and consequently added probably $100 or more to the price of the display, would you actually commit to buying one... today?


& i'm sure folks want faster reaction time better graphics capabilities

Possibly, but that's a limitation on LCD tech in general which will get better with time, but Apple LCD's at present are probably among the best computer LCD displays available. I don't know what else you'd do until the tech itself improves... except to say this: Those who are really serious about color, clarity and contrast should stick to CRT's for the time being. Nothing beats a Trinitron in this arena.

& somewhere, someone wants it glossy

Probably... but the greater likelihood is that graphic designers who tend to buy the higher end Apple LCD's don't. Matte displays are far better for accurate color and contrast. Glossy displays falsely enrich the image, which is a problem if you're trying to maintain a color match from prepress to proof.

fangiotophia
Jan 16, 2008, 01:12 PM
Actually, I have been looking for a new monitor and was really hoping that the ACDs would be updated. At the very least, their price is almost twice that of a similar display from practically everyone else. Granted, they have a nicer design, but a 6ms refresh time is pretty slow these days.

I just bought a Mac Pro and really would love the remote/iSight to go with it. Since they have discontinued the actual iSight, I would have to buy a new laptop just to get one! That's just unreasonable.

Mr.PS
Jan 16, 2008, 01:18 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you want a new Cinema Display for, exactly, that the current ones aren't doing?

Reason I ask is because you seem pretty eager about it, but haven't really clarified your need.

The current ones are old tech - the panel hasn't been updated since March 2006. I want what we all want. Built in isight, updated display, and more connections.

If they had them, and consequently added probably $100 or more to the price of the display, would you actually commit to buying one... today?

I most certainty would, I would order right now. Even if the display was $2500 I'd order it. The Dell 3008WPF is $2000... Money isn't the issue, it's the lack of updates. Sure the current ACD's are great, but they're OLD TECH and no body will pay full price for that. I want the newest and the best when I buy something.

babboxy
Jan 16, 2008, 01:26 PM
(wrong place, please delete)

sananda
Jan 16, 2008, 01:59 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you want a new Cinema Display for, exactly, that the current ones aren't doing?



i'd like thinner ones. and more connections.

Beardy man
Jan 16, 2008, 02:09 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you want a new Cinema Display for, exactly, that the current ones aren't doing?

Reason I ask is because you seem pretty eager about it, but haven't really clarified your need.

Well, having had iMacs for the last few years the glossy screen is pushing me to a Mac Pro. I'm ready for the ACD 30" but am very concerned by the threads on the Apple Discussion lists about the "dancing pixels" etc (2.5 years and growing). It almost seems like there are no good ACD 30's out there.

I was hoping a product refresh would give Apple a chance to solve the bugs without having to admit there is a problem (at the moment they seem to be in denial)

I would have welcomed a built-in iSight. The original iSight stressed how much better it was than the competition (better fps, better contrast, better reaction to lo-light), seems like Apple has given up on pro users who want to video conference without extra cables and attachments sprouting out of an elegant aluminium bezel :-(

As a designer, i'm drawn to the colour reviews for the ACD 30 (swop LUT etc) but am nervous laying down GBP1199. Seems like some folks are on their 3rd dislay and are still unhappy.

I might hang on to see if there are any reports of the Geforce 8800 "curing" the problem before I dive in

deathshrub
Jan 16, 2008, 02:15 PM
I ordered my MP yesterday with the 30" ACD. I figured it might have been a godsend that the ACDs weren't updated at Macworld. What if they were all glossy? What a nightmare that would be.

vixapphire
Jan 16, 2008, 02:22 PM
too bad about the lack of acd updates. i'm not ready to buy one myself, but a friend i work with was buying a new setup for herself, so I told her of the upcoming mac pro refresh and possible acds, but i just told her this morning to go ahead and head up to NH to get a tax free MP (she also gets edu because she takes a few classes every year). In good news she's buying a HP 30" monitor from IT at work for $900. She also claims that ebay has some HP 30"ers for $900 shipped, but i try to stay away from the fleabay these days. Still, it was tough to tell her to pay $800 for a 23" when she could get a 30" for $100 more. The HP is ugly, but she's a designer with a rather picky eye and she used it all day yesterday to test it and just loved the actual screen.

it's not that ugly, and the screen is truly something to behold.

Father Jack
Jan 16, 2008, 02:29 PM
IWhat if they were all glossy? What a nightmare that would be.
I don't think you need to worry about that. Serious image editors would never use a glossy screen.

Mr.PS
Jan 16, 2008, 02:33 PM
it's not that ugly, and the screen is truly something to behold.

That would never happen...

macgruder
Jan 20, 2008, 05:09 AM
Actually, I have been looking for a new monitor and was really hoping that the ACDs would be updated. At the very least, their price is almost twice that of a similar display from practically everyone else. Granted, they have a nicer design, but a 6ms refresh time is pretty slow these days.
Hardly. The panel is a S-IPS LG.Philips LM230W02 (for the 23"). This is probably the very best panel you can buy anywhere for a 23/24". The displays you are talking about aren't similar displays at all - they are inferior PVA or TN types. Hence, the price. Faster response times (for gamers) don't appear in S-IPS panels - only in cheaper TN types.

A comparable display is the NEC LCD2490WUXi which you won't find for under about $1100. The ACD 23" is in fact for the quality of the display good value. The main problem with it is the lack of inputs and the 1 year-guarantee.

The only change that Apple could make to the 23" is to things like the inputs (which personally I would like to see) because there is no better panel. Of course they could change to a 24" but this is not a better panel. Just a slightly larger one.

One legit worry is if you buy the 23" now, and Apple changes to a 24" then buying a second panel will be a problem.

Artofilm
Jan 20, 2008, 10:04 AM
Apple will release newly designed ACD's along with the newly designed Mac Pro, and since they just released a Mac Pro, I wouldn't think it would be released for maybe another 7 months to a year.

Don't hold your breath. The current ACD's are amazing.

jnc
Jan 20, 2008, 10:13 AM
Just out of curiosity, what do you want a new Cinema Display for, exactly, that the current ones aren't doing?

Reason I ask is because you seem pretty eager about it, but haven't really clarified your need.

More inputs! I'd love to have an ACD hooked up to an :apple:tv in my living room, and one hooked up to a Wii in my bedroom, etc. At the moment my best option is a 27" Dell... I'd love to have Apple styling instead.

Martin C
Jan 20, 2008, 11:08 PM
More inputs! I'd love to have an ACD hooked up to an :apple:tv in my living room, and one hooked up to a Wii in my bedroom, etc. At the moment my best option is a 27" Dell... I'd love to have Apple styling instead.
I'm right there with you on this one. Please add some more inputs. HDMI!

KingYaba
Jan 20, 2008, 11:09 PM
If people are still purchasing the existing displays I don't see much motivation in rolling out new ones.

jnc
Jan 21, 2008, 03:47 AM
I'm right there with you on this one. Please add some more inputs. HDMI!

Yeah! Or change their names back to "Studio" Displays because Cinema indicates I can watch some films on this thing - yet it can't even hook up to a :apple:tv/PS3! :p

RoDe
Jan 21, 2008, 09:07 AM
The ACD are way overdue for an overhaul. They are overpriced and the specs are so 2003 ;). Hope they put a FW800 on it and an isight.

lets all pray for new ACD :D

inkling23
Jan 21, 2008, 11:32 AM
I'm hoping for a new, thinner, LED-backlit ACD with Ir and iSight, and HDMI...which I'm also hoping will be an option on the next-gen Mac Pro...which I'm hoping will be smaller (at least around the size of my trusty Quicksilver). I will then gladly purchase both.

That's a lot of hoping. Too much to ask for? Apple, are you listening? :-)

Oh, and WWDC sounds logical for this non-consumer setup to be announced.

teleromeo
Jan 21, 2008, 11:38 AM
If people are still purchasing the existing displays I don't see much motivation in rolling out new ones.

well I'm holding the purchase of a MacPro for a while because I would like the newest monitor with it. I'm sure there are others that do not want to buy ...

overcast
Jan 21, 2008, 12:30 PM
I just picked up an HP LP3065 and I'm not looking back! :)

ryanide
Jan 21, 2008, 12:37 PM
Check out their new 30" display.

http://i.dell.com/images/global/products/monitors/mon3008wfp_overview1.jpg

2560 x 1600 Native Resolution
3000:1 Dynamic Contrast Ratio
fast 8 ms response time
TrueHD 1080
Dell TrueColor Technology – 100% of NTSC color
USB 2.0 Hi-Speed ports and 9-in-2 media card reader
Extensive Connectivity – Seven connection options: VGA, DVI-D with HDCP, HDMI, S-Video, Component, Composite and DisplayPort

State-of-the-Art Design – With its brushed aluminum housing, glass stand base, and Dell-patented cantilever arm, the Dell 3008WFP looks as beautiful from the back and side as from the front.

and its $200 more than the lousy 30" cinema display!


http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=223-4890

http://i.dell.com/images/global/products/monitors/mon3008wfp_overview2.jpg

overcast
Jan 21, 2008, 12:42 PM
$2000 for a 30" consumer display is ridiculous. If you're going to get into that realm, you might well just go Eizo.

PCWorld review. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140940-page,1/article.html
For $800 less you can get the Samsung or the HP and have equal or better quality without all of the over saturation of colors.

barijazz
Jan 21, 2008, 01:20 PM
I have to say that my loyalty to Apple dropped a bit. Mac Pro really tested my patience and the update was definately worth it but why in the hell did they not update ACDs to go with it? I really hope they will do silent update this week so I can buy my MP+ACD and forget Apple for few months (until I have money for a notebook) :)

Second, I want to get an ACD but they are to thick, and a little pricy. I am surprised that the ACDs are about the thickness of an imac.

Check out their new 30" display.

<snip>

that sounds cool and all on paper, but its still a dell. And in my experience with dell...

Apple will release newly designed ACD's along with the newly designed Mac Pro, and since they just released a Mac Pro, I wouldn't think it would be released for maybe another 7 months to a year.

Don't hold your breath. The current ACD's are amazing.

True but he has a point...

More inputs! I'd love to have an ACD hooked up to an :apple:tv in my living room, and one hooked up to a Wii in my bedroom, etc. At the moment my best option is a 27" Dell... I'd love to have Apple styling instead.

And I would love 4 HDMI ports in the 30".:D

built in isight & ir receiver


& i'm sure folks want faster reaction time better graphics capabilities

& somewhere, someone wants it glossy

I'd much rather have an external isight, the option to have it would be good, and the ability to turn and move it without moving the screen would be cool as well. I would like a wireless isight with one button on the back, the photo button. It'd be like having an eye fi card in your isight.

macnews
Jan 21, 2008, 01:26 PM
Was reading the article on the Dell monitor posted and it mentioned a new display connector - ughhh!

I don't know if this is good or bad, only that I have 2 Apple monitors with ADC connectors. Monitors are still good but I am running out of computers which they can connect to!

overcast
Jan 21, 2008, 02:20 PM
Was reading the article on the Dell monitor posted and it mentioned a new display connector - ughhh!

I don't know if this is good or bad, only that I have 2 Apple monitors with ADC connectors. Monitors are still good but I am running out of computers which they can connect to!

No graphics card uses DisplayPort right now, so it's pointless.

Virgil-TB2
Jan 21, 2008, 02:33 PM
If they had them, and consequently added probably $100 or more to the price of the display, would you actually commit to buying one... today?...Totally agree.

While they will probably update them eventually, the only thing they could really add today are things that the market for the thing doesn't actually need or want. Sure it would be nice if they were thinner, they are already thicker at the edges than the current aluminium iMac. But it's certainly not a show stopper that they are.

I predict the update will happen in conjunction with some real and necessary improvement in the design. Either by adding multi-touch (with associated arm-rests ;) ), or because they will be made more environment friendly perhaps.

I do think they could be a bit cheaper than they currently are. The minimum ACD worth getting is the 23" which is still basically a thousand dollars after taxes even if you get a refurbished one at the educational price.

Virgil-TB2
Jan 21, 2008, 02:43 PM
If people are still purchasing the existing displays I don't see much motivation in rolling out new ones.I think it's possible you will see Apple come out with a different stand-alone display for a different market segment.

Apple sells a boatload of laptops, and everyone where I work that uses them, has a screen in their office that they connect to when they are in. The ACD is just not the screen for this market segment. It's too expensive and has all kinds of high end qualities that these folks don't need (or even know about.)

We might see Apple come out with a screen something like that rumored docking station. Glossy, thin, built in isight etc., and made primarily to connect to your laptop. The screen part however, would likely be of "acceptable" quality only, like the one in the current 17" iMac, and thus cheaper. This is a fairly low-end, cost conscious market though and not somewhere Apple generally tries to compete, so who knows.

overcast
Jan 21, 2008, 03:14 PM
I think it's possible you will see Apple come out with a different stand-alone display for a different market segment.

Apple sells a boatload of laptops, and everyone where I work that uses them, has a screen in their office that they connect to when they are in. The ACD is just not the screen for this market segment. It's too expensive and has all kinds of high end qualities that these folks don't need (or even know about.)

We might see Apple come out with a screen something like that rumored docking station. Glossy, thin, built in isight etc., and made primarily to connect to your laptop. The screen part however, would likely be of "acceptable" quality only, like the one in the current 17" iMac, and thus cheaper. This is a fairly low-end, cost conscious market though and not somewhere Apple generally tries to compete, so who knows.
Apple coming out with a low end display, is like saying Apple is going to release a cheap midtower. It's not going to happen. The low end display and midtower are already out, it's called an iMac.

xnu
Jan 21, 2008, 03:24 PM
Apple displays will have to be updated before the end of the year to keep their promise of eliminating harmful chemicals etc. for Greenpeace's sake. When I don't know, I would think either very soon 1 month or late summer.

zedsdead
Jan 21, 2008, 03:29 PM
Apple displays will have to be updated before the end of the year to keep their promise of eliminating harmful chemicals etc. for Greenpeace's sake. When I don't know, I would think either very soon 1 month or late summer.

I expect them at either NAB in April or WWDC. I imagine they will be MUCH thinner than they are now, and will likely have an isight built-in and maybe HDMI. The 24" will probably replace the 23." Outside of that I do not expect much from Apple in the display department. Should be interesting to see if Apple goes with the Glossy Displays (or maybe will make both and give customers an option).

B3CK24
Jan 21, 2008, 07:53 PM
I agree... as Graphic Design student I want a new MP and ACD to go with it as my MB is doing well running CS3, but not what I need. I am holding off my entire purchase until they introduce an ACD w/ iSight and HDMI.. and NO gloss... Glossy is so unprofessional for color matching and such, thus why I dont see myself purchasing an iMac even though they have good features.

atarian90
Jan 21, 2008, 10:28 PM
Another thing Apple should do in a redesigned ACD is to get rid of the external brick power supply. I think ACDs are the only LCDs out that are not only quite thick, but still have a hefty external brick power supply. :(

A built-in iSight and an extra DVI or two port would be nice too as mentioned.

JFreak
Jan 22, 2008, 02:02 AM
Actually, the big display prices *must* come down soon, because regular 32" tv can be bought for 500 euros nowadays. A display which has HDMI input, which means it can be connected to a DVI computer card rather easily.

Now I don't mean to say that a regular 32" TV that costs 500 would compete with a 30" ACD in terms of colour accuracy or top resolution, but I'm saying if someone wants a big display it can be done for peanuts. And as people discover this they're not going to buy "overpriced" computer displays that are meant for one purpose only.

JFreak
Jan 22, 2008, 02:05 AM
Another thing Apple should do in a redesigned ACD is to get rid of the external brick power supply.

I don't mind having external brick, it fits nicely under my PowerMac. What I would want to see is longer cable between host and display!! I'd kill for a 5 meter cable.

JonasLondon
Jan 22, 2008, 07:28 AM
Actually, the big display prices *must* come down soon, because regular 32" tv can be bought for 500 euros nowadays. A display which has HDMI input, which means it can be connected to a DVI computer card rather easily.

Now I don't mean to say that a regular 32" TV that costs 500 would compete with a 30" ACD in terms of colour accuracy or top resolution, but I'm saying if someone wants a big display it can be done for peanuts. And as people discover this they're not going to buy "overpriced" computer displays that are meant for one purpose only.

No HDTV competes with the resolution of a 30" COMPUTER monitor...

Apples and oranges, man.
J.

JonasLondon
Jan 22, 2008, 07:30 AM
I don't mind having external brick, it fits nicely under my PowerMac. What I would want to see is longer cable between host and display!! I'd kill for a 5 meter cable.

Agree, brick not a problem at all, it still looks 10x better than most power adapters around my desk. More inputs, yes, bring them on, built in iSight - why not, but not critical (says a happy fellow who still has the original iSight).

:-)

overcast
Jan 22, 2008, 08:42 AM
Actually, the big display prices *must* come down soon, because regular 32" tv can be bought for 500 euros nowadays. A display which has HDMI input, which means it can be connected to a DVI computer card rather easily.

Now I don't mean to say that a regular 32" TV that costs 500 would compete with a 30" ACD in terms of colour accuracy or top resolution, but I'm saying if someone wants a big display it can be done for peanuts. And as people discover this they're not going to buy "overpriced" computer displays that are meant for one purpose only.
Yeh sure, if you want a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 on your 50" tv. Sweet. You show me any TV that does 2500x1600.

toke lahti
Jan 22, 2008, 10:18 AM
No graphics card uses DisplayPort right now, so it's pointless.
And if next year half of new ones uses displayport, is it still useless?

4God
Jan 22, 2008, 10:24 AM
I expect them at either NAB in April or WWDC. I imagine they will be MUCH thinner than they are now, and will likely have an isight built-in and maybe HDMI. The 24" will probably replace the 23." Outside of that I do not expect much from Apple in the display department. Should be interesting to see if Apple goes with the Glossy Displays (or maybe will make both and give customers an option).

If I were a betting man, I'd bet on new displays (or at least a price drop) at NAB. ;)

ijurachi
Jan 22, 2008, 12:44 PM
LG-Philips is the current provider of LCD panels for the ACDs. I found this press release on the LG-Philips corporate site:

To meet the growing need for high-quality LCD panels in the desktop monitor market for graphic design and video production uses, LG.Philips LCD has developed wider color gamut products, including the world’s largest monitor panel, measuring 30 inches diagonally, as well as a 26-inch model. Both panels boast superior color gamut of 117 percent.

Maybe a refresh isn't too far away. Personally, I think the design and size for the 30" will not change but the performance will see a boost.

My 2¢

overcast
Jan 22, 2008, 12:59 PM
And if next year half of new ones uses displayport, is it still useless?
Yes because its maximum resolution is 2500x1600 and DVI already satisfies that, it doesn't really matter at this point. It doesn't transmit audio like HDMI. Honestly the only benefit to it, is the increased distance it can run (15m).

jnc
Jan 22, 2008, 01:33 PM
Yeh sure, if you want a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 on your 50" tv. Sweet. You show me any TV that does 2500x1600.

What exactly do you think people will be doing on a TV? Using CAD??! It's a fine resolution for movies, browsing, music etc.

HooHar
Jan 22, 2008, 02:16 PM
If I were a betting man, I'd bet on new displays (or at least a price drop) at NAB. ;)

Have Apple ever announced new hardware at NAB before ?

vixapphire
Jan 22, 2008, 02:36 PM
That would never happen...

huh? what's the frequency, kenneth?

albusseverus
Jan 23, 2008, 02:54 AM
Apple really has a problem on their hands. The old displays are good, but the technology has been leapfrogged since.

Expectations are so high, OLED or LED backlight don't seem feasible at the sizes required 24", 27", 30" ?

The old/current matte displays look so lifeless, compared to new glossy displays. My new iMac has serious colour gradient problems, but I wouldn't trade it for a Cinema Display.

And that was indeed the choice I made...
I was prepared to go the more expensive route... 23" ACD & MacMini, if the ACD could be used as a monitor for a blu-ray player. But next to the glossy displays, no contest.

And nobody's going to pay the prices asked, for such old tech. no matter how good the quality... seemingly so close to an update, no matter how far away it is.

As everyone here is saying... HDMI inputs are on the wish list, although I can't see that happening - this is (one market/one customer) Apple we're talking about.

I wouldn't want to be Apple on this one...

beetsman
Jan 23, 2008, 03:23 AM
If they had them, and consequently added probably $100 or more to the price of the display, would you actually commit to buying one... today?




Possibly, but that's a limitation on LCD tech in general which will get better with time, but Apple LCD's at present are probably among the best computer LCD displays available. I don't know what else you'd do until the tech itself improves... except to say this: Those who are really serious about color, clarity and contrast should stick to CRT's for the time being. Nothing beats a Trinitron in this arena.



Probably... but the greater likelihood is that graphic designers who tend to buy the higher end Apple LCD's don't. Matte displays are far better for accurate color and contrast. Glossy displays falsely enrich the image, which is a problem if you're trying to maintain a color match from prepress to proof.


BANG ON MAN, BANG ON.

toke lahti
Jan 23, 2008, 03:41 AM
Yes because its maximum resolution is 2500x1600 and DVI already satisfies that, it doesn't really matter at this point. It doesn't transmit audio like HDMI. Honestly the only benefit to it, is the increased distance it can run (15m).

Maybe you don't know so much about color management.
Ever heard about 8-bit bottleneck?
DVI could use 16-bit colordepth (lsb on second link), but nobody uses that and there's not enough bandwidth with 2500x1600 resolution.
Displayport (or hdmi1.3) solves that problem without having expensive hardware LUTs in monitors (that ACDs currently does not have).

toke lahti
Jan 23, 2008, 03:50 AM
DisplayPort is really coming:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/06/ati-displayport-cards-trickle-out/
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/26/upcoming-amd-radeon-hd-3450-3470-and-3650-low-enders-leaked/
Problem might be how many years it takes Apple to start using it...

macgruder
Jan 23, 2008, 05:20 AM
Apple really has a problem on their hands. The old displays are good, but the technology has been leapfrogged since.

Expectations are so high, OLED or LED backlight don't seem feasible at the sizes required 24", 27", 30" ?

The old/current matte displays look so lifeless, compared to new glossy displays. My new iMac has serious colour gradient problems, but I wouldn't trade it for a Cinema Display.

And that was indeed the choice I made...
I was prepared to go the more expensive route... 23" ACD & MacMini, if the ACD could be used as a monitor for a blu-ray player. But next to the glossy displays, no contest.

And nobody's going to pay the prices asked, for such old tech. no matter how good the quality... seemingly so close to an update, no matter how far away it is.

As everyone here is saying... HDMI inputs are on the wish list, although I can't see that happening - this is (one market/one customer) Apple we're talking about.

I wouldn't want to be Apple on this one...

How are the current displays old tech? I think you are confusing 'old tech' with 'original release date a long time ago but silent incremental updates since'.

The currents ACDs use the LG.Philips S-IPS panel. In other words 'about the best of new tech' as opposed to 'old tech'. I challenge you to find a 23"/24" display that uses a comparable panel for under $1000 . The newer tech is the H-IPS panel which is the monitor that you'll find in your iMac that has 'serious colour gradient problems' (send it back, it's a dud). About the only monitor you'll find with the H-IPS is the NEC 24" that comes in at around $1100 .

Glossy displays are not for pros so they will only be an option on the ACD's. Glossy displays are better than matte ones in the same way that a lollipop is tastier than a truffle.

The only update I can see happening soon would be to use the latest H-IPS panel with more inputs but Apple won't do that if it's not available for the 30" as well (is it anyone?).

Apple's competition with the highend 23/24" monitors is the NEC. Since the Apple is $200- $300 cheaper and there is no/few other comparable displays(s) in the price range I'd consider it a bargain at the moment unless you have other issues such as inputs.

If Apple release new ACDs I suspect the 23/24" will be more expensive, but you'll have a chance to get the present ACD for a bargain. Other than that I think the 23" ACD is a safe buy.

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 09:07 AM
What exactly do you think people will be doing on a TV? Using CAD??! It's a fine resolution for movies, browsing, music etc.
Why the hell would I want to waste space and money on something that gives me the same resolution as a monitor half its size. This is about computer displays, not family room displays.

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 09:20 AM
Maybe you don't know so much about color management.
Ever heard about 8-bit bottleneck?
DVI could use 16-bit colordepth (lsb on second link), but nobody uses that and there's not enough bandwidth with 2500x1600 resolution.
Displayport (or hdmi1.3) solves that problem without having expensive hardware LUTs in monitors (that ACDs currently does not have).
Oh really? Care to enlighten me then grand wizard. You show me sources that broadcast in the deep color realm (30,36,48-bit color depths), and THEN you show me the displays that support that color depth. Why do you think there is such a big argument amongst displays/component manufacturers on the merits of HDMI 1.3. If Anthem, the maker of my $6500 Statement D2 video processor, didn't feel it was necessary to add 1.3 support, then I think that's a pretty good indication of the progress of deep color support. HDMI is the same exact thing in terms of video transport as DVI - smaller connector, with a different pin mapping.

http://www.anthemav.com/NewSitev2.0/AnthemProduct/AVM30_40_50/Literature/Downloads/HDMI_Questions_PDS.pdf

8-bit(24bit) is plenty, for a long time.

...and besides, this discussion was about DisplayPort and it's usefulness, when we already have HDMI. Maybe you don't know so much about topic discussion.

bluefire75
Jan 23, 2008, 09:23 AM
Not a popcorn-fart chance in hewl Apple will release new monitors anytime soon. I too was hope'n they would release an update during Macworld. One can dream can't they?

YoungCreative
Jan 23, 2008, 10:30 AM
The old/current matte displays look so lifeless, compared to new glossy displays....

And nobody's going to pay the prices asked, for such old tech. no matter how good the quality... seemingly so close to an update, no matter how far away it is.

Have you spent time working with one of the new glossy displays? I used a new 24" iMac at my day job and it drove me nuts with the reflections. Last week I bought a new MacPro for home and happily grabbed a 23" ACD. So, you better update your stats when you say "nobody's" going to buy an existing ACD.

I bought one, and I love it! If I want glossy, I'll master the DVD and play it back on my TV.

My kids are disappointed that there is no iSight camera, but I reminded them that they aren't getting to use my MacPro anyway, so it doesn't matter. :D

jnc
Jan 23, 2008, 10:59 AM
Why the hell would I want to waste space and money on something that gives me the same resolution as a monitor half its size. This is about computer displays, not family room displays.

Actually I believe what we were talking about was how much cheaper units can function as computer displays.

netdog
Jan 23, 2008, 11:07 AM
Man, am I glad that I didn't get stuck on this Official Waiting For... list.

Got my ACD in August and have been loving every minute of it. My regular old iSight works fine (and plugs into the back of the monitor). The screen is magnificent and performs beautifully.

What is it that you guys are praying for in an update?

Sure, panels are going to improve but unlike when a computer receives a major architectural update (as with Penryn and even more so with Nehalem), Apple just silently updates their screens all the time. The only major shift that I can see will be when the ACD goes LCD (I don't see that coming too soon for the 30") or perhaps when they introduce an even bigger display at an even bigger price.

So what is it that you all are waiting for? Dive in. The water's fine.

jnc
Jan 23, 2008, 11:20 AM
No HDTV competes with the resolution of a 30" COMPUTER monitor...

Apples and oranges, man.
J.

Resolution isn't the be all and end all. Movies, browsing... all the usual stuff can be done on an HDTV no prob.

I would love an ACD, but I only have room for one display. It needs to run my Mac, PS3 and Wii - I had to go for a HDTV. I'm on the lookout for a display with better res and colour, and Apple just isn't a choice due to lack of inputs... looks like it'll have to be the Dell 3008. :(

freezerburrn
Jan 23, 2008, 12:14 PM
I don't think you need to worry about that. Serious image editors would never use a glossy screen.

Why is that? I'm just curious.

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 12:30 PM
Why is that? I'm just curious.
Misrepresentation of true color. Glossy gives the effect of higher saturation and contrast. That's why it looks "prettier" to people.

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 12:32 PM
Actually I believe what we were talking about was how much cheaper units can function as computer displays.
My 13" CRT can function as a display too. That doesn't mean it's going to give me good picture quality and high resolution. Cheap TV's are cheap for a reason.

jnc
Jan 23, 2008, 01:20 PM
My 13" CRT can function as a display too. That doesn't mean it's going to give me good picture quality and high resolution. Cheap TV's are cheap for a reason.

HDTVs however, offer great res for a majority of things. I'm using a Samsung one right now while I wait for Apple or Dell to show their '08 hands (hoping for a 2708 or updated ACDs sometime soon) so who knows what point you were trying to make there. Have you even used one??

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 02:23 PM
HDTVs however, offer great res for a majority of things. I'm using a Samsung one right now while I wait for Apple or Dell to show their '08 hands (hoping for a 2708 or updated ACDs sometime soon) so who knows what point you were trying to make there. Have you even used one??
Yes, I've seen cheap tv's. Do I used one? No. I have a 60" SXRD for movies and a 30" LP3065 for my monitor, as well as an old 19" NEC CRT. My point is, what is a large display going to offer you if the resolution stays the same. So what, you have a 100 foot wide display, that only does 1920. So now everything on the screen is the size of a car. I guess one could argue gaming, but for everything else, especially anything with fine text is going to look like garbage. You think it's just coincidence a 24" TV costs less than a 24" monitor?

jnc
Jan 23, 2008, 02:29 PM
What exactly do you think people will be doing on a TV? Using CAD??! It's a fine resolution for movies, browsing, music etc.
:rolleyes:

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 02:34 PM
:rolleyes:

Then why bother getting a computer, buy an AppleTV or a PS3. Save yourself a $1000

jnc
Jan 23, 2008, 02:58 PM
Good god, are you seriously suggesting that if you don't need a 2560 x 1600 resolution you don't need a computer? Hahaha... just quit while you're behind, man.

Martin C
Jan 23, 2008, 04:24 PM
Good god, are you seriously suggesting that if you don't need a 2560 x 1600 resolution you don't need a computer? Hahaha... just quit while you're behind, man.
Hahaha. I guess most people on this board don't need a computer then.

overcast
Jan 23, 2008, 04:32 PM
Good god, are you seriously suggesting that if you don't need a 2560 x 1600 resolution you don't need a computer? Hahaha... just quit while you're behind, man.

If you're just using it for movies, music and browsing. Does it make sense?

dante@sisna.com
Jan 23, 2008, 05:11 PM
How are the current displays old tech? I think you are confusing 'old tech' with 'original release date a long time ago but silent incremental updates since'.

The currents ACDs use the LG.Philips S-IPS panel. In other words 'about the best of new tech' as opposed to 'old tech'. I challenge you to find a 23"/24" display that uses a comparable panel for under $1000 . The newer tech is the H-IPS panel which is the monitor that you'll find in your iMac that has 'serious colour gradient problems' (send it back, it's a dud). About the only monitor you'll find with the H-IPS is the NEC 24" that comes in at around $1100 .

Glossy displays are not for pros so they will only be an option on the ACD's. Glossy displays are better than matte ones in the same way that a lollipop is tastier than a truffle.

The only update I can see happening soon would be to use the latest H-IPS panel with more inputs but Apple won't do that if it's not available for the 30" as well (is it anyone?).

Apple's competition with the highend 23/24" monitors is the NEC. Since the Apple is $200- $300 cheaper and there is no/few other comparable displays(s) in the price range I'd consider it a bargain at the moment unless you have other issues such as inputs.

If Apple release new ACDs I suspect the 23/24" will be more expensive, but you'll have a chance to get the present ACD for a bargain. Other than that I think the 23" ACD is a safe buy.

Yep -- You got this right.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 23, 2008, 05:21 PM
I just had an Art Director for a Stop Motion Animation Movie Company leave our shop. We ran a bunch of 3x6 foot fine art prints for her for the Sundance Film Festival (we are in Utah).

She and her art team created the posters digitally from a series of still photos taken with a Nikon D-300. The still photos were of painted sets and set characters. The paints they used were very pastel-like and bright. They then pushed these prints and added text in RGB format in Illustrator and Photoshop.

Their display was a Dell 30" high Color.

We showed them proofs on a calibrated high gamut HP LP3065 and then on an ACD 23".

Our printers for this job are fully calibrated (closed loop color) HP Z3100, Colorspan Displaymaker, and HP DesignJet 130 both with EFI Designer XL RIPS with full Spectrophotometer Support.

The art director was highly bummed that the InkJet Prints would not match her Dell or our HP LP3065 (both very wide gamut). She had no background in Color Management and no understanding of RGB versus CMYK, if you can imagine this!!

She kept moaning that she needed to find a way for the print to match her display. We kept telling her to refer to the ACD 23 for a more realistic expectation as to how the prints would look in final form.

It was amazing to me her lack of understanding of color gamut and how cmyk printing cannot match today's HC or High Gamut Monitors.

I offer this to this thread as there are a lot of people complaining that Apple's ACD's are "out-of-date," etc.

Actually, they are not: they are simply technology that is very targeted at a group of professionals that Apple use to covet as its "own:" print professionals and print-based photographers.

While Apple has moved past this market heavily into entertainment and broadcast video, their monitors have remained focused on this area. Surely they will update them. But for now, please understand why Apple's ACD's remain as they are and that they still have a large user base that actually needs and prefers these gamut specs.

I am of the belief that a creative shop should have many monitors as we do: some high gamut and some standard SWOP gamut, like ACD's.

We moved far beyond print a long time ago: we focus now on Video, CMS-based web development and broadcasting, and Flash. High Gamut is great for this (though not without its risks even for this market as many end-users have older, low gamut LCD's).

But to call Apple's ACD's out of date is just pain misinformation and lack of knowledge on a complex and tricky subject.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 23, 2008, 05:30 PM
Hardly. The panel is a S-IPS LG.Philips LM230W02 (for the 23"). This is probably the very best panel you can buy anywhere for a 23/24". The displays you are talking about aren't similar displays at all - they are inferior PVA or TN types. Hence, the price. Faster response times (for gamers) don't appear in S-IPS panels - only in cheaper TN types.

A comparable display is the NEC LCD2490WUXi which you won't find for under about $1100. The ACD 23" is in fact for the quality of the display good value. The main problem with it is the lack of inputs and the 1 year-guarantee.

The only change that Apple could make to the 23" is to things like the inputs (which personally I would like to see) because there is no better panel. Of course they could change to a 24" but this is not a better panel. Just a slightly larger one.

One legit worry is if you buy the 23" now, and Apple changes to a 24" then buying a second panel will be a problem.

The above is the best summary post I have read concerning the actual VALUE of the ACD 23 and of the risk of mis-match if/when Apple changes it to a 24". But make no mistake, for the technology, the ACD 23 is priced correctly.

toke lahti
Jan 23, 2008, 05:58 PM
Oh really? Care to enlighten me then grand wizard. You show me sources that broadcast in the deep color realm (30,36,48-bit color depths), and THEN you show me the displays that support that color depth. Why do you think there is such a big argument amongst displays/component manufacturers on the merits of HDMI 1.3. If Anthem, the maker of my $6500 Statement D2 video processor, didn't feel it was necessary to add 1.3 support, then I think that's a pretty good indication of the progress of deep color support. HDMI is the same exact thing in terms of video transport as DVI - smaller connector, with a different pin mapping.

http://www.anthemav.com/NewSitev2.0/AnthemProduct/AVM30_40_50/Literature/Downloads/HDMI_Questions_PDS.pdf

8-bit(24bit) is plenty, for a long time.

...and besides, this discussion was about DisplayPort and it's usefulness, when we already have HDMI. Maybe you don't know so much about topic discussion.

I thought that this thread is about ACDs and I believe that they are primarily used other than watching broadcast tv.

There are already displays with xvYCC and it's gamut is so big that 8-bit colors will show banding. 8-bits are enough for ntsc gamut, but not bigger.
Next versions of bd / hd-dvd specs will include xvYCC and h.264 broadcasts will probably use xvYCC also in the future.

ACDs are also used a lot in professional video post production and there is need for more than 8-bit colors. Also high quality photography needs more than 8-bits. All DSLRs have had deeper color depth than 8-bits from day one.

8-bits is enough when display's real contrast ratio is about 300:1, but when we already have displays that have contrast ratio way beyond that, there is banding on a carefully profiled display. 256 brightness levels just isn't enough. That's why sdi has had 10-bits for a decade.

So there really is need for more than 8-bits with displayport or any other way. Even average consumers will notice that within a lifetime of a new ACD.

When I buy expensive high quality devices like displays, I want them to be high quality at least half of their life, not just now.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 23, 2008, 08:08 PM
I thought that this thread is about ACDs and I believe that they are primarily used other than watching broadcast tv.

There are already displays with xvYCC and it's gamut is so big that 8-bit colors will show banding. 8-bits are enough for ntsc gamut, but not bigger.
Next versions of bd / hd-dvd specs will include xvYCC and h.264 broadcasts will probably use xvYCC also in the future.

ACDs are also used a lot in professional video post production and there is need for more than 8-bit colors. Also high quality photography needs more than 8-bits. All DSLRs have had deeper color depth than 8-bits from day one.

8-bits is enough when display's real contrast ratio is about 300:1, but when we already have displays that have contrast ratio way beyond that, there is banding on a carefully profiled display. 256 brightness levels just isn't enough. That's why sdi has had 10-bits for a decade.

So there really is need for more than 8-bits with displayport or any other way. Even average consumers will notice that within a lifetime of a new ACD.

When I buy expensive high quality devices like displays, I want them to be high quality at least half of their life, not just now.

We absolutely need more than 8 bits on the pro end. 8 Bits would also decrease the range between colors of similar composition and improve image editing.

However, I don't believe OSX and the adobe suite supports more than an 8 bit pathway at present. I could be wrong on this. I think vista does.

CP1091
Jan 23, 2008, 08:35 PM
Oh the joys of anticipation :)

macgruder
Jan 24, 2008, 09:15 AM
When I buy expensive high quality devices like displays, I want them to be high quality at least half of their life, not just now.

I agree. Although the 23" monitor (at least) is 'only' $800 so cannot really be classed expensive enough to be high-end pro-monitor. (A Nikon D300 rather than a Nikon D3!) I suspect the panel manufacturers keep the prices beyond 8-bit at a high-premium, so you have to pay $1600 or more for such a monitor.

thegaffer
Jan 24, 2008, 09:47 AM
I guess this is good of a thread as any to ask..

I have more than generalist and less than master knowledge of print and video production. I work for a university and have a multimedia development position... I preface with "work for a university" because I have one of those jobs where it is more beneficial to have very broad ranging knowledge of most production technologies (for web, for video, for print) than having very specific knowledge.

i.e. one day I am developing a Flash application, the next I am working in After Effects or Motion, the next day I have Photoshop or Illustrator up. Anyway...

Part of my job is running a multimedia lab which is available to the campus staff, faculty and students to do production work. A mix of Mac Pros and Power Mac G5s with 23" ACDs. My question is two fold:

To video folks: For those of you working with motion graphics, particularly in HD (lets just say 1080p to be safe), do you find the response time on the ACDs to be sufficient for working with HD content? How about full screen HD playback?

Also, I'm considering getting a 17" MBP (soon, I'd like to wait for a refresh but the money isn't coming out of my personal coffers); what is your feeling about it pumping out HD content to a 30" ACD? The ACD would actually be for home use with the MBP. How does it perform pushing HD content?

Thank you kindly!

toke lahti
Jan 24, 2008, 02:31 PM
We absolutely need more than 8 bits on the pro end.
I think that within a year or two even consumers will be demanding more picture quality. Even cheaper displays are beginning to have more contrast and wider gamut than crt's used to have. With new displays consumers start to see PQ problems with older content. This leads to demand for higher PQ content. Here in Finland, sd-dtv was generally considered high quality with older crt's, but when hd-lcd's got more common, people started complaining about artifacts.
And maybe even smaller movie companies start realizing that they need color management...:rolleyes:

PodPacker
Jan 24, 2008, 02:49 PM
Probably will coincide with the availability of the 8800GT

MacNerd12
Jan 24, 2008, 02:52 PM
I have been waiting for a major upgrade to the cinema displays since I got my laptop in June 2006 - since waiting like the rest of you.

I wonder if eventually the iMac will be thinner than the current cinema displays, then they will have to upgrade.

To be honest, it doesn't need to be a major upgrade, take the price down by a third and half the thickness of the screen and I would be happy.

One day my friends...one day :confused:

Actually, the new Aluminum iMacs are skinnier than the current ACDs.

toke lahti
Jan 24, 2008, 03:18 PM
To video folks: For those of you working with motion graphics, particularly in HD (lets just say 1080p to be safe), do you find the response time on the ACDs to be sufficient for working with HD content? How about full screen HD playback?
I find ACD's really good quality all-around purpose displays. IPS is faster than PVA, so they hold their name pretty good. ACD's are also pretty fine without profiling, which most other dislpays need badly before any color work. With profiling ACD's are naturally even better. If you need higher quality, you'll have to get displays with hardware LUT.
Personally, I decided 2006, that I won't buy anything to myself (displays or graphics adapters) without hdcp.
Also, I'm considering getting a 17" MBP (soon, I'd like to wait for a refresh but the money isn't coming out of my personal coffers); what is your feeling about it pumping out HD content to a 30" ACD? The ACD would actually be for home use with the MBP. How does it perform pushing HD content?
I'm also waiting for led backlit 17", although I couldn't afford it now, so it's nice it's not showing up...:rolleyes:
MBP should have no effort to playback 1080p. At least if it isn't too fat bandwidth, so that hdd/lan can stream it.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 24, 2008, 03:52 PM
I think that within a year or two even consumers will be demanding more picture quality. Even cheaper displays are beginning to have more contrast and wider gamut than crt's used to have. With new displays consumers start to see PQ problems with older content. This leads to demand for higher PQ content. Here in Finland, sd-dtv was generally considered high quality with older crt's, but when hd-lcd's got more common, people started complaining about artifacts.
And maybe even smaller movie companies start realizing that they need color management...:rolleyes:

Well Said!! Agree totally --- thanks for the thoughts.

amigi
Jan 25, 2008, 02:59 AM
hi,
what been missed out in this discussion is that the ACD has no HDCP support !!! that means no protected Blueray HD content plays
( maybe thats why there is no blue ray option yet !)
and even when DVI is compatible to HDMI , without HDCP the ACD stays black, which makes the name Cinema a bit obsolete ,
as i do video most and just bought a 3,2 macpro , i am still waiting for an update on the ACD ,
but without HDCP its not a good deal when going for HD in the future
a lot of other displays (Eizo, Dell,Quato, samsung, NEC) already support HDCP ,
apple not yet

toke lahti
Jan 25, 2008, 05:01 AM
hi,
what been missed out in this discussion is that the ACD has no HDCP support !!!
Do you mean that you missed out that I didn't? ;)

amigi
Jan 25, 2008, 07:52 AM
Do you mean that you missed out that I didn't? ;)

no, just my 2 cents , :rolleyes:
there was the question of what the ADC cannot do and new technology etc ..

i think this is a reason to wait or buy something else ( if you like to do video )


greets peter

oopps just saw that you didn't - :rolleyes:

"""Personally, I decided 2006, that I won't buy anything to myself (displays or graphics adapters) without hdcp.""""

vixapphire
Jan 25, 2008, 10:12 AM
I just had an Art Director for a Stop Motion Animation Movie Company leave our shop. We ran a bunch of 3x6 foot fine art prints for her for the Sundance Film Festival (we are in Utah).

She and her art team created the posters digitally from a series of still photos taken with a Nikon D-300. The still photos were of painted sets and set characters. The paints they used were very pastel-like and bright. They then pushed these prints and added text in RGB format in Illustrator and Photoshop.

Their display was a Dell 30" high Color.

We showed them proofs on a calibrated high gamut HP LP3065 and then on an ACD 23".

Our printers for this job are fully calibrated (closed loop color) HP Z3100, Colorspan Displaymaker, and HP DesignJet 130 both with EFI Designer XL RIPS with full Spectrophotometer Support.

The art director was highly bummed that the InkJet Prints would not match her Dell or our HP LP3065 (both very wide gamut). She had no background in Color Management and no understanding of RGB versus CMYK, if you can imagine this!!

She kept moaning that she needed to find a way for the print to match her display. We kept telling her to refer to the ACD 23 for a more realistic expectation as to how the prints would look in final form.

It was amazing to me her lack of understanding of color gamut and how cmyk printing cannot match today's HC or High Gamut Monitors.

I offer this to this thread as there are a lot of people complaining that Apple's ACD's are "out-of-date," etc.

Actually, they are not: they are simply technology that is very targeted at a group of professionals that Apple use to covet as its "own:" print professionals and print-based photographers.

While Apple has moved past this market heavily into entertainment and broadcast video, their monitors have remained focused on this area. Surely they will update them. But for now, please understand why Apple's ACD's remain as they are and that they still have a large user base that actually needs and prefers these gamut specs.

I am of the belief that a creative shop should have many monitors as we do: some high gamut and some standard SWOP gamut, like ACD's.

We moved far beyond print a long time ago: we focus now on Video, CMS-based web development and broadcasting, and Flash. High Gamut is great for this (though not without its risks even for this market as many end-users have older, low gamut LCD's).

But to call Apple's ACD's out of date is just pain misinformation and lack of knowledge on a complex and tricky subject.

great post; very interesting. i currently own a 23" ACD but have been entertaining the idea of upgrading to a 30", and the HP has been high on the list because of its high contrast, multiple inputs and attractive price compared to the ACD30.

are you saying that using the adjustment controls on the HP, one cannot balance the color to match that of the ACD? or is it just that at its "default" values out of the box, it gives a hyped picture?

vixapphire
Jan 25, 2008, 10:20 AM
Also, I'm considering getting a 17" MBP (soon, I'd like to wait for a refresh but the money isn't coming out of my personal coffers); what is your feeling about it pumping out HD content to a 30" ACD? The ACD would actually be for home use with the MBP. How does it perform pushing HD content?

Thank you kindly!

if i may piggyback onto this question, as i'm in the same boat currently.

given dante's comments about the color inaccuracies of non-ACD monitors (like the HP specifically), I'm wondering whether the built-in mon on the 17" hi-res is accurate?

i'm planning to upgrade out of both a 2.0 coreduo MBP and dual 2gig G5 PM into a single 17" 2.6/8 hi-res MBP and add a 30" monitor to that for home use. If the 17's internal monitor is respectably accurate for printwork, obviously I'll be able to save a few sheckels on the 30" by going HP (enclosure elegance be damned); on the other hand, if the 17 is not accurate it'll make more sense to spend the dough on an ACD.

your thoughts appreciated!

vic

barijazz
Jan 25, 2008, 11:15 AM
I mainly want more ports on the ACDs so that I can hook up my apple t.v. and watch HD movies on it. I can't believe apple didn't offer HD movie rentals for computers.:mad:

jnc
Jan 25, 2008, 12:02 PM
I mainly want more ports on the ACDs so that I can hook up my apple t.v. and watch HD movies on it. I can't believe apple didn't offer HD movie rentals for computers.:mad:

Is HD :apple:tv only? I missed that.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 25, 2008, 01:44 PM
if i may piggyback onto this question, as i'm in the same boat currently.

given dante's comments about the color inaccuracies of non-ACD monitors (like the HP specifically), I'm wondering whether the built-in mon on the 17" hi-res is accurate?

i'm planning to upgrade out of both a 2.0 coreduo MBP and dual 2gig G5 PM into a single 17" 2.6/8 hi-res MBP and add a 30" monitor to that for home use. If the 17's internal monitor is respectably accurate for printwork, obviously I'll be able to save a few sheckels on the 30" by going HP (enclosure elegance be damned); on the other hand, if the 17 is not accurate it'll make more sense to spend the dough on an ACD.

your thoughts appreciated!

vic

Hi Vic,

I have a 17" MBP (latest version, 17" 2.6ghz, 4gig ram, high res matte screen, etc) and can comment but first let me clear up your characterization of some of posts when you said "given dante's comments about the color inaccuracies of non-ACD monitors (like the HP specifically), "

Let me be specific, It is not that Non-ACD monitors in general are not color accurate, it's just that a few of the monitors mentioned within this post may be display a wider gamut of colors than SWOP (general characterization of Offset and Web Printing, usually CMYK ink) can actually print.

Some of these wide gamut displays do not calibrate well due to a complex process of color interpolation at the video card level, and some do. The HP LP3065 is one that does:

http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2950

Just wanted to clear this up so as to not bash HP un-needlessly.

Now for the 17" MPB -- it is good, but not great.

First off a thing about the MBP's -- All their displays are 6bit, and not 8bit like the signal going from a Mac Pro to an ACD. Basically this means that the color range of a MBP is not the same as as that of an ACD or other monitor comparable to an ACD. To make up for the less colors, the drivers dither between the comparable colors.

This makes image edit a bit less accurate for sure.

As far as color accuracy, the Matte MBP's are pretty close to a SWOP gamut, especially in terms of brightness and the feel of "paper."

As far as a MBP being a substitute, I guess it really depends on the level of accuracy you need: photos and art for a newspaper are different beasts than photos headed towards fine art, etc.

I hope this helps a bit.

Dante

dante@sisna.com
Jan 25, 2008, 01:47 PM
or is it just that at its "default" values out of the box, it gives a hyped picture?

Exactly. The HP LP3065 out of the box is very bright, vibrant and not realistic to SWOP printing. But it is beautiful to look at in this state.

It calibrates down to SWOP really well.

Check this out:

http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2950

Visit their report on the calibration of the monitor and see how well it does.

It's sad to see all those amazing colors disappear. But we keep a couple of profiles around -- One for Print, One for general daily use, One for web design to SRGB.

Great Great Monitor. Can't say enough good about it.

I like it better than our Dell 30 HC.

vixapphire
Jan 26, 2008, 09:10 PM
Thanks, Dante. Your patient elucidation is much appreciated. I use my desktop for music production, and my laptop for everything else, including photoshop stuff for CD covers, etc.; the next step is consolidation into a single machine (now that I've sold off a ton of synth hardware and am more in-the-box). The color accuracy is obviously not the be-all and end-all for my applications, but I wouldn't want to save a couple of bucks and end up with something I couldn't use in everything I do.

I saw the HP in person today for the first time, and it does look great. As for the form factor element of the equation, I like the fact that it can be lowered on its stand to where the screen is almost sitting on the tabletop, and the screen can be turned L-R without moving the stand. I have a nice couch off to the side of my rig, where I'd like to be able to turn a 30" monitor for an occasional evening's DVD-viewing with friends, and hadn't yet figured out how this would "go" with an ACD (this studio arrangement is new; previously my couch was behind the main seating position at the rig).

Most of the above is doubtless more than you need or care to know, but let me finish my blathering by thanking you again. Best,

vic

dante@sisna.com
Jan 27, 2008, 06:32 AM
Thanks, Dante. Your patient elucidation is much appreciated. I use my desktop for music production, and my laptop for everything else, including photoshop stuff for CD covers, etc.; the next step is consolidation into a single machine (now that I've sold off a ton of synth hardware and am more in-the-box). The color accuracy is obviously not the be-all and end-all for my applications, but I wouldn't want to save a couple of bucks and end up with something I couldn't use in everything I do.

I saw the HP in person today for the first time, and it does look great. As for the form factor element of the equation, I like the fact that it can be lowered on its stand to where the screen is almost sitting on the tabletop, and the screen can be turned L-R without moving the stand. I have a nice couch off to the side of my rig, where I'd like to be able to turn a 30" monitor for an occasional evening's DVD-viewing with friends, and hadn't yet figured out how this would "go" with an ACD (this studio arrangement is new; previously my couch was behind the main seating position at the rig).

Most of the above is doubtless more than you need or care to know, but let me finish my blathering by thanking you again. Best,

vic

I hear yah, and I do care: selecting a monitor always gives me fits!!

It is always good to get feedback. Yes, that HP is sweet in every respect and adjustability is a strong point. I love that factor. The ACD is weak in that area.

You'll be fine for CD covers: I have done a few of them for clients -- the HP would be good for them especially given their small form factor (that is, it is not like you are going huge pages with giant blocks of color).

Good luck with whatever you go with.

Dante

Val-kyrie
Jan 27, 2008, 10:11 AM
I thought that this thread is about ACDs and I believe that they are primarily used other than watching broadcast tv.

There are already displays with xvYCC and it's gamut is so big that 8-bit colors will show banding. 8-bits are enough for ntsc gamut, but not bigger.
Next versions of bd / hd-dvd specs will include xvYCC and h.264 broadcasts will probably use xvYCC also in the future.

ACDs are also used a lot in professional video post production and there is need for more than 8-bit colors. Also high quality photography needs more than 8-bits. All DSLRs have had deeper color depth than 8-bits from day one.

8-bits is enough when display's real contrast ratio is about 300:1, but when we already have displays that have contrast ratio way beyond that, there is banding on a carefully profiled display. 256 brightness levels just isn't enough. That's why sdi has had 10-bits for a decade.

So there really is need for more than 8-bits with displayport or any other way. Even average consumers will notice that within a lifetime of a new ACD.

When I buy expensive high quality devices like displays, I want them to be high quality at least half of their life, not just now.

It would also be nice if the new displays would be TCO 06 compliant. The current displays are only TCO 03 compliant.

gazfocus
Jan 27, 2008, 11:03 AM
I went to John Lewis' today to look at the Apple Cinema Displays (I've always thought I'd prefer a glossy display like my HP 22"), but I was suprised at how much more accurate the colour was on the ACD in comparison to the 24" iMac.

I couldn't tell which one had a nicer picture as they were both locked onto the Mac login screen but, after seeing them, I must admit, I like the Matte more than the glossy I think.

Digital Skunk
Jan 27, 2008, 11:13 AM
Screw ACDs.... :mad: I am going with the Nec Displays!

Gemylon
Jan 31, 2008, 03:46 PM
Got one ACD 23" already.
Planning to purchase another one in next two weeks.


I think they're brilliant displays.

Been working with them a lot,
and never had any problems with color accuracy towards digital printing jobs.
I work mostly with posters, covers and booklets.
Sometimes in CMYC but most RGB.

Of course an upgrade is always welcome,
so if they come out with a new 'line' next Tuesday,
I'd be happy to grab one with build in iSight and a few extra ports...

;)

G

isoMorpheus
Feb 1, 2008, 01:33 AM
Not anytime soon, Apple's shipping the cinema displays with Leopard as desktop on the boxing now.

jnc
Feb 1, 2008, 06:15 AM
Not anytime soon, Apple's shipping the cinema displays with Leopard as desktop on the boxing now.

So do the MBP boxes still have Tiger displayed on them?

Parental
Feb 1, 2008, 09:03 AM
ACD doesnt have HDCP now in anacronistic.I can't buy a display if i can't use bluray o ps3.For you when NEW ACD can come out?

barijazz
Feb 1, 2008, 06:13 PM
So do the MBP boxes still have Tiger displayed on them?

Actually yes lol, I'll dig up my MBP box and show you (just got it a month ago).

barijazz
Feb 1, 2008, 06:15 PM
.

JesterJJZ
Feb 1, 2008, 08:59 PM
Personally I don't see the point of having a 24'' screen if the res is the same as the 23''. It's more about resolution than size for me. If they are the same I'd rather have the smaller one.

jnc
Feb 1, 2008, 09:52 PM
Actually yes lol, I'll dig up my MBP box and show you (just got it a month ago).

Aw, then that's bad news for the ACDs... but perhaps good news for new MBPs? :D

^squirrel^
Feb 8, 2008, 10:45 AM
ACD doesnt have HDCP now in anacronistic.I can't buy a display if i can't use bluray o ps3.For you when NEW ACD can come out?

So in theory Apple wont release Bluray until they release compatible displays. We could be waiting a long time before we see Bluray as an option then on Macs!

jnc
Feb 8, 2008, 01:26 PM
So in theory Apple wont release Bluray until they release compatible displays. We could be waiting a long time before we see Bluray as an option then on Macs!

Sometime this year... Montevina MBP with Blu Ray burner, HDCP ACDs with HDMI and Blu Ray drive option on Mac Pro, then. :D

a104375
Feb 18, 2008, 11:21 AM
So in theory Apple wont release Bluray until they release compatible displays. We could be waiting a long time before we see Bluray as an option then on Macs!

deffinitly why would apple offer bluray and the let the users go and buy a hd display from another company, I dont think they will offer it until they have their own hd compatible displays

supamario
Apr 9, 2008, 10:40 AM
they always come out big...i'm keeping my hopes up

Johnny ireland
Apr 11, 2008, 04:24 AM
Is there still a chance that we might see a new Cinema Display before the 18th?

Anyone got any thoughts/predictions on when the new ACDs will come?

nick9191
Apr 11, 2008, 04:32 AM
June

I would like to see,

thinner displays
HDMI
Better quality
Better response times

And 20" at £200 23" at £350 30" at £700

Beardy man
Apr 12, 2008, 02:34 AM
June

I would like to see,

thinner displays
HDMI
Better quality
Better response times

And 20" at £200 23" at £350 30" at £700

I couldn't wait.

Sitting here typing at my 3 week old 30" ACD I'm wondering what would the advantage of a thinner display be? (It's the foot that takes the space)

I don't get any noticeable lag on video or large graphics so how much faster do you need the response time to be?

Build quality is far in excess of any other monitor I've ever had - this thing is built like a tank and the image quality (as a print designer) is spot on. It may not suit people who need an oversaturated bright display but for me it's hard to imagine a higher image quality.

Yes, I'd like the price to have been £700 but it isn't and compared to an Eizo it's a fair price. Using a 30" professionally, in comparison to a 17" monitor (okay, big jump) I used to spend 50% of my mouse time (subjective) moving windows around the screen to get at what I wanted. The productivity gains mean this monitor will pay for itself in 6-9 months. If you want to buy a 30" for leisure use then it's a luxury and cost shouldn't be an issue.

Even if new ACD's came out at the above specs tomorrow, I wouldn't regret having bought this monitor when I did.

HDMI isn't an issue for me as I watch movies on my TV and don't have time to get into video editing etc. ;)

jnc
Apr 12, 2008, 03:12 PM
HDMI isn't an issue for me as I watch movies on my TV and don't have time to get into video editing etc. ;)

I only have room for one display, and need something that will run Mac and consoles... currently settling for a 1366x768 HDTV :( would love to replace it with an ACD... component and HDMI would fix that...

kamm
Apr 12, 2008, 08:17 PM
700 quids for 30"???
Hahaha, this is Apple, man - grease up and bend over, you'll get raped brutally if you need anything high-end or close to it.

Sometimes I wonder why would anyone buy any additional HW from Apple, their prices are so laughably off, so jacked-up while they don't offer anything extra - let alone when rather less - over any competing product.

You want the world's best 30" display for TV or any other video stuff? Go and get the Gateway 3000 for $1.5k, it even has the HQV Reon scaler chip on-board, nothing can touch it, that's for sure. You want good colors? Try any of those 92% NTSC gamut displays (e.g. Dell 3007WFP-HC or HP) for ~$1k.
All of these sport lot more ports and features than Apple displays, lower pricetag and better performance. Other than 'matching' purposes - my fav Apple Store quote is "it's best to use a Mac with an ACD" ROFL - nowadays it makes zero sense to waste money on any Apple display, I think.
How this will change with new products coming form Apple, I don't know but Apple's less-than-stellar track record - brutally overpriced yet rather mediocre releases, first runs always pagued with stuff like 'pink problem' etc - doesn't make me think they will do anything revolutionary at this time but who knows...:)

Bubba Satori
May 12, 2008, 07:20 AM
Anyone got any thoughts/predictions on when the new ACDs will come?

I'm thinking around the time the Nehalem Mac Pros come out. End of this year, maybe.

macwall
May 15, 2008, 09:22 PM
but the apple displays look pretty on the outside too!

jnc
May 15, 2008, 09:47 PM
I'm thinking around the time the Nehalem Mac Pros come out. End of this year, maybe.

Took Apple a year and a half to update the original Mac Pro - you think they will close the gap between the current and next-gen to below 12 months??!

Anyway... I'm holding out for an ACD announcement... and nothing. It's been two years without change, that's crazy. Has forced me to consider Dell... :(