PDA

View Full Version : New Cinema 20" versus Old Cinema 20"


cmvsm
Nov 13, 2004, 01:32 AM
Hello Everyone,

I was looking at the new Apple Cinema 20" with the silver bezel and have decided that I actually like the older 20" model better with the clear plastic frame around the screen. Can anyone tell me why I should buy the newer version or why I shouldn't buy the older version? I didn't see any significant advancements on Apple's site with the new model, but thought someone here might be able to enlighten me further. Thanks!

erroneous
Nov 13, 2004, 01:59 AM
Can anyone tell me why I should buy the newer version or why I shouldn't buy the older version? I didn't see any significant advancements on Apple's site with the new model, but thought someone here might be able to enlighten me further.

It's a small thing but, because of the change to the stand, the new model can be angled horizontally or slightly down. I watch a lot of TV from a sofa by my desk, which puts me below the level of the screen. I just turn my 23" Alu around, point it down at my viewing position, and watch away. :)

Pretty minor, but worth bearing in mind if you were going to use it in a domestic situation.

bidge
Nov 13, 2004, 02:11 AM
DVI! Firewire 400 and USB2.0 hub.

unless the old one is waaaay cheaper go with the new one

cmvsm
Nov 13, 2004, 02:23 AM
DVI! Firewire 400 and USB2.0 hub.

unless the old one is waaaay cheaper go with the new one


I see that the old Cinema display has a USB hub in it as well. Is this a 1.0 hub or something? What's the advantage to having a 2.0 hub and firewire 400? What would I be hooking up to these? I can get the new display for almost the same price as the old. I'm not sure why the old displays have not come down in price as the new ones were brought in.

bidge
Nov 13, 2004, 02:27 AM
The old displays use a proprietary apple connector called ADC. It uses one connector to send the power, usb and video signal.

If you have your machine on the ground, it can be quite useful having those ports on the monitor.

mklos
Nov 13, 2004, 08:04 PM
I think the new displays are the way to go. Thinking into the future, I'd like to think that any new Macs with regular graphics cards in them will NOT have an ADC connector in them. The NVIDIA Cards, and newer ATI cards that aren't announced yet will NOT have ADC connectors on them. So if you buy the old display you'll probably be looking at either an expensive adapter (ADC to DVI), or another display if you ever upgrade down the road. Just something to think about.

Plus the Aluminum display use newer technology, have a brigher backlight, and is an overall better display. The USB 2.0 and FW 400 ports will come in extremely handy as mentioned before by someone else. Yes, the old display only has USB 1.1 ports.

cmvsm
Nov 13, 2004, 10:56 PM
Thanks for your insight. I did buy the old model as I heard some "pink" comments about the new and visually the old looks better in my opinion. I thought that operation was pretty much congruent.

I did look up ADC to DVI connectors should I need it in the future. Looks as if they are only about 30 bucks. Do they affect picture quality or is it strictly a pass through type of connection? Also, if it is a passthrough, does the power and usb still get picked up? I would assume so but just checking.

erroneous
Nov 14, 2004, 01:02 AM
I did look up ADC to DVI connectors should I need it in the future. Looks as if they are only about 30 bucks. Do they affect picture quality or is it strictly a pass through type of connection? Also, if it is a passthrough, does the power and usb still get picked up? I would assume so but just checking.

The converters to connect a DVI monitor to an ADC output socket tend to be about the price you're quoting, but that's the reverse of the one you might need. The ones to connect an ADC monitor to a DVI output socket seem to be closer to the 100 dollar mark. I think I've seen people report quality issues with both types but, since it's a digital signal, I don't understand that particular voodoo...

The official Apple convertor has a USB in port and a power supply.

Capt Underpants
Nov 14, 2004, 10:47 AM
Thanks for your insight. I did buy the old model as I heard some "pink" comments about the new and visually the old looks better in my opinion. I thought that operation was pretty much congruent.


The newer ones do have higher brightness, pixel response time, and adjustability... Does anyone know how the old cinema displays compare with the new ones as far as ghosting goes? Personally, I would've bought the new dell display. It has everything the new apple display has, but it's $500 bucks cheaper.

wPod
Nov 14, 2004, 11:29 AM
isnt the old one HD and the new one is not HD?

edesignuk
Nov 14, 2004, 11:31 AM
isnt the old one HD and the new one is not HD?
They're both the same resolution, how can one be HD and not the other? :confused:

Capt Underpants
Nov 14, 2004, 05:14 PM
isnt the old one HD and the new one is not HD?

Neither of the 20 inchers are HD.

Rod Rod
Nov 14, 2004, 06:54 PM
Neither of the 20 inchers are HD.

Both of the 20" monitors, new and old, are HD. They have a higher resolution than HDTV sets which have 1280x768 pixels, and there are many of those out there. Those HDTVs use an interpolation scheme to scale 1080i signals (1920x1080) to fit their 1280x768 screens.

The 23" monitor can display 1080i at its native resolution, and that's HD. However, 720p is also HD, at 1280x720. The 20" monitor is plenty capable of showing 720p HD properly. For that matter, the 17" Studio Display can handle 720p HD natively.

MrArchitect1
Nov 14, 2004, 09:37 PM
The new 23" monitors are alot brighter than the old ones, i noticed the differnce between them straight away. Old 23" are 200 cd/sqm, new one is 260 cd/sqm.
The old 20" 230 cd/sqm, new 20" 260 cd/sqm, still noticable difference.
The old 20" are still bright enough.

pros of new 20" monitor :)
firewire at monitor,USB2 at monitor,brighter,slimer,able to tilt forward(witout fear of fall over), smaller profile (new 23" monitor is same height/width to edge of aluminium as the old 20" to outside of plastic)
it also has an on/off switch for the monitor, not the computer.

cons of new 20" monitor :(
usb requires port in compter, only gain 1 usb port with monitor, not 2
Firewire only adds one port as well(needs one port in computer for the 2 in the monitor)
Power Supply needs additional power point, a spagetti of cables at the end.

small note :) the little mirrored apple on the old 20" does warn me when people approach from behind, and for those who love post it notes, go with the plastic surround ;)
its just plain evil to put post its on these aluminium surrounds :eek:

vixapphire
Nov 14, 2004, 10:09 PM
i recently went through the same process with the old v. new 23" monitor. despite all my best efforts, i didn't notice the brightness as significantly as an earlier poster did; in fact, the blacks were blacker on the old monitor. then again, after all was said and done, all you need is a 7" square footprint for the new one v. the old monitors' tripod. after a few years of working with the older blue & white crt's and their aggravating tripod feet, i'm totally over making that kind of accommodation in the workspace. my monitor's perched on a 36" bello speaker stand behind my logic controls, above the q and ready to rock. the new monitors also possess a timeless appearance; the plastic-edged models already look like 2000's news, and i'm at a loss to imagine how one goes beyond minimalism like the newer form factor when it comes to timeless styling. barring technical failure, this thing will look good whereever it's put. and, unlike the last 17" crt monitor or any of the blue/white ones, the older 23"s don't have that "period/nostalgic" vibe to them - they'll just be looking more tired in 2 years, not "classic" (unless hooked up to a cube...).

just my two bits of aesthetics opinion and other useless bilge. technically, i think the differences are small enough not to matter.

vixapphire

cmvsm
Nov 14, 2004, 11:18 PM
Well boys, I got the "older" 20" model. Despite some of the posts, I think that the acrylic look still has pizzaz and sets the monitor apart from all others. I just felt like the current design is what you see everywhere from all LCD vendors where it just blends into the crowd, except for maybe the silver color which is different from the black or grey of Dell or Sony. Even when you see the acrylic 20" studio monitor from the back it still looks as if it has a special look unlike the others.

If asthetics are not your forte, then maybe the cheaper monitors would have a ground to stand upon, but I've always heard from other Graphic Designers that the color proofing on the screen of a Mac is the same as a physical proofing and saves money and time. This is what I was after.

So in the old monitor I've got good looks and outstanding performance...what else would you need?

Capt Underpants
Nov 15, 2004, 04:16 PM
Both of the 20" monitors, new and old, are HD. They have a higher resolution than HDTV sets which have 1280x768 pixels, and there are many of those out there. Those HDTVs use an interpolation scheme to scale 1080i signals (1920x1080) to fit their 1280x768 screens.

The 23" monitor can display 1080i at its native resolution, and that's HD. However, 720p is also HD, at 1280x720. The 20" monitor is plenty capable of showing 720p HD properly. For that matter, the 17" Studio Display can handle 720p HD natively.

It seems stupid for apple not to market them as HD, when they are, then...

Rod Rod
Nov 15, 2004, 05:30 PM
It seems stupid for apple not to market them as HD, when they are, then...

Apple marketing isn't always to be believed. :)

Well boys, I got the "older" 20" model.

Congratulations! The screen goes better with your keyboard and mouse, and if you get the Apple Pro Speakers or harman-kardon Soundsticks those will also look great next to that screen. As far as color-proofing I'm sure you already know you'll have to get one of those USB color calibration tools.

Sun Baked
Nov 15, 2004, 05:49 PM
It seems stupid for apple not to market them as HD, when they are, then...It's also smart marketing on Apple's part to get you to step up to the more expensive 23" monitor, because it has a HD in the name when the 20" doesn't.

They all look like they have an aspect ratio of 16x9 inherent to HD pictures -- but I haven't measured them, and they are all wide aspect ratio monitors (actually a 16x10 aspect ratio by pixel density.)

You could tell the difference in aspect ration between these and the old 17" Studio Display, which wasn't a wide aspect ration display.

cmvsm
Nov 15, 2004, 09:14 PM
Apple marketing isn't always to be believed. :)



Congratulations! The screen goes better with your keyboard and mouse, and if you get the Apple Pro Speakers or harman-kardon Soundsticks those will also look great next to that screen. As far as color-proofing I'm sure you already know you'll have to get one of those USB color calibration tools.


Thanks Rod. Much appreciated. Speaking of color calibration tools, do you or anyone know where I can these at a decent price?

absolut_mac
Nov 15, 2004, 10:38 PM
Thanks Rod. Much appreciated. Speaking of color calibration tools, do you or anyone know where I can these at a decent price?

Try these places....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/

http://www.adorama.com/

The last two might have a demo or a used one for a reasonable discount.