PDA

View Full Version : Apple Officially Discontinues 30-Inch and 24-Inch Cinema Displays




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jul 27, 2010, 08:48 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-officially-discontinues-30-inch-and-24-inch-cinema-displays/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/27/085851-27inch.jpg

Although we already noted this fact (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-releases-27-inch-led-cinema-display/) as a footnote in today's 27" LED Cinema Display announcement article, we felt it important to point out -- Apple has officially discontinued the 24" and 30" Apple Cinema Displays. Going forward, today's 27" LED Cinema Display will be the only display offered by Apple. Per Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/article/152954/2010/07/27inchcinemadisplay.html):At the same time, this marks the end of the road for the 24-inch and 30-inch Apple displays. According to Apple vice president of hardware marketing David Moody, those products will continue to be sold until supplies run out, at which point the new 27-inch display will be Apple's only standalone offering.The new monitor offers the same horizontal resolution as the now discontinued 30" display at 2650 across, though fewer pixels vertically (1440 vs 1600). The 30" has been the topic of much speculation as Apple has left the large screen display relatively stagnant over the years. Apple's focus on portable products is apparent as the 27" LED Display appears to be primarily targeted at laptop owners.

Apple will continue to sell the 24" and 30" LCDs until stock runs out.

Article Link: Apple Officially Discontinues 30-Inch and 24-Inch Cinema Displays (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-officially-discontinues-30-inch-and-24-inch-cinema-displays/)



saxon48
Jul 27, 2010, 08:49 PM
It would have been kind of nice to see the 30" models keep coming. :(

iBookG4user
Jul 27, 2010, 08:50 PM
It would be nice if they would continue to offer a matte external display :(

PetitBourgeois
Jul 27, 2010, 08:50 PM
Come on, Apple! It's a mistake to discontinue them.

MorphingDragon
Jul 27, 2010, 08:51 PM
Seems odd not to have a 24" and a 27" LED Screen.

aethelbert
Jul 27, 2010, 08:51 PM
It would be nice if they would continue to offer a matte external display
No, consumers love glossy displays. That's all that counts.

saxon48
Jul 27, 2010, 08:51 PM
It would be nice if they would continue to offer a matte external display :(

That too. It doesn't seem that hard to give customers some choice in the ACD's...

LouieSamman
Jul 27, 2010, 08:51 PM
we need to see a 40" screen in the later years.

ouimetnick
Jul 27, 2010, 08:52 PM
We just need a 21.5" display for $599. 27" is to big for some, but not me. :D

iBookG4user
Jul 27, 2010, 08:53 PM
No, consumers love glossy displays. That's all that counts.

I don't want an overpriced mirror, though :p

(At least it would be nice if they would've left the option for a matte screen, like they did for the 15" MacBook Pros)

goobot
Jul 27, 2010, 08:53 PM
why would they do this?

gramtrax
Jul 27, 2010, 08:53 PM
And still no mention still of a matte version of the display.......

Spanky Deluxe
Jul 27, 2010, 08:53 PM
Ah well, looks like if my 30" ACD ever gives up the ghost (touches wood and prays that it doesn't), I'll have to take my money elsewhere. 27" and less pixels just doesn't cut it.

SnoFlo
Jul 27, 2010, 08:53 PM
Goodbye Apple, hello NEC.

Sun Baked
Jul 27, 2010, 08:54 PM
The lack of any tech specs on the LED Display page was sort of making that obvious.

Though, with the further decline in Apple Display choices the DisplayPort now seems even more like a rather silly port standard.

wordoflife
Jul 27, 2010, 08:54 PM
Shame, I wanted to purchase a 24'' when I had some money later.

gri
Jul 27, 2010, 08:55 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

iBookG4user
Jul 27, 2010, 08:57 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

Well there's a slippery slope logic fallacy if I've ever seen one...

Jaro65
Jul 27, 2010, 08:58 PM
It is surprising that they would only want to offer a 27" monitor, as it may simply be too big for some people. It would have made sense to keep offering the 24" ACD. Are there maybe more monitors coming our way? Or is this maybe SJ telling us: Thou shalt not use a monitor smaller than 27!"

MorphingDragon
Jul 27, 2010, 08:58 PM
Ah well, looks like if my 30" ACD ever gives up the ghost (touches wood and prays that it doesn't), I'll have to take my money elsewhere. 27" and less pixels just doesn't cut it.

Companies love 16:9 Computer Screens, they can be made with the same factory equipment as TVs. Expect to find it difficult to get another 30" monitor in a couple of years.

If they made a 32" monitor with a bigger pixel count...


Well there's a slippery slope logic fallacy if I've ever seen one...

You haven't spent a lot of time with your parents lately have you?

Bonch
Jul 27, 2010, 08:59 PM
I just bought a brand new 30" display from Apple Store online. It arrived clearly used and dirty. I looked up the serial number and it was manufactured in March 2007. I kid you not. I called Apple and they said it had just been sitting on the shelf all that time.

munstedt
Jul 27, 2010, 08:59 PM
why!?!!?!!!!!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!:(

QCassidy352
Jul 27, 2010, 09:01 PM
Not getting this one at all. One display option, glossy only, at $1000? I'm sure it's a beautiful display... but methinks this is taking the "simplicity of options" approach too far. I liked the old lineup with a 20, 23, and 30. I guess they could redo that as a 21.5, 24, 27, or maybe 21.5, 27, 30, but there are a lot of people who want smaller than 27 and a lot who want bigger (and of course the glossy issue).

Brien
Jul 27, 2010, 09:01 PM
We just need a 21.5" display for $599. 27" is to big for some, but not me. :D

This would be perfect, however I think Apple isn't really in the external display market anymore, considering that 80% of their computers include one.

why would they do this?
Money. It's cheaper to make one display that uses the same panel as the 27" iMac, and not have to order more displays that aren't being used in computers. Remember, the 24" display uses the same panel as the old 24" iMac.

It's also why I would LOVE a 21.5" ACD.

DylanLikesPorn
Jul 27, 2010, 09:01 PM
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/05/darth_vader_nooo.jpg

gri
Jul 27, 2010, 09:02 PM
Well there's a slippery slope logic fallacy if I've ever seen one...

Well, I am not saying that it is going to be like it but think about it: Mac Os delayed for the iOS. Updates later and later with few innovations (remember when most of the updates had something really new in it and not only a faster processor). iPad and iPhone before Mac (see OS), form above function (Antennagate), only glossy displays, and only 27 with mini-display port... I am getting worried where Apple will be 5 years from now. They ditched the Computer out of their name a while ago...

Unless they plan to come out later with another size but than why ditch the smaller version, doesn't make sense...

SLR2009
Jul 27, 2010, 09:02 PM
How come they will be discontinuing the 24" Display? I own the 24" LED Display. Is there any reason to get the 27" display if you already own the 24"? Won't text on the 27" be smaller? That's one reason that I want to stick with the 24" because text becomes too tiny at 27" displays resolution.

kinless
Jul 27, 2010, 09:02 PM
Meh, there's plenty of monitors out there to choose from. It really does not have to have a fruit on it.

Despite the fact that they say "Dell" on them, a pair of 24" U2410 beauties work wonders for me... matte IPS display, 16x10 ratio, multi-card reader, USB2 hub, all kinds of inputs including HDMI and DisplayPort, and almost half the cost as . No, it isn't LED, but if that's the only negative, I'm over it. (A Logitech 9000 takes care of the webcam part.)

Apple's monitors are now consumer-based, not geek-based. We really shouldn't even be crying about this.

zedsdead
Jul 27, 2010, 09:02 PM
Even though there is a resolution and size loss, I don't think people would be so upset if Apple had a Matte version as well.

aethelbert
Jul 27, 2010, 09:02 PM
(At least it would be nice if they would've left the option for a matte screen, like they did for the 15" MacBook Pros)
I wonder how much they'd like to charge for such a coating on a display this large...

ranReloaded
Jul 27, 2010, 09:03 PM
Seems odd not to have a 24" and a 27" LED Screen.

Heck, since they're at it why don't they also discontinue the 13 and 15 inch MBPs?

On a second thought, they also 'discontinued' the 24 inch iMac once the 27 inch came out... What they should do is offer a 21.5 inch monitor too, to be consistent.

JeffDM
Jul 27, 2010, 09:03 PM
What do you do with the notebook power connector if you're not using a notebook? Hot glue the edges of the little cap on it to keep it from falling off by accident?

skyline r34
Jul 27, 2010, 09:03 PM
I just don't understand why is Apple killing the 24 inch LED, the 30 inch for one thing but why the 24" seems kinda odd, Maybe more sizes will be available at a later time is my guess but i'm not waiting anymore just going to pick up the 27 inch in september, For 2yrs been using a 17 inch on my 08 Mac Pro

Lesser Evets
Jul 27, 2010, 09:04 PM
They need a 30" with retina display.
End of discussion.
...and it has to fit in your pocket and have 450+ hours of battery life.

Consultant
Jul 27, 2010, 09:05 PM
RIP 30" cinema display. I remember the days when the 23" ACD was huge.


They need a 30" with retina display.
End of discussion.
...and it has to fit in your pocket and have 450+ hours of battery life.

I heard that's coming out next Tuesday, and the Tuesday after that, and so on.

Spanky Deluxe
Jul 27, 2010, 09:06 PM
Companies love 16:9 Computer Screens, they can be made with the same factory equipment as TVs. Expect to find it difficult to get another 30" monitor in a couple of years.

If they made a 32" monitor with a bigger pixel count...

The 16:9 ratio doesn't really bother me. The loss in physical screen size and number of pixels does bother me though. A 2844x1600 30" screen would have been fine. A 32" with a 3072x1728 screen would be more like it though. I'm sure Apple will eventually release such a screen though and they'll probably market it with a whole "we listened to our customers, they loved the size of our old 30" screen and loved the DPI of our 27" screen. So now we introduce the best of both world, the 32" high res screen".

KnightWRX
Jul 27, 2010, 09:07 PM
What do you do with the notebook power connector if you're not using a notebook? Hot glue the edges of the little cap on it to keep it from falling off by accident?

How about just leave it dangling ? What does it matter really ?

RMo
Jul 27, 2010, 09:08 PM
Well, the 30" certainly isn't a surprise; the fact that they hadn't updated it in a while was a clue.

The 24", however, I find quite surprising. In fact, I was hoping they would come out with a smaller (read: more affordable) display, too--but instead they went in the other direction. I guess they're content leaving the "good displays for normal people" market to Dell and catering to people with loads of cash to blow who want a huge glossy screen (and one that leaves an awkward MagSafe cord hanging if you're not using it on a MacBook or MacBook Pro).

Yamcha
Jul 27, 2010, 09:09 PM
I don't know why Apple doesn't offer a variety of sizes for the cinema display..

iBookG4user
Jul 27, 2010, 09:09 PM
You haven't spent a lot of time with your parents lately have you?

Eh? What does that have to do with anything? :confused:

I wonder how much they'd like to charge for such a coating on a display this large...

I can't imagine that it would be that much more. Plus they wouldn't have to use the glass, so they would save on manufacturing there.

Eric5h5
Jul 27, 2010, 09:10 PM
Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

How will anyone actually write any iOS apps in that case?

--Eric

dagomike
Jul 27, 2010, 09:12 PM
No surprise they're dropping the 30-inch. Actually I thought they already had.

Strange though not keeping the 24 around. Must not be profitable for them. After all if you're going to drop the $$$ on a Mac Pro, what's the point of saving a couple hundred on small display.

I assume some day we'll get a 30+ inch LED.

MorphingDragon
Jul 27, 2010, 09:12 PM
Eh? What does that have to do with anything? :confused:

Parents love to use Slippery Slopes to try scare children into being good.

alex.sebenski
Jul 27, 2010, 09:12 PM
This just screams that they're making room for their new Apple TV product in larger sizes. But that's just me dreaming.

BenRoethig
Jul 27, 2010, 09:13 PM
why!?!!?!!!!!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!:(

Because only one opinion matters at Apple.

saxon48
Jul 27, 2010, 09:14 PM
They need a 30" with retina display.
End of discussion.
...and it has to fit in your pocket and have 450+ hours of battery life.

Wait for the next update.

saxon48
Jul 27, 2010, 09:15 PM
Because only one opinion matters at Apple.

And I bet we all know who that one opinion is...

csalm87
Jul 27, 2010, 09:16 PM
If they're going to discontinue the 24 inch, the least they could do is lower the price on the 27 inch.

macduke
Jul 27, 2010, 09:16 PM
Apple won't ditch OS X for iOS until iOS can do everything OS X can do. So don't worry.

As for the displays, I was hoping for a smaller, cheaper option. What exactly is the benefit of buying a $1000 external display vs the what, $1700 27" iMac? I guess if you don't need the computer? Otherwise, aren't they similarly spec'd IPS LED backlit panels?

I bought a perfectly fine 26" H-IPS panel 1920x1200 with polarizer and 4 USB port hub for $600 over two years ago. It's an odd brand (Doublesight?) but had a name brand panel when I researched it (can't rememer which). It has great viewing angles and wide color gamut that I actually had to restrict because it was too much! Works great for graphic design when calibrated with a Spyder3. I even use it to play Halo 3 on my xBox and watch Netflix. I think for now I'll just stick with 3rd party manufacturers. Apple clearly isn't committed to this area. The aesthetics are top notch, however, but nobody visits my back office anyway! Black plastic will have to do.

Now let's get those quad core MBP's next year!

cvaldes
Jul 27, 2010, 09:16 PM
why would they do this?
The computer monitor market is cut-throat. Apple is probably finding it difficult to compete while still maintaining their margins.

This is probably just their token monitor offering for those who insist on having an Apple display. They are likely buying 27" screens at a more favorable price since there's an iMac that may be using the same part.

There is no such advantage for the 24" nor 30" screens.

It would be safe to expect in the future that Apple only offers one monitor at the same size of the screen of the largest iMac. If you want a different sized monitor, buy from a third-party monitor manufacturer. It appears that Apple is willing to concede that low-margin market (just like they have conceded the netbook marketplace).

Smurfed
Jul 27, 2010, 09:17 PM
Apple just keeps taking out options, there goes your freedom to choose.

Just stupid.

Bubba Satori
Jul 27, 2010, 09:17 PM
We just need a 21.5" display for $599

You've got to be kidding. That's a good price from 5 years ago.

TimTheEnchanter
Jul 27, 2010, 09:19 PM
So silly that Apple sells their displays for so much, then to only go with a single size at fricken $1,000. They truly do not want to be in the external display business anymore except for the iMac and selling a limited quantity of "trophy displays".

Pros, you're now on your own to BYOD. Apple doesn't want your business, just buy their MacPro and go away.

On the other hand, HP has what could be a killer display for us graphics folks.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=957524
A 30" display that is said to be 100% sRGB accurate and something like 95% Adobe RGB accurate IN MATTE, 3-year warranty ($159 takes it to 5-years) for $1,300 ($1175 someone scored searching). Worth looking at if not Dell Ultrasharps have been great at my office.

:confused:

kainjow
Jul 27, 2010, 09:20 PM
why!?!!?!!!!!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!:(

What does this mean (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI#t=01m16s)? :D

MacJones
Jul 27, 2010, 09:20 PM
Glad I bought my 24" last month with the education discount, 27" is to big and to expensive for me.

German
Jul 27, 2010, 09:20 PM
ACD = Glossy + just one Displayport = Joke

But it does not matter what Apple does with the ACDs. There are many other manufacturers.

queshy
Jul 27, 2010, 09:22 PM
I understand them discontinuing the 30" ...it's so old now...but why the 24"? Why not just drop the price a bit.

Furrybeagle
Jul 27, 2010, 09:22 PM
How come they will be discontinuing the 24" Display? I own the 24" LED Display. Is there any reason to get the 27" display if you already own the 24"? Won't text on the 27" be smaller? That's one reason that I want to stick with the 24" because text becomes too tiny at 27" displays resolution.

If you want more screen real estate the 27” may be more useful. It’s also more expensive and takes up more space than a 24”.

The text shouldn’t be significantly smaller. It’s pretty close to a MacBook (Pro). Comparing pixel densities:

24” LED, 94 ppi
27” LED, 109 ppi
23” Alu, 98 ppi
30” Alu, 100 ppi
15” PowerBook, 102 ppi
15” MacBook Pro, 113 ppi
15” MacBook Pro Highres, 132 ppi.


See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_density

TurboSC
Jul 27, 2010, 09:23 PM
I was hoping for a nicely priced 24 inch... but overall pretty disappointed, I guess I'll just stick with Dell / Samsung :P

noodle654
Jul 27, 2010, 09:24 PM
So if I wanted to buy an Apple display I have one option? A 27" screen?

MacJones
Jul 27, 2010, 09:26 PM
So if I wanted to buy an Apple display I have one option? A 27" screen?

That's what it sounds like. :)

triplecore1
Jul 27, 2010, 09:27 PM
does apple even sell many of these? Who in their right mind would pay $749 for a 24inch computer screen. I might as well by a flat planel tv and use it as a monitor.

HiRez
Jul 27, 2010, 09:28 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only?.

Well, the new Mac Pros do have dual mini display ports. Although they seem consumer-ey, they are high-bandwidth digital pipes which can also carry audio and power, can support multiple displays with one cable, so there's no reason they can't be used for professional applications. In fact, DisplayPort technology is considerably more capable and flexible than DVI or HDMI.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:29 PM
Wow... I'm really surprised. If this doesn't show Apple's lack of interest in the "Pro" market I don't know what does.

ZooCrewMan
Jul 27, 2010, 09:29 PM
Why "Apple OFFICIALLY Discontinues..." Why not simply "Apple Discontinues?" Why do people feel the need to over-use the word officially? And do it incorrectly?

REM314
Jul 27, 2010, 09:30 PM
They're only going to have a 27'' display? And its geared towards laptop owners? Have fun frying your GPUs.

SockRolid
Jul 27, 2010, 09:31 PM
I hope that Apple will release a new high-end monitor, maybe 32" diagonal or so. Just for the pros out there who really need big screens with high pixel density. I would never need one, but I'm sure there's a market for it, even at Apple prices...

entatlrg
Jul 27, 2010, 09:32 PM
Apple is clearly chasing profits and bottom lines now more than ever. At the same time they're disappointing Mac users, who helped make the company what it is today.

It's sad in one way, mind blowing in another. But hey, if you're a consumer looking for a cool phone and a consumption device then look Apple up ... if you're a Mac user looking for 'wow' products, or even sensible moves like KEEPING the 24" ACD, we're going to be sadly disappointed I think.

And, there's no company making similar products to Apple so we're screwed in a way ... either go with the Apple/SJ flow or what, buy Lenovo, Dell, Sony ... in my experience that's a bad idea too.

Sit back and enjoy the ride I guess and believe S. Jobs will eventually deliver products that please us, including Mac users...

sigma8
Jul 27, 2010, 09:33 PM
I already have enough mirrors in my apartment, I don't need an Apple-branded one.

techpr
Jul 27, 2010, 09:34 PM
a 21.5 ACD is needed. Like the old 23 and 30's.

meatballs
Jul 27, 2010, 09:35 PM
Didn't Steve Jobs say that the monitor market was "a bag of hurt" or something like that? Maybe he was talking about computers I forget.

:D

saxon48
Jul 27, 2010, 09:35 PM
Apple just keeps taking out options, there goes your freedom to choose.

Just stupid.

Conform different.

August West
Jul 27, 2010, 09:35 PM
I'm glad I picked up my 24" last Christmas. 27" is just too large for my needs and I much prefer the 16:10 to the 16:9 of the new 27".

HLdan
Jul 27, 2010, 09:36 PM
Apple just keeps taking out options, there goes your freedom to choose.

Just stupid.

You still have freedom to choose, you just choose a different brand. Owning an Apple product is not required by law. :p

HiRez
Jul 27, 2010, 09:37 PM
Didn't Steve Jobs say that the monitor market was "a bag of hurt" or something like that? Maybe he was talking about computers I forget.

I believe he was talking about Blu-Ray when he said that.

abhimat.gautam
Jul 27, 2010, 09:37 PM
I liked the 24-inch display. Maybe they're planning to turn the iMac's 21.5-inch screen into a new display.

Icaras
Jul 27, 2010, 09:38 PM
Wow, the 24" ACD must have the shortest life span of any Apple product ever.

Speaking of which, I just returned my 24" ACD refurb today, so those who want to find a steal for the cheapest priced display Apple has to offer, keep an eye out on that refurb page ;)

PerfSeeker
Jul 27, 2010, 09:39 PM
Non-story, there are a million other wonderful displays out there.

FrankieTDouglas
Jul 27, 2010, 09:39 PM
No, consumers love glossy displays. That's all that counts.

Except we're finally not talking about the damn Apple consumer market for a change. These are products for the professionals. As such, the products should be tailored to them, not simply creating the iPhone template and scaling it up and down.

mward333
Jul 27, 2010, 09:40 PM
I just bought a brand new 30" display from Apple Store online. It arrived clearly used and dirty. I looked up the serial number and it was manufactured in March 2007. I kid you not. I called Apple and they said it had just been sitting on the shelf all that time.

Bonch, that was an awesome post. I am glad that you shared it with us. Very interesting! Thank you for sharing!

I bought my 3 monitors (each 30 inch) back in summer of 2007, and they are all still working great for me, except for one of the power blocks, which died within a few weeks, and Apple replaced it for free (I bought the AppleCare, by the way).

I hope that your dusty monitor serves you well. I like those monitors, although they do stay very hot. I could fry an egg on one of my monitors, especially at the very top edge, whew, very hot indeed!

cvaldes
Jul 27, 2010, 09:40 PM
does apple even sell many of these? Who in their right mind would pay $749 for a 24inch computer screen. I might as well by a flat planel tv and use it as a monitor.
They probably don't sell millions, but likely thousands.

Remember that Apple customers are some of the most affluent retail customers on the planet and many of them wouldn't bat an eyelash in paying $750 for a 24-inch monitor.

After all these are people shoveling out $300 for a smartphone, $2400+ for a two-year cellular contract, $700 for an iPad, plus something like >85% of Mac households also have a Windows PC. These are people with lots of disposable cash.

Some of them might be so lavish as to buy bottled water. (gasp)

Eidorian
Jul 27, 2010, 09:41 PM
I guess I'll wait for a U2411.

HLdan
Jul 27, 2010, 09:42 PM
Wow, the 24" ACD must have the shortest life span of any Apple product ever.



Ever heard of the iPod HiFi? ;)

dolphin842
Jul 27, 2010, 09:42 PM
a 21.5 ACD is needed. Like the old 23 and 30's.

No need to worry. Dell sells the U2211h with an IPS panel and identical specs (21.5", 1920x1080) for ~$270. And it's matte :cool:.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:42 PM
I guess I'll wait for a U2411.

I might as well. This is ridiculous.

LaDirection
Jul 27, 2010, 09:43 PM
Apple's computer line has always been a failure one way or another. Their iOS devices & iPods are HUGE success, market leading products. No surprise that you'll see a corporation moving out of a troubled market into a booming one.

On another note, as a video editor, it pains me to have lived the emergence of Final Cut Pro to now live Apple's move out of the professional video market. The disappearance of Shake, the abandoning of matte pro displays (the 23"ACD was the only display to offer correct 59.97 TBC), Apple literally IMPOSING the DVD-R standard to now completely drop the ball on Blu Ray and DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro terrible lagging behind AVID Media Composer etc etc etc.

I hate learning a new software but we won't have a choice to move back to AVID...

Icaras
Jul 27, 2010, 09:44 PM
Ever heard of the iPod HiFi? ;)

Nice one! That one was so short I had forgotten about it ever existed. :p

cvaldes
Jul 27, 2010, 09:45 PM
Apple's computer line has always been a failure one way or another.
Not for AAPL shareholders.

:D

reden
Jul 27, 2010, 09:45 PM
This is Apple reducing options to its personal computer lines, now that they are becoming more of a mobile company. A new age is dawning at Apple, first the WWDC with zero Mac OS X anything, and everything focused on iOS. Who knows what this will mean in the future, only they know what their focus is. Remember those good'ol days when we would thrill at the excitement of new Mac presentations/keynotes. Now, the Mac only gets silent updates, treated like old toys.

Eidorian
Jul 27, 2010, 09:46 PM
I might as well. This is ridiculous.Dell had the 2408WFP discounted down to $419 in Christmas of 2008. It was PVA but it was a good deal.

The U2410 is a mixed bag but an improvement overall. I can still hold out for longer.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:47 PM
Apple's computer line has always been a failure one way or another. Their iOS devices & iPods are HUGE success, market leading products. No surprise that you'll see a corporation moving out of a troubled market into a booming one.

On another note, as a video editor, it pains me to have lived the emergence of Final Cut Pro to now live Apple's move out of the professional video market. The disappearance of Shake, the abandoning of matte pro displays (the 23"ACD was the only display to offer correct 59.97 TBC), Apple literally IMPOSING the DVD-R standard to now completely drop the ball on Blu Ray and DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro terrible lagging behind AVID Media Composer etc etc etc.

I hate learning a new software but we won't have a choice to move back to AVID...

Truer words have never been written on this issue. With the discontinuation of Shake and the lack of hardware to support Final Cut Pro (which seems to be getting less and less support as well), a company that once lead the industry standard in film editing and photography is giving up on the professionals that once held Apple displays and PowerMac's as top notch. So many in the film industry utilize Final Cut Pro, it'd be a shame to see that market switch to Avid.

a.gomez
Jul 27, 2010, 09:48 PM
used to care about this monitor until i saw the LG 30 inch S-IPS monitor at a job - they run about 1,200US and no reflection. A joy to work on.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:49 PM
used to care about this monitor until i saw the LG 30 inch S-IPS monitor at a job - they run about 1,200US and no reflection. A joy to work on.

OOOOO do they make a 24" version?

ronparr
Jul 27, 2010, 09:49 PM
`the 27" LED Display appears to be primarily targeted at laptop owners.'

There's nothing to suggest that it's targeted primarily at laptop users - beyond the vacuous sense in which every Mac accessory is targeted primarily at laptop users due to the fact that 71% of all Macs sold are laptops.

Every desktop Mac you can buy has at least one displayport output and the new Mac pros have 2. The magsafe power adapter doesn't make it any less suitable for desktop use.

jedijoe
Jul 27, 2010, 09:50 PM
I had both the 24 and 30. I had to get rid of one of them, as I didn't use both as I once did (working at 2 locations).

The 24-inch was nice, bright, built-in camera and speakers were convenient....



.... but which one did I sell on craigslist. The 24-inch. I was sick of seeing my ugly self all day long in the reflection. Also the extra screen space was just too much to give up.

I hope my 30-inch lasts 10 more years.

There are plenty of other better monitors nowadays anyway, if I was buying new today. I think it is just hard for Mac people because they're not brushed aluminum and don't match their Macbook[Pro]/MacPro ;)

REM314
Jul 27, 2010, 09:50 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

macpro2000
Jul 27, 2010, 09:50 PM
Boy I appreciate my 30" even more now.

chaosconan
Jul 27, 2010, 09:51 PM
There is a design flaw in the menu bar for large displays. Apple knows it and that's why they cannot go bigger anymore. The menu bar works great for macbooks and displays equal or less than 24 inch. But displays going bigger than that it just makes it hard to navigate to the menu bar when located all the way to the top left corner.

What Apple needs to do is bring back the NextSTEP menu system and give the option to use either configuration. Those that are on a MacBook or with small displays can go with the horizontal menu bar. And for those that are on a bigger display can switch to the verital menu bar (look at attached image).

Apple also needs to separate the menu bar (left to right) with the tool bar (right to left). So, if I change my menu bar to vertical and float it somewhere down the display closer to the bottom the tool bar is unaffected. It remains at the top.

iMac0765
Jul 27, 2010, 09:52 PM
An 27" iMac costs 1700 US
An 27" Display costs 1000 US

If my calculations are correct, the computer components are worth only 700 dollars? Nice move Apple, made us all :confused: for a sec! ;)

ronparr
Jul 27, 2010, 09:53 PM
If they're going to discontinue the 24 inch, the least they could do is lower the price on the 27 inch.

They did lower the price on the 27 inch. It went from $1700 (with a free Mac included, in the form of a 27" iMac) to $1000. Up until today, that was your only option for getting a 27" LCD from Apple.

Eidorian
Jul 27, 2010, 09:53 PM
OOOOO do they make a 24" version?The HP ZR24w deserves an honorable mention as well.

aliensporebomb
Jul 27, 2010, 09:53 PM
This is Apple reducing options to its personal computer lines, now that they are becoming more of a mobile company. A new age is dawning at Apple, first the WWDC with zero Mac OS X anything, and everything focused on iOS. Who knows what this will mean in the future, only they know what their focus is. Remember those good'ol days when we would thrill at the excitement of new Mac presentations/keynotes. Now, the Mac only gets silent updates, treated like old toys.

Like Toy Story 4!

steve2112
Jul 27, 2010, 09:54 PM
Nice one! That one was so short I had forgotten about it ever existed. :p

I think the Mac Cube actually had a shorter life span. I know it was only about a year or so. It and the Hi Fi were close in short lifespans. Too bad, because the Cube looked amazing.

cleanup
Jul 27, 2010, 09:54 PM
Why doesn't Apple release a more affordable panel for consumers? $800 is a ****ing redonkeykong amount of cash to drop on a display for most people. I think Apple could easily produce a more affordable panel (in the $250-400 range since presumably they'll want to use IPS panels) for people who buy a Mac Mini or want a more affordable external display for their Apple laptop. Otherwise, people will constantly be going to other brands. A 30" Dell IPS display (which is gorgeous) can cost quite a bit less than $800. And a consumer-oriented IPS display like my 2209WA can cost people as little as $200 when it goes on sale. I think it's a big cash cow that Apple is neglecting to address.

People will buy an Apple mouse and keyboard for their Macbook but will normally immediately turn to another manufacturer for a display. Doesn't Apple want that to STOP? :p

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:54 PM
The HP ZR24w deserves an honorable mention as well.

Checking that out right now. You know the specs off hand?

Bonch
Jul 27, 2010, 09:55 PM
Bonch, that was an awesome post. I am glad that you shared it with us. Very interesting! Thank you for sharing!

I bought my 3 monitors (each 30 inch) back in summer of 2007, and they are all still working great for me, except for one of the power blocks, which died within a few weeks, and Apple replaced it for free (I bought the AppleCare, by the way).

I hope that your dusty monitor serves you well. I like those monitors, although they do stay very hot. I could fry an egg on one of my monitors, especially at the very top edge, whew, very hot indeed!

I was a little mad because I paid for a new one, but it is working fine so I decided to keep it. The cord had shoe marks all over it but they wiped clean. I bought a 24" a week before the 30" and found it too glossy and small so I ordered the 30" with the intent to return the 24". I was about to ship the 24" back today but after seeing this thread I think I will keep it. It will probably be even more valuable in a year when these displays are rare. I would have to pay 10% restocking fee plus shipping back.

MegaSignal
Jul 27, 2010, 09:55 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

12-Core MacPro with one of those 30-inch monitors (if you can still find one) - if I could afford it, I'd get this setup while I still can...

Xarthan
Jul 27, 2010, 09:55 PM
i wonder if the reason they are going away with the 24" is maybe they are coming out with a 21" ? would be cheaper for apple to make a 27 and a 21 same size as their imacs.

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 09:56 PM
Ah well, looks like if my 30" ACD ever gives up the ghost (touches wood and prays that it doesn't), I'll have to take my money elsewhere. 27" and less pixels just doesn't cut it.

Yeah, same here. For those who use 30" displays, the only option when upgrading Apple monitors now when they fail will be to downgrade in size/resolution.

I don't think this has ever happened before with any Apple product, has it? Removing the biggest/fastest/top model version and not replacing it..

The widescreen video dimension as the only option is also disappointing. Good for consuming content, but I would prefer more 4:3 ratio vertical height for working. I guess the consumer market is dictating the monitor manufacturing industry.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 09:56 PM
I think the Mac Cube actually had a shorter life span. I know it was only about a year or so. It and the Hi Fi were close in short lifespans. Too bad, because the Cube looked amazing.

What about the "hockey puck" mouse? lol

http://vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/articlepics/mouse/snap20.jpg

Eidorian
Jul 27, 2010, 09:56 PM
Checking that out right now. You know the specs off hand?It's better off to read the reviews.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1272354232

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_zr24w.htm

With some crazy Bing Cashback action it was under easily under $400.

MegaSignal
Jul 27, 2010, 09:56 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

12-Core MacPro with one of those 30-inch monitors (if you can still find one) - if I could afford it, I'd get this setup while I still can...

cleanup
Jul 27, 2010, 09:58 PM
Seriously Apple, make a 20" version of the LED display, get a cheaper panel (like the ones Dell uses in their IPS displays), price it at $299-349 and reap the profits.

arkmannj
Jul 27, 2010, 09:58 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

:(
I really hope Apple doesn't feel this way. I'd hope they would see it as a challenge and rise to the occasion on al fronts, for consumers, prosumers, and professionals all across their product lines.

keruah
Jul 27, 2010, 10:01 PM
Because only one opinion matters at Apple.
And that's a good thing.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 10:02 PM
It's better off to read the reviews.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1272354232

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_zr24w.htm

With some crazy Bing Cashback action it was under easily under $400.

Hmm, while the Dell tends to lean towards the warm side, the detail in dark images seems a better fit for photo and video editing. I can't decide, but the Dell they compare alongside the LG in the first article seems to be a good deal. If it has displayport, I might be able to daisy chain my 24" display to it (do they make a minidisplayport to displayport adapter? they must).

bwillwall
Jul 27, 2010, 10:03 PM
ugh im really tired of these giant displays. I want a 20" option and after that its getting rediculous. I hate the giant iMacs cus there simply too big. They dont fit on some desks well and there almost as big as one of my tvs and there twice the size of another. I just dont like sitting on a computer chair and staring at the screen at 3 feet from my face and looking across over 2 feet of space on the screen. Im sorry i just hate it so much and i hate having only the option to pay for 24" and now 27". Even on the iMac 21.5 its bigger than i need. I can handle it but its a LOT.

e-coli
Jul 27, 2010, 10:03 PM
Seems odd not to have a 24" and a 27" LED Screen.

The 24" is the same resolution as a 17" MBP. When you plug into it your palettes, window placement, desktop etc. stays the way it is for a seamless transition.

I personally can't stand plugging into a monitor with a different resolution. It takes 5 minutes to rearrange palettes back to where they were.

Gm7Cadd9
Jul 27, 2010, 10:04 PM
Apple is SOOO lame not allowing you to buy 3rd party monitors to hook up to your computer...

oh wait? You can...?

sing it with me now:

If you don't want a 27'' Apple Cinema Display

dont' buy it

If you bought one and you don't like it

bring it back

_____

Two pet peeves going on in this thread:

1. "Why would I pay $XXX for a display, I could buy a flat panel TV for that price and use it as a display

I have a 23'' Cinema Display at work it is 1920x1080. It looks beautiful, my boss has a 32'' No name LCD display, also at 1920x1080, not only is the color way off, but the resolution is super low for such a big screen, which brings me to pet peeve number 2.

2. "Stupid Apple, cutting the number of pixels"

The 30'' Cinema Display is 30'' diagonal, with a resolution of 2560x1600 it is a 16x10 aspect ratio. The new 27'' has the SAME footprint as the 30'' but is 16x9 aspect ratio, the same number of pixels wide as the 30'' 2560, those 200 pixels you lose is because the screen isn't as tall.

One last note... you don't have to buy it. If the argument is that there are tons of competing displays, then go buy one. When you compare spec-for-spec against other displays the Apple is still likely more, but not by the margin most people think it is.

ronparr
Jul 27, 2010, 10:05 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

Milk "whatever is left" of a growing market. LOL...

meatballs
Jul 27, 2010, 10:05 PM
I hate iOS devices and I hate laptops, damn them :mad: What about those of us who sit around on our asses all day? I don't want to look like Steve Jobs, all skinny and ****. That's what happens you know, when you run around all day with the iOS stuff and the laptops. :eek:

MacFly123
Jul 27, 2010, 10:05 PM
We just need a 21.5" display for $599. 27" is to big for some, but not me. :D

This would be perfect, however I think Apple isn't really in the external display market anymore, considering that 80% of their computers include one.


Money. It's cheaper to make one display that uses the same panel as the 27" iMac, and not have to order more displays that aren't being used in computers. Remember, the 24" display uses the same panel as the old 24" iMac.

It's also why I would LOVE a 21.5" ACD.

EXACTLY! That makes sense! Why not have a 27" and a 21.5" and they can use the same panels of the iMacs and get bigger discount bulk purchasing.

This is a little sad. I don't think Apple is anti Mac or anything or anti pro but I am starting to feel the neglect myself now too! I am a video producer and I do NOT want to use alternatives to the Mac Pro, the Cinema Displays, and Final Cut Studio, but I really am a little bit worried about their future :( I started to feel better when Steve said the new FCS will be amazing for pros and consumers, but now after these updates today I am a little worried again! :(

REM314
Jul 27, 2010, 10:05 PM
:(
I really hope Apple doesn't feel this way. I'd hope they would see it as a challenge and rise to the occasion on al fronts, for consumers, prosumers, and professionals all across their product lines.

Well it seems like you'll have to wait for another refresh. 6-9ish months?

bwillwall
Jul 27, 2010, 10:06 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

THAT IS REDICULOUS!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!! #1. Macs are now selling better than ive seen in my life (im 14) I never used to go to somebodys house and see a mac sitting on there table. Now I can name more ppl I know that have macs that pcs probably. I also notice that ppl with macs show them off but ive never seen a person show off a pc.

Akzel
Jul 27, 2010, 10:10 PM
Sorry Steve, no matte no ACD for me.

LazersGoPEWPEW
Jul 27, 2010, 10:12 PM
I just bought a brand new 30" display from Apple Store online. It arrived clearly used and dirty. I looked up the serial number and it was manufactured in March 2007. I kid you not. I called Apple and they said it had just been sitting on the shelf all that time.

That's jacked up. So what happened. Did you send it back?

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 10:12 PM
snip

I believe the main issue isn't just with the displays Apple currently (doesn't) offer. This news is simply more proof that Apple is neglecting the film and photo editors/professionals in recent years. With a focus on iOS, iPhones, iPods, iPads, and less options that once existed years ago (such as the PowerMac's, ACD's that were reasonable and powerful), this news is just one more nail in the coffin for Apple's support of OS X (and that's OS X for non-portable devices).

MacFly123
Jul 27, 2010, 10:13 PM
i wonder if the reason they are going away with the 24" is maybe they are coming out with a 21" ? would be cheaper for apple to make a 27 and a 21 same size as their imacs.

Yes I agree, it makes perfect sense... BUT if they were going to do this it would have happened today! I don't see it happening... UNLESS there might be a rule that only lets Apple update the Cinema Displays every 2 or 3 years... That would explain things, so maybe it will come! :rolleyes:

DragonJade
Jul 27, 2010, 10:14 PM
Bigger display with smaller resolution - not good. :(

a.gomez
Jul 27, 2010, 10:14 PM
OOOOO do they make a 24" version?

not seen one - they have 24s, but they the consumer market ones that have the 1080p "feature" (sad times :( ) so you get the 1920 x 1080 fiasco

HP had a 24 S-IPS 7ms panel... the ZR line - not sure if still around.

gri
Jul 27, 2010, 10:14 PM
12-Core MacPro with one of those 30-inch monitors (if you can still find one) - if I could afford it, I'd get this setup while I still can...

Ordered a 30 ACD last week... ;-)

Eidorian
Jul 27, 2010, 10:17 PM
Hmm, while the Dell tends to lean towards the warm side, the detail in dark images seems a better fit for photo and video editing. I can't decide, but the Dell they compare alongside the LG in the first article seems to be a good deal. If it has displayport, I might be able to daisy chain my 24" display to it (do they make a minidisplayport to displayport adapter? they must).The HP has DisplayPort.

There are also Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort adapters.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 10:18 PM
not seen one - they have 24s, but they the consumer market ones that have the 1080p "feature" (sad times :( ) so you get the 1920 x 1080 fiasco

HP had a 24 S-IPS 7ms panel... the ZR line - not sure if still around.

Yeah, the HP ZR24w, still around and for ~$300-400.


The HP has DisplayPort.

There are also Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort adapters.

I might be getting myself an HP. :D

Callsign Razor
Jul 27, 2010, 10:18 PM
Apple just keeps taking out options, there goes your freedom to choose.

Just stupid.
Huh? You're free to choose any display you want... I'm on my second Mac Pro and I've never used an Apple display, my first Mac Pro was mated to an Eizo display and the current one is mated to a LaCie 730.

ThomasJL
Jul 27, 2010, 10:20 PM
I really want a 30" 2560 x 1600 display, but what company actually makes an sRGB (i.e., not-wide gamut) 30" 2560 x 1600 display aside from Apple?

For non-Photoshop tasks, wide-gamut looks horrible because the colors are too saturated, and no colorimeter can correct it. Furthermore, sRGB emulation modes on wide-gamut monitors are pathetic.

Full of Win
Jul 27, 2010, 10:23 PM
Is there any doubt that Apple Consumer Electronics just don't care about the pro users.

macridah
Jul 27, 2010, 10:24 PM
Weak, I was seriously going to upgrade to a 30".

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 10:25 PM
which brings me to pet peeve number 2.

2. "Stupid Apple, cutting the number of pixels"

The 30'' Cinema Display is 30'' diagonal, with a resolution of 2560x1600 it is a 16x10 aspect ratio. The new 27'' has the SAME footprint as the 30'' but is 16x9 aspect ratio, the same number of pixels wide as the 30'' 2560, those 200 pixels you lose is because the screen isn't as tall.

One last note... you don't have to buy it. If the argument is that there are tons of competing displays, then go buy one. When you compare spec-for-spec against other displays the Apple is still likely more, but not by the margin most people think it is.

Nonsense. Vertical height makes a huge difference when working. Menus etc are all at the top. so any sacrifice of height means the menubar and window title and buttons etc encroach further onto actual viewable workspace. The 200 pixels you dismiss as being irrelevant means Photoshop menus rquire more actual workspace to be sacrificed to make them fit. As I said, I would prefer even more working height, 4:3 instead of 16:10. 16:9 is even worse. 16:9 is great for widescreen content consumption at full screen, but extra height is better for actual production if just for all the menus and buttons etc I mentioned.

You're logic would make sense if the menus etc were all on the side instead of the top. And then you have the Dock as well, which is made collapsible because it reduces vertical workspace even more. I have always had mine on the side for this reason.

And yes I *do* have to buy Apple products. I've bought other monitors and have always gone back to Apple displays.

paduck
Jul 27, 2010, 10:25 PM
[...]

Apple will continue to sell the 24" and 30" LCDs until stock runs out.

Article Link: [url=http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-officially-discontinues-30-inch-and-24-inch-cinema-displays/]Apple Officially Discontinues 30-Inch and 24-Inch Cinema Displays (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-officially-discontinues-30-inch-and-24-inch-cinema-displays/)

I think there needs to be a clarification of the original article. Apple does not have a 24" LCD Cinema Display in their product line. They have a 24" LED Cinema Display.

Is the 24" LED being replaced by the 27" LED? We always knew that LCD's weren't long for this world, but the removal of the supposed next-generation 24" LED would be something of a surprise.

fun173
Jul 27, 2010, 10:29 PM
I think they will come out with a 21.5" display having 21 and 27 seems to be good.

bedifferent
Jul 27, 2010, 10:29 PM
I think there needs to be a clarification of the original article. Apple does not have a 24" LCD Cinema Display in their product line. They have a 24" LED Cinema Display.

Is the 24" LED being replaced by the 27" LED? We always knew that LCD's weren't long for this world, but the removal of the supposed next-generation 24" LED would be something of a surprise.

Um, they're all LCD's. The 24" is an LED LCD. LED LCD's are what Apple currently offers, the 30" display was/is a CCFL LCD. All of them are LCD's, just the backlighting is different.

gatepc
Jul 27, 2010, 10:30 PM
Seems to me they are phasing out the 16:10 aspect ratio displays. I wonder if this will continue with there laptop lineup? I prefer 16:9 anyway just wish I had waiting to buy an apple monitor.

Callsign Razor
Jul 27, 2010, 10:30 PM
I really want a 30" 2560 x 1600 display, but what company actually makes an sRGB (i.e., not-wide gamut) 30" 2560 x 1600 display aside from Apple?

For non-Photoshop tasks, wide-gamut looks horrible because the colors are too saturated, and no colorimeter can correct it. Furthermore, sRGB emulation modes on wide-gamut monitors are pathetic.
Take a look at the LG W3000H or the HP LP3065.

NeuralControl
Jul 27, 2010, 10:32 PM
It's actually a real shocker that Apple is discontinuing the 24 inch. For a few moments I thought it was nice that Apple dropped the price of the monitor, but to get rid of it completely is odd. Maybe they are hoping to "up-sell" customers to the 27inch.

Sir Cecil
Jul 27, 2010, 10:33 PM
Snap up the 24" if you have a laptop. With the newer price saving of $100, the 24" screen matches the Macbook Pro's ratio exactly. Side-by-side, the two screens complement each other perfectly. Not so with the 27".
And if your eyes are less than perfect, the more comfortable resolution of the 24" will be preferable.

I think the 24" is being discontinued because they want to use the same screens as the 27" iMac. If they did release a smaller screen they would likely want to use the 21.5" iMac variety, but they don't see much demand for that size over what a 17" laptop offers. Nevertheless, I'd say the 24" is now a bargain and is discontinued more because it is relatively expensive to continue producing (cheaper for Apple to simply order more currently-utilized 27" iMac screens), rather than bettered.

Grab 'em!

Eddyisgreat
Jul 27, 2010, 10:36 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

yes it's very smart financially for apple to concentrate on iOS devices considering they are selling more computers than ever before and still derive a good revenue from the segment as a whole.

Wednesday morning email : Can everyone who isn't working on iDevice development please meet for cake and ice cream in the front lawn.

Front lawn announcement by steve : hey thanks for showing up guys. This was our best quarter ever and....you're all fired. Don't bother filing for unemployment because this is somehow your fault. btw the cake is a lie and the ice cream is melted.

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 10:45 PM
Apple probably realizes that they're not dealing with a crappy Vista anymore and that Windows 7 consistently scores around par with OS X. They probably also realize that even regular consumers/governments/colleges are switching to various Linux builds. Its probably smarter for them financially to concentrate on iOS devices and milk whatever is left of the Mac community.

This doesn't tally with Apple not giving up when they were getting hammered by Windows 95, 98 and NT. Why would they give up now against Windows 7 when they are more competitive now than they've ever been against Microsoft?

The iOS products feed the OSX market, not the other way around, so it makes sense to focus on them. Build the iOS/iPod market and the OSX market grows with it.

paduck
Jul 27, 2010, 10:45 PM
Um, they're all LCD's. The 24" is an LED LCD. LED LCD's are what Apple currently offers, the 30" display was/is a CCFL LCD. All of them are LCD's, just the backlighting is different.

OK, I'm with you, but the point I was alluding to (poorly) was that the article refers to the new display throughout at a 27" LED Display. And the 24" Cinema Display. The 24" LED Cinema Display appears to me to simply be a smaller version of the 27" released today, yet the article dumps it into the same class as the 30" Cinema Display which is fundamentally different and refers to both as "LCD displays." The implication is clear that they are a different product line. The 30" most certainly is, but the 24" LED is really in the same class as the 27" LED monitor that survives today, wouldn't you agree?

wywern209
Jul 27, 2010, 10:47 PM
THAT IS REDICULOUS!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!! #1. Macs are now selling better than ive seen in my life (im 14) I never used to go to somebodys house and see a mac sitting on there table. Now I can name more ppl I know that have macs that pcs probably. I also notice that ppl with macs show them off but ive never seen a person show off a pc.

go to a office and see how many macs you see there. how about at your school. any macs there?

Becky Austin
Jul 27, 2010, 10:52 PM
That's really lame. Does anyone know if they at least made the cable longer on the new 27" ACD? I keep my Mac Pro on the floor and the 24" LED cable doesn't reach it. I was hoping they smartened up and made a longer cable for the 27".

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 10:56 PM
OK, I'm with you, but the point I was alluding to (poorly) was that the article refers to the new display throughout at a 27" LED Display. And the 24" Cinema Display. The 24" LED Cinema Display appears to me to simply be a smaller version of the 27" released today, yet the article dumps it into the same class as the 30" Cinema Display which is fundamentally different and refers to both as "LCD displays." The implication is clear that they are a different product line. The 30" most certainly is, but the 24" LED is really in the same class as the 27" LED monitor that survives today, wouldn't you agree?

I got the point you were making the first time.

Basically, the 27" LED replaces its 24" predecessor in that product line, while the 30" non-LED is being dumped completely with no replacement at all. As opposed to the 27" LED replacing both non-LEDs as the article infers.

ronparr
Jul 27, 2010, 10:58 PM
I think the 24" is being discontinued because they want to use the same screens as the 27" iMac.


Apple offers distinctive products and maintains high margins because they have few or no competitors for what they sell. It's reasonable to assume that LED backlit 24 inch LCDs will not be that rare in the coming year (though many may not be IPS) and that Apple would, wisely, prefer to avoid competing on price with other companies that offer 24 inch LCDs.

Given a choice between offering a product that appears extremely uncompetitive on price, lowering their margins, or just quitting the market segment, Apple will choose to quite the market segment. This may seem cynical to some, but it's just about organizing their business around their strengths.

OTOH, the number of options for 27 inch LCDs is likely to remain small for a while. Since not every PC can drive a 2560x1440 display, the incentive for competitors to enter the market is much smaller than for the 24 inch model. The main competitor would seem to be a Dell 27 inch CCFL backlit LCD that costs about the same.

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 10:59 PM
That's really lame. Does anyone know if they at least made the cable longer on the new 27" ACD? I keep my Mac Pro on the floor and the 24" LED cable doesn't reach it. I was hoping they smartened up and made a longer cable for the 27".

15cm (6") longer. Not much, but an indication it is meant for the new Mac Pros underdesk as well.

avkills
Jul 27, 2010, 11:00 PM
Goodbye Apple monitors; Hello HP wide gamut monitors!

-mark

PerfSeeker
Jul 27, 2010, 11:01 PM
Goodbye Apple monitors; Hello HP wide gamut monitors!

-mark

Panasonic, Samsung, Dell, etc...

mr_flibble
Jul 27, 2010, 11:02 PM
I don't want an overpriced mirror, though :p

(At least it would be nice if they would've left the option for a matte screen, like they did for the 15" MacBook Pros)

I am another one who doesn't buy anything glossy. I would even leave Mac platform if there were no options for matte finish. Apple is loosing money because I have to buy monitors from others. And I am not alone.

Bwa
Jul 27, 2010, 11:03 PM
I have bought 5 of the 30" displays over the last few years; I really like them. Even though the design is "old", they still look very sleek and always are conversation pieces (even on my desk that has just one of them).

These are the only Apple monitors I've had on my desk since the early 90s.

ronparr
Jul 27, 2010, 11:05 PM
go to a office and see how many macs you see there. how about at your school. any macs there?

This is just anecdotal, but I'll mention that 10 years ago at my university I saw primarily thinkpads. Macs were very rare. Now I see more Macs than anything else among faculty and remarkable growth among students.

In my wife's firm, Macs were previously used primarily by graphic designers, but are now starting to pop up throughout the organization.

PerfSeeker
Jul 27, 2010, 11:06 PM
Yes Macs are selling better then ever, 3.4 million in the last quarter right? But how many Windows-PCs sold 5x that many?

Bytor65
Jul 27, 2010, 11:08 PM
Take a look at the LG W3000H or the HP LP3065.

Those are both wide gamut. As are all current 30" computer monitors currently in production. The Apple 30" was the last standard gamut 30".

Eduardo1971
Jul 27, 2010, 11:09 PM
...Wednesday morning email : Can everyone who isn't working on iDevice development please meet for cake and ice cream in the front lawn...Front lawn announcement by steve : hey thanks for showing up guys. This was our best quarter ever and....you're all fired. Don't bother filing for unemployment because this is somehow your fault. btw the cake is a lie and the ice cream is melted.

This is very funny! Good one Eddy.:)

Eddyisgreat
Jul 27, 2010, 11:15 PM
Yes Macs are selling better then ever, 3.4 million in the last quarter right? But how many Windows-PCs sold 5x that many?

Same reason walmart had $404 billion dollars in revenue for FY2009 yet many employees qualify for and are collecting welfare and other public assistance.

profit and volume do not have a positive correlation to one another, not if you are losing money on every unit or must sell an ungodly number of units just to break even after which your margins are scant anyway. I thought we would have figured this out by now. Oh well.

Bytor65
Jul 27, 2010, 11:22 PM
Not getting this one at all. One display option, glossy only, at $1000? I'm sure it's a beautiful display... but methinks this is

Nothing says you have to buy an Apple monitor. Glossy vs Matte is a preference. I prefer matte (I think the majority does) and the Matte market is quite well served. The Dell U2711 has the same panel (without LED BLU) and it is matte.

I know a lot of people also hate the matte coating and the sparkly effect it has. I even saw one guy who took apart the U2711 and soaked the screen with wet towels for 12 hours so he could peel off the matte layer and it was gloss underneath. That is all the matte coating is, a stick on layer.

Don't like glossy. Buy a matte one instead like the Dell U2711, or buy a stick on matte coating for the apple.

http://www.photodon.com/MXFilmOniMacCompare05S.jpg

skellener
Jul 27, 2010, 11:30 PM
It's not Apple, but it's close (and cheaper)....

CinemaView 24 - $399. (http://www.cinemaview.com/product/cinemaview-24-display)

http://www.cinemaview.com/cinemaview/images/cv24_side.jpg

awmazz
Jul 27, 2010, 11:31 PM
I even saw one guy who took apart the U2711 and soaked the screen with wet towels for 12 hours so he could peel off the matte layer and it was gloss underneath. That is all the matte coating is, a stick on layer.

Seriously? That's all it is, just a layer they add on to a gloss version? I learn something every day.

PerfSeeker
Jul 27, 2010, 11:33 PM
Same reason walmart had $404 billion dollars in revenue for FY2009 yet many employees qualify for and are collecting welfare and other public assistance.

profit and volume do not have a positive correlation to one another, not if you are losing money on every unit or must sell an ungodly number of units just to break even after which your margins are scant anyway. I thought we would have figured this out by now. Oh well.

Last I checked MSFT & HP were quite profitable. Who cares what meagre cut Wal Mart gets?

DylanLikesPorn
Jul 27, 2010, 11:33 PM
It's not Apple, but it's close (and cheaper)....

CinemaView 24 - $399. (http://www.cinemaview.com/product/cinemaview-24-display)

How come they don't show how the stand connects to the monitor. A little bit fishy to me.

Eric5h5
Jul 27, 2010, 11:35 PM
Yes Macs are selling better then ever, 3.4 million in the last quarter right? But how many Windows-PCs sold 5x that many?

Who cares? The point is that Apple sold the most Macs they ever have.

--Eric

skellener
Jul 27, 2010, 11:36 PM
How come they don't show how the stand connects to the monitor. A little bit fishy to me.There used to be one...it's not fishy at all DylanLikesPorn. I'll post it if I find it. The stand in back is actually kind of curved and connects to a hinge. I've seen it.

http://www.cybertheater.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/index_02_8i7_paste-8i7.png
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/9597/backll.jpg

nickarmadillo
Jul 27, 2010, 11:37 PM
It really seems like Apple is putting a lot of effort into pissing off Mac computer users lately. Yet they still have record sales ... so who am I to tell them what to do. Its obviously working for them.

But I can't get rid of the nagging feeling that they are just doing this to see how much they can get away with. I can't really come up with any other reasonable explanation for their choices lately. No one could possibly be arrogant/ignorant enough to actually think these are intelligent product choices, could they?

ArcaneDevice
Jul 27, 2010, 11:41 PM
I believe the main issue isn't just with the displays Apple currently (doesn't) offer. This news is simply more proof that Apple is neglecting the film and photo editors/professionals in recent years. With a focus on iOS, iPhones, iPods, iPads, and less options that once existed years ago (such as the PowerMac's, ACD's that were reasonable and powerful), this news is just one more nail in the coffin for Apple's support of OS X (and that's OS X for non-portable devices).

Exactly. Apple is no place for professionals to go now unless their requirements are basic enough that it can get done on a consumer iMac.

Apple haven't offered any innovation for the pro sphere in a long, long time and today's announcements of a Pro that's the third spec bump-only in three years and killing nearly all the external displays is just one more clear sign that Apple wants to kill the desktop division and force Pros to go to the iMac or leave.

As connectivity-limited as the displays are, just by not having a 30 inch model says enough. Previously just having the size (and remember how much of a big deal that was when it was announced years ago?) was useful for Pro workers.

skellener
Jul 27, 2010, 11:41 PM
It really seems like Apple is putting a lot of effort into pissing off Mac computer users lately. If I had a nickel everytime I heard that.... ;)

acslater017
Jul 27, 2010, 11:42 PM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

I think a few things are at work these days (2007-2010) at Apple:

1) Mobility is where the growth is. MacBooks outsell iMacs and Mac Pros like crazy. The iPhone practically launched Apple into the mainstream overnight. The iPad, though often ridiculed by the hardcore (e.g. MacRumors readers), is still causing lines in some countries. Rather than simply chisel away at Dell and Microsoft in the computer market, Apple is practically DEFINING entire categories.

2) The Mac is an extremely mature platform. In terms of hardware, processor speeds and memory have gotten to the point where the average consumer no longer needs revolutionary hardware revisions. In terms of software, Leopard was the most recent big OS jump, with Snow Leopard being a refinement. It slimmed down, sped up, and got better a hundred little things (ejecting USB devices, connecting to Wi-Fi, etc.)

My hope/suspicion
Apple is slowly, carefully working on MAJOR changes to the Mac OS/UI. I don't know if it'll be Multitouch, or even still be called OS X. But Apple is steadily gaining experience in new user interfaces (iOS Multitouch, OS X trackpad, iPad GUI additions, motion/acceleration, voice control, etc.) Imagine Apple taking the top 20 UI ideas from the App Store and applying it to a personal computer enabled with a Multitouch display, microphone w/ voice control algorithms, GPS, proximity sensor, and precise accelerometers .

Given that Apple has already broken ground on new categories (iPhone, iPad) and the last release of OS X was a refinement, I hope/suspect that the next release of the Mac OS will be a big one! Perhaps we won't even see it until WWDC 2011 or later. Apple is known for taking its time and executing it perfectly. I wouldn't be surprised if they are digesting all these lessons from the past three years and apply it to the Mac! :eek: :apple:

haoqfu
Jul 27, 2010, 11:43 PM
seems i can't drive 2 identical apple displays with the new mini then..... :mad:

mytdave
Jul 27, 2010, 11:45 PM
It makes sense that non-LED displays would have to go bye-bye some day, but it's unfortunate that Apple has nothing else to offer. The other disappointment is the lack of a matte option. Really, it's not that hard to offer that choice.

I would hope that in the near future Apple might offer a 21.5" display (same panel as the smaller iMac) but then surprise everyone by bringing out a whopper LED-lit IPS 35" display with a 3840x2160 resolution (109 ppi)! Sign me up baby!

kevinkt
Jul 27, 2010, 11:47 PM
its only 3 inch difference either way just buy it.

skellener
Jul 27, 2010, 11:48 PM
Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices... This is almost the case now. Once they do away with AppleTV or rev it to use iOS you'll be right. iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad are consumer products and yes, they run iOS. Mac OS X will be around a long, long time though. Somebody has got to write iOS apps don't they? The only way to do that is with a Mac running OS X. Didn't you hear Steve Jobs at D8 ?? Not everyone needs a truck these days. Most just need cars. Last time I checked, there are still an awful lot of trucks on the road though. ;)

batchtaster
Jul 27, 2010, 11:50 PM
"Oh no! What am I going to do without those extra 3 inches?"

animatedude
Jul 27, 2010, 11:52 PM
this is so sad.

Apple is so in love with 16:9 and 27-inch,i would say the majority of consumers -at least here-are not.

listen Apple,you need to get this right:

21.5-inch iMac is too small but maybe it's fine for high school and college kids,so i'm fine with it but i rather not buy it,it's a bit too small for me.

27-inch is WAY TOO BIG..WAY TOO BIG...WAY TOO BIG...i swear to god i probably read this 1000 times over here too,27 is RIDICULOUS and UNNECESSARY for the majority of consumers ,GET IT?


24-inch is:

1-the perfect size.
2-16:10.
3-perfect for everyday use,watching movie AND ppl who want to edit or use other heavy stuff on it.

the 24-inch cinema display is the best most underrated product you've ever released.

SkippyThorson
Jul 28, 2010, 12:02 AM
Because only one opinion matters at Apple.

And I bet we all know who that one opinion is...

Me. :)

PerfSeeker
Jul 28, 2010, 12:06 AM
Steve Jobs in love with 27" and 27" only so that's what goes. You have to think the 24" sold very well, but that doesn't matter to :apple:

Nuvi
Jul 28, 2010, 12:22 AM
Another hint that Apple really doesn't care about its computers any more. 27 glossy with laptop connector only? Pros finally updated about 6-9 months late (too lazy to check), MBA now not really updated since what, 2008?

Next step - ditch MacOS in favor of iOS for consumer devices, programs only installable via application store, ditch the Macintosh in favor of the Pads...?

SJ used to be the icon, I am afraid he is more and more getting the focal point of unsatisfied mac lovers...

We need Apple Computers Inc. back! Apple Inc. can make all the iToys they want but we need a company that is devoted in making the best computers possible and Apple "iToy" Inc. surely isn't the one.

Peruna
Jul 28, 2010, 12:36 AM
This would be perfect, however I think Apple isn't really in the external display market anymore, considering that 80% of their computers include one.


Money. It's cheaper to make one display that uses the same panel as the 27" iMac, and not have to order more displays that aren't being used in computers. Remember, the 24" display uses the same panel as the old 24" iMac.

It's also why I would LOVE a 21.5" ACD.

I think you hit the nail on the head here, times two. Look, Apple last updated their displays with the 24" nearly two years ago (Nov '08) and the 30" hasn't been updated in over 4 years (March '06). This is clearly a market they decided some time ago was not theirs. They will continue to offer whatever the biggest iMac screen is for the Pro but nothing else to keep costs in line and it makes sense. Mac Mini users aren't going to buy an expensive Apple Display nor will the vast majority of MacBook/Pro users - there are cheaper options on the market. And, as iMacs continue to stay as fast, the Mac Pro market will become exclusively the home for power users - an important but much smaller market. Not to many years ago the gulf in price between an iMac and tower Mac was not that much and advanced regular users would opt for the tower/Pro route. That is no longer the case unfortunately. Those users will just have to get used to small real estate or find a 3rd party alternative.

lilo777
Jul 28, 2010, 12:41 AM
its only 3 inch difference either way just buy it.

I agree. Apple should also consider reducing the number of laptop models to one. Screen difference is even smaller there. One phone, one mouse, one keyboard, one display, one computer. Who needs more?

joshellis625
Jul 28, 2010, 12:42 AM
Does anybody know where I can find the wallpaper used on that Apple display? :D

AppliedMicro
Jul 28, 2010, 12:47 AM
Apple is so in love with 16:9 and 27-inch,i would say the majority of consumers -at least here-are not.
Are you kidding?
The 27" iMac has been selling better than the 24-incher.
And 16:9 is the aspect ratio today's biggest "Full HD" TV screens are made of.
"Full HD resolution" is better than 1920x1200 to most people.

24-inch is:
...unlike any product in Apple's lineup.
Neither the size doesn't match, nor resolution, aspect ratio or dpi.

Personally, I'm disappointed about the lack of a matte display from Apple.
I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

Is there anything in the market that can compete with Apple's style and built quality (aluminum encasing!)?

Doctor Q
Jul 28, 2010, 12:49 AM
I'm sorry to see an old friend leave the Apple product line, but life will go on.

I hope the 30" ACD I'm using now lasts forever.

PerfSeeker
Jul 28, 2010, 12:50 AM
We need Apple Computers Inc. back! Apple Inc. can make all the iToys they want but we need a company that is devoted in making the best computers possible and Apple "iToy" Inc. surely isn't the one.

The unibody Mac Mini? :)

awmazz
Jul 28, 2010, 12:51 AM
its only 3 inch difference either way just buy it.

Only? That number translates to over four hundred thousand pixels less than the 30", so that's a definite downgrade. It's far cheaper to produce and sell because it *is* far smaller.

It's not just the prinicple of the thing. 16:10 to 16:9 is exactly 10% less. A 10% reduction in specifications when the expectation for new computer products is always either at least the same let alone an increase. Never less. This is the first or largest downgrade in specs for any Apple line that I can remember short of terminating a product line completely. Those who have a 30" screen now who may need to buy a new display will have to downgrade now.

"Oh no! What am I going to do without those extra 3 inches?"

Sacrifice work space.

gugy
Jul 28, 2010, 12:58 AM
Stupid decision by Apple, Seriously anybody who had a chance to work on a 30" just love the thing.

DylanLikesPorn
Jul 28, 2010, 12:58 AM
oh come on that was funny. admit it you laughed.

Marx55
Jul 28, 2010, 01:02 AM
No matte, no purchase! First is health. That simple.

diazj3
Jul 28, 2010, 01:10 AM
Now this is the end of an era.... the 30" ACD was a marvelous display: a real icon... but by today's tech standards, its really outdated... for example, it still features Firewire 400 (while all current macs come with FW800) and old fashion LCD backlight.

Anyway... I hope they release a 30+ inch LED display, with higher resolutions, FW and USB, microphone, isight, speakers (although speakers are not really really critical IMO, as most Pro users choose better external speakers)... a similar Aluminum design... AND ANTIGLARE!!!

:p... right, keep dreaming: perhaps we're lucky enough if there's an antiglare option for the MBP line...

cheers!

JesterJJZ
Jul 28, 2010, 01:14 AM
Seriously? That's all it is, just a layer they add on to a gloss version? I learn something every day.

I don't think that's right...

Eidorian
Jul 28, 2010, 01:18 AM
It's not Apple, but it's close (and cheaper)....

CinemaView 24 - $399. (http://www.cinemaview.com/product/cinemaview-24-display)

http://www.cinemaview.com/cinemaview/images/cv24_side.jpgIf it was only 1920 x 1200. I just bought a new video card too.

meatballs
Jul 28, 2010, 01:20 AM
Does anybody know where I can find the wallpaper used on that Apple display? :D

Zoom in on that MBP and see who sent the email. :D

InterfaceLIFT (http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/downloads/date/any/) is a good place for those kind of wallpapers.

jeffereyj
Jul 28, 2010, 01:38 AM
no matte option = no buy, EVER.

torbjoern
Jul 28, 2010, 02:04 AM
There are plenty of options out there. Even if you do have a Macintosh computer, let's say... the latest Mac Pro, for instance, why do you care so much about having an Apple display? Does Apple really make the very best 30"-displays in the world? Or is it that the non-apple-equivalents (quality-wise) are far more expensive? I'm just a bit curious about this.

I have bought several iDevices AND computers made by Apple, but I can't really see myself buying an Apple display unless it was really worth 1000$ - and no glossy screen would be worth $1000.

ryanide
Jul 28, 2010, 02:10 AM
Ever heard of the iPod HiFi? ;)

just wish it worked with my old iPhone 3G, since it is now a spare iPod.

torbjoern
Jul 28, 2010, 02:13 AM
"Oh no! What am I going to do without those extra 3 inches?"
Sounds like a Freudian issue to me. You are obviously holding it wrong.

Sent from my iPhone.

iPadPublisher
Jul 28, 2010, 02:17 AM
I believe he was talking about Blu-Ray when he said that.

I believe meatballs was kidding... but alas, humor is subjective 'round these parts.

Scorpius1
Jul 28, 2010, 02:27 AM
This is irrelevant to most pro photographers and designers,most of them would use an Eizo or NEC spectraview monitor anyway!!!the glossy finish is a deal breaker...;)

swagi
Jul 28, 2010, 02:31 AM
I think a few things are at work these days (2007-2010) at Apple:

1) Mobility is where the growth is.

2) The Mac is an extremely mature platform.

My hope/suspicion
Imagine Apple taking the top 20 UI ideas from the App Store and applying it to a personal computer enabled with a Multitouch display, microphone w/ voice control algorithms, GPS, proximity sensor, and precise accelerometers .


Or Just to paraphrase your statement:

Desktop computers are dead. If you want a desktop workhorse, go somewhere else.

Basically what the critically minded have been saying for years. And I thank PeterQVenkman from the MacPro-Thread for basically giving me the final notch to ditch Apple Hardware. It's Win7/Hackintosh for me from now on.

And no:
- Multitouch display doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- GPS doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- proximity sensor doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- Accelerometers on a desktop - now that would be hell of fun to shovel around your MacPro in Need For Speed :D

Full of Win
Jul 28, 2010, 02:41 AM
An 27" iMac costs 1700 US
An 27" Display costs 1000 US

If my calculations are correct, the computer components are worth only 700 dollars? Nice move Apple, made us all :confused: for a sec! ;)

This assumes that the panels are the same. Until the specs on gamut are released we can only guess it is the same.

TheSVD
Jul 28, 2010, 02:51 AM
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/05/darth_vader_nooo.jpg
hahaha at that picture!

Also, why no 24!?

baryon
Jul 28, 2010, 02:53 AM
What will Desktop users (Mac Mini, Mac Pro) do with the extra MagSafe cable? Will it just dangle there? It's kinda weird that you have 3 cables coming out of this display (plus mains power)! And why can't the webcam and audio work though Bluetooth?

gnasher729
Jul 28, 2010, 02:55 AM
So if I wanted to buy an Apple display I have one option? A 27" screen?

Yes. But if you can live without the Apple sticker, I just went to www.dabs.com and they have 272 different monitors for sale. So there is plenty of choice.


And 16:9 is the aspect ratio today's biggest "Full HD" TV screens are made of.
"Full HD resolution" is better than 1920x1200 to most people.

It's not better. They are cheaper because it's the same panels used for TVs, but for most uses of a computer the additional height is very beneficial. Just look at MacRumors: The number of posts you can see at a time is limited by screen height, not width. And monitor makers sell it as an advantage, but it isn't.

mattlong1978
Jul 28, 2010, 02:59 AM
I don't see how this matter's to much, people who like the product can buy it those who don't as said before there is plenty of choice out there, once my 23" ACD's finally call it quit's I have no reserve looking to different brands

Cydonia
Jul 28, 2010, 03:09 AM
:cool:

Apple is SOOO lame not allowing you to buy 3rd party monitors to hook up to your computer...

oh wait? You can...?

sing it with me now:

If you don't want a 27'' Apple Cinema Display

dont' buy it

If you bought one and you don't like it

bring it back

_____

Two pet peeves going on in this thread:

1. "Why would I pay $XXX for a display, I could buy a flat panel TV for that price and use it as a display

I have a 23'' Cinema Display at work it is 1920x1080. It looks beautiful, my boss has a 32'' No name LCD display, also at 1920x1080, not only is the color way off, but the resolution is super low for such a big screen, which brings me to pet peeve number 2.

2. "Stupid Apple, cutting the number of pixels"

The 30'' Cinema Display is 30'' diagonal, with a resolution of 2560x1600 it is a 16x10 aspect ratio. The new 27'' has the SAME footprint as the 30'' but is 16x9 aspect ratio, the same number of pixels wide as the 30'' 2560, those 200 pixels you lose is because the screen isn't as tall.

One last note... you don't have to buy it. If the argument is that there are tons of competing displays, then go buy one. When you compare spec-for-spec against other displays the Apple is still likely more, but not by the margin most people think it is.

coolguyalex
Jul 28, 2010, 03:09 AM
A 21.5" and 27" external would make more sense?

yeknommonkey
Jul 28, 2010, 03:16 AM
I was hoping for a nicely priced 24 inch... but overall pretty disappointed, I guess I'll just stick with Dell / Samsung :P

i just bought a 37inch samsung LED tv and it is beautiful (but a bit shiny!) the quality of the screen both as TV and as monitor for my mac mini is top notch, even compared to my apple 30inch monitors.

BUT having seen the retina display on the iP4 i'll hang on to these 30's until they start packing in the pixels and go resolution independent on the OS. either that or i'll cry when they ditch the whole party in favour of selling iDevices only and i'll have to plug on with clunky old plastic boxes and find something else overpriced to spend my money on.

Cydonia
Jul 28, 2010, 03:19 AM
http://home.myfairpoint.net/hannigan7/ed_mat.jpg

bilbo--baggins
Jul 28, 2010, 03:21 AM
When Apple sold 20, 23 and 30" displays the range made perfect sense.

Ever since the 24" 'made for MacBook's' display I have been put off buying because it always felt like the rest of the range should be just around the corner. Introducing the 27" sort of made sense, but discontinuing the 24 and 30" before anything replaces them is even more bizarre than before.

iZac
Jul 28, 2010, 03:24 AM
Seems odd not to have a 24" and a 27" LED Screen.

If, as some have suggested, that the 27" is actually reasonably competitively priced against other 27" monitors, Apple would be expected to make the 24" competitively priced against other 24" IPS panels, and god knows, Apple don’t like selling cheap things!

holmesf
Jul 28, 2010, 03:25 AM
What will Desktop users (Mac Mini, Mac Pro) do with the extra MagSafe cable? Will it just dangle there? It's kinda weird that you have 3 cables coming out of this display (plus mains power)! And why can't the webcam and audio work though Bluetooth?

Don't know about what desktop users will do with the magsafe cable.

Bluetooth only has a small fraction of the bandwidth of USB, however, which makes it a poor choice to carry video. It would also add a delay to any audio or video it carried. Besides that there might be some issues with software support.

MacHiavelli
Jul 28, 2010, 03:46 AM
As a 30 inch ACD user for 2.5 years, I've gotta say that I LOVE my ACD - the usable space is just so useful for multi-tasking. Hope my 30 inch ACD lasts forever. :cool:

tomscott1988
Jul 28, 2010, 03:59 AM
So if we are going to be honest the 27" is made to work with all the macbook/pro models. Basically anyone who can afford £750-£2600 (low to high spec) if an average consumer wanted to extend their 13" screen and buy an apple branded display £800 is nearly as much as their machine!! this is obserd! how many average users would buy one? i know im being optimistic by saying an average user would have the need to extend their laptop screen, but the question stands. It just wouldn't happen! Plus how many consumers would part with that much cash for a display? and not get a professionals specced screen????

Also there is no way any pro would buy a 27" glossy display (well in this pros mind anyway) they are too annoying and not what a pro wants if they are spending 8+hours a day looking at it! plus removing all choice by getting rid of a 24" that product had what a 2 year shelf life not even enough to run out one applecare warranty!

So to sum up - no choice, not applicable to pro's, too expensive for consumers, so who are these aimed at? the raving mad???

Im glad I bought a 23" cinema display when i had the chance because every other offering from apple is a joke. For my next display i hate to say il be looking elsewhere but i did like my display to fit with my mac pro... now they dont, especially when the 30" is now gone. Might just find another 23".

anyone else agree???

norwaypianoman
Jul 28, 2010, 04:03 AM
Well, I am not saying that it is going to be like it but think about it: Mac Os delayed for the iOS. Updates later and later with few innovations (remember when most of the updates had something really new in it and not only a faster processor). iPad and iPhone before Mac (see OS), form above function (Antennagate), only glossy displays, and only 27 with mini-display port... I am getting worried where Apple will be 5 years from now. They ditched the Computer out of their name a while ago...

Unless they plan to come out later with another size but than why ditch the smaller version, doesn't make sense...

My meaning is that conspiracy theories like yours are always, always wrong at the core. Even when there is a hint of right in them.

nelmat
Jul 28, 2010, 04:10 AM
I don't want an overpriced mirror, though :p

(At least it would be nice if they would've left the option for a matte screen, like they did for the 15" MacBook Pros)

I find people with this criticism have only seen a glossy display in a retail outlet - in working experience, this is not a mirror at all, the glare is zero issue. I'm an experienced graphics professional, my screen is calibrated and I don't have a window behind me - it's really not difficult to eliminate glare, and the colours look great when I demonstrate to clients, and what comes back from the print bureau matches my on screen image.

There isn't a big enough market share demanding a matte screen, if you want one, then buy one of the many inexpensive kits available.

nelmat
Jul 28, 2010, 04:13 AM
- Multitouch display doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- GPS doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- proximity sensor doesn't make any sense on a desktop
- Accelerometers on a desktop - now that would be hell of fun to shovel around your MacPro in Need For Speed :D

Multitouch makes perfect sense if the monitor is flat on your desk while working. People's lack of vision in this area is astounding. Of course proximity sensor, GPS and accelerometers aren't needed on a non-moving device, but to be able to interact with your screen as you would a piece of paper on a desk would be incredible for creative professionals. I'm not talking precision work, I'm talking day to day use and photoshop work.

Stridder44
Jul 28, 2010, 04:19 AM
You haven't spent a lot of time with your parents lately have you?

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

nelmat
Jul 28, 2010, 04:21 AM
Ever heard of the iPod HiFi? ;)

Yeah, still have mine. Best sounding, nicest design I've ever heard from an affordable iPod speaker system. Love it, and has pride of place in the living room - the envy of many visitors...

Dagless
Jul 28, 2010, 04:24 AM
Well it's not surprising. They're focussing more on mobile devices and iToys these days.

SBlue1
Jul 28, 2010, 04:30 AM
to be honest, i feel sad too, but on the other hand there are lots of cool monitors from other companies. i dont see an advantage of buying an apple monitor.

Dagless
Jul 28, 2010, 04:33 AM
Multitouch makes perfect sense if the monitor is flat on your desk while working. People's lack of vision in this area is astounding.
Your lack of vision is also astounding. From experience it is not comfortable to be leaning over a display embedded in a desk. The back is always arched and anything more than 15 minutes on it (as you also put pressure on your elbows for support) becomes a physical pain.

Touchscreen monitors also don't work. I used to work as the graphic designer for a manufacturer that built them. As a leaving gift they gave me their largest touchscreen display... they really don't work. Stood up, lying down. No siree bob.


There isn't a big enough market share demanding a matte screen, if you want one, then buy one of the many inexpensive kits available.
I'd imagine if people want a good matte display they'll just buy one from a different manufacturer. We started doing that a couple of years ago.
Curious as to why, as a graphic designer, you prefer glossy displays. For display artwork they are good. But for proofing and the massive contrast from them - I couldn't touch one. I used to like them for proofing video footage but since all the good TV's now are matte you can no longer rely on them.

ValSalva
Jul 28, 2010, 04:35 AM
Gruber was right about this too.

I guess Apple is lowering its manufacturing costs by having the 27" iMac and their now only ACD be the same display. They should release a 21.5" ACD too though.

Manderby
Jul 28, 2010, 04:44 AM
If you consider buying a high quality display, don't go for apple. That has never been a good choice. There was one advantage once, and it was the hugeness of the 30 inch display. But this advantage has vanished long ago.

About the matte: This discussion will never end as about 50% of the users like them and 50% do NOT like them. I do not like them particularly but the choice to get a matte on a mac laptop is simply ugly. Drawing, Coloring, Imaging as well as coding and writing, I all do on an external matte display not from apple. In the office, we got Eizos for high quality imaging and Samsungs for normal work. More expensive but absolutely worth the price.

To make this clear: When you talk about quality of a display, people still think of brightness (which is mostly useless as displays are used indoor and the eye adapts quickly), contrast (which is why apple goes glossy), color gamut (which does not relly matters much for everyday use) and LED (which is ok). But they often forget about the ergonomical aspects. Don't let you fool by statements like 85% bigger color gamut or contrast ratios of 1:1000000000. Go to a store, look at the display when running and decide if you could work with that after having used it for at least 10 Minutes.

I saw people tilting their screens to the floor to not get the glare, I saw people moving to dark corners in the office to not get the glare, I saw people wiggling their head to see what the display should display and not what it mirrors. Me personally, I use a matte display connected to my Mac and use it as the primary monitor and the glossy as the palette display. Matte is way superior in productivity. The only advantage of glossy is the darker blacks which results in the higher contrast ratios.

Again, If you need a GOOD display, do yourself a favour and do not consider apple.

Eric2
Jul 28, 2010, 04:46 AM
The problem with all the other hi-end matte screens out there is there so damn ugly. As another poster pointed out you want something that fits with your Mac.

Sadly more proof Apple is slowly abandoning the pro market.

toke lahti
Jul 28, 2010, 04:50 AM
So silly that Apple sells their displays for so much, then to only go with a single size at fricken $1,000. They truly do not want to be in the external display business anymore except for the iMac and selling a limited quantity of "trophy displays".
Nothing but raising profits. If you want Apple display, you need to pay more for it now.
On the other hand, HP has what could be a killer display for us graphics folks.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=957524

It even has HDCP.
And 10-bit colors.
Hope that next version of OsX gets 10-bit colora like Windows7 already has. If there ever will be next version of OsX...

SirHaakon
Jul 28, 2010, 04:51 AM
That's one reason that I want to stick with the 24" because text becomes too tiny at 27" displays resolution.
Make sure you don't buy the iPhone 4 then!

Baklava
Jul 28, 2010, 04:56 AM
The Pro days are almost over. How sad.

ranReloaded
Jul 28, 2010, 05:00 AM
I wonder how much they'd like to charge for such a coating on a display this large...

Yeah... that coating material costs a lot per square inch! :D

ranReloaded
Jul 28, 2010, 05:02 AM
Make sure you don't buy the iPhone 4 then!

In iPhone 4, text and UI elements remain the same size (but more crisp).
Font sizes in the API are specified in 'points', not pixels.

ranReloaded
Jul 28, 2010, 05:04 AM
Gruber was right about this too.

I guess Apple is lowering its manufacturing costs by having the 27" iMac and their now only ACD be the same display. They should release a 21.5" ACD too though.

If this is right, they won't be offering a bigger monitor until they release a bigger iMac of the same size...

OTOH I really liked the aluminum design of the 30 inch. I think the black border is OK for iMacs but the "white apple logo on black" doesn't look good...

EDIT: Not that I can afford a Mac Pro or anything...

ranReloaded
Jul 28, 2010, 05:11 AM
It's not better. They are cheaper because it's the same panels used for TVs, but for most uses of a computer the additional height is very beneficial. Just look at MacRumors: The number of posts you can see at a time is limited by screen height, not width. And monitor makers sell it as an advantage, but it isn't.

I remember when I first saw 16/9 (SD) Widescreen TVs here in Japan in the 90s. At first they seemed "shorter" rather than "wider", because I was so used to the 4/3 TVs. I was missing the height... Now I' OK with 16/10 computers, but the illusion struck me again when I saw a 27 inch iMac in person and it didn't seem bigger than the 24 inch I have at home. If I ever buy a 27 inch, I'll put them side by side and compare...

fat phil
Jul 28, 2010, 05:19 AM
Thank goodness I've already got one. Yay for shiny consumer products, death to the pro.

SirHaakon
Jul 28, 2010, 05:23 AM
The 16:9 ratio doesn't really bother me. The loss in physical screen size and number of pixels does bother me though. A 2844x1600 30" screen would have been fine. A 32" with a 3072x1728 screen would be more like it though. I'm sure Apple will eventually release such a screen though and they'll probably market it with a whole "we listened to our customers, they loved the size of our old 30" screen and loved the DPI of our 27" screen. So now we introduce the best of both world, the 32" high res screen".
The bigger monitor you get, you start to realize how low-res most big HDTVs really are. That 27" screen has more resolution than a 60" HDTV.

Spacedust
Jul 28, 2010, 05:29 AM
Apple 23" HD Cinema Display is the BEST !

Silver, matt, not too big, not too small.

rowr
Jul 28, 2010, 05:31 AM
fewer pixels vertically (1440 vs 1600)

1400 is too damned small.

NetScheduler
Jul 28, 2010, 05:33 AM
It really seems like Apple is putting a lot of effort into pissing off Mac computer users lately. Yet they still have record sales ... so who am I to tell them what to do. Its obviously working for them.

But I can't get rid of the nagging feeling that they are just doing this to see how much they can get away with. I can't really come up with any other reasonable explanation for their choices lately. No one could possibly be arrogant/ignorant enough to actually think these are intelligent product choices, could they?

"If I were running Apple, I would milk the Macintosh for all it's worth -- and get busy on the next great thing. ..."

-=XX=-Nephilim
Jul 28, 2010, 05:48 AM
After my 20" CD died after only 14 months of use I gave up on ever EVER again splashing super-mega-ultra premium amount on Apple screens!

Although bad news it doesn't affect me slightest :)

ryanwarsaw
Jul 28, 2010, 06:00 AM
I am guessing that they weren't making enough money on them to bother with them anymore. If they were profitable and selling like hotcakes they would be crazy to discontinue them.

Gavbo
Jul 28, 2010, 06:05 AM
Apple are only interested in developing and making produces that appeals to the widest audiances now. If it wont sell a billion in its first week then they wont borther.

LondonCentral
Jul 28, 2010, 06:09 AM
All display manufacturers need to do is put a brushed aluminium (aluminum) bezel/frame around their screens. That should keep the style over substance crowd happy.:D

Dewroo
Jul 28, 2010, 06:14 AM
I honestly question why apple would choose to eliminate the 30" display.
it just confuses me, but if it cuts down on productions costs, so be it.

AtariMac
Jul 28, 2010, 06:34 AM
BINGO! Well said.

Many of you are probably too young to remember that Apple used to make a sweet line of laser printers as well. Eventually the market's downward pressure became too great and it was not worth Apple's effort to continue with the printer business.

Oh, and that was one of SJ's first things to dismantle upon his return as then iCeo.


The computer monitor market is cut-throat. Apple is probably finding it difficult to compete while still maintaining their margins.

This is probably just their token monitor offering for those who insist on having an Apple display. They are likely buying 27" screens at a more favorable price since there's an iMac that may be using the same part.

There is no such advantage for the 24" nor 30" screens.

It would be safe to expect in the future that Apple only offers one monitor at the same size of the screen of the largest iMac. If you want a different sized monitor, buy from a third-party monitor manufacturer. It appears that Apple is willing to concede that low-margin market (just like they have conceded the netbook marketplace).

Stella
Jul 28, 2010, 06:39 AM
Wow. Apple displays aren't cheap either. They are almost discouraging people from buying.

OS X Dude
Jul 28, 2010, 06:42 AM
I think it's very likely there will be a 21.5" ACD before long, maybe in time for the next revision. They can use the existing iMac screen (which I think they do anyway for the ACD line) so it's a cost effective no-brainer for them.

Especially after a lot of people on here (myself included) have asked for a smaller size display. I tried a 27" iMac and it was far too big for close-up use for me.

Master Chief
Jul 28, 2010, 06:45 AM
The Pro days are almost over. How sad.
Right. That must be why Apple is about to release the most powerful and expensive Mac Pro ever.

spydr
Jul 28, 2010, 06:52 AM
Come on, Apple! It's a mistake to discontinue them.

It's not. It doesn't make much economical sense to go after a low volume market (30" matte displays), when they can offer 90% of pixels for 60% of the cost, and in addition throw in lost of additional features as well. Sounds like a great deal to me.

But I will agree, that there must be a matte option for the stubborn image/video professionals who don't want to simply rearrange the light source behind them :rolleyes:

PS: Looks like the Matte and ugly HP 30" display is a good choice for $1299, for those who are crying murder out there.