It depends on your needs. I love the iMac form factor, but there's a risk- if the system or the display goes bad, you lose both. You're also limited on inputs; if you go with something like the Dell you can also run your XBox or PS3 into the monitor (using component in or HDMI) and maybe a second computer using the other DVI port.
I guess you're right there. How has the longevity been on the recent Apple display generations? I am hoping it has improved. I've seen plenty of them, but none of the new ones that are that old yet.
I think this depends on where the system is. If you're in a brightly lit room, glossy can be more of a problem. Glossy looks fantastic though if you don't have many reflections.
That's why I was saying treated glass as opposed to a typical diffuse bump coating would be cool.
The difference is
quantifiable and measurable. As a percentage of AdobeRGB the Dell scores 95% whereas the TBolt scores 76%.
More users will probably be impressed with the glossy screen though, which makes colors "pop out" more; and not everybody is a graphics pro (I'm certainly not). So unless you view the two side-by-side the gamut difference is probably a moot point, but it is more than just a subjective difference for somebody who really needs that criteria. A graphics pro is probably going to spend much more money on a higher-end monitor anyway.
Sort of.. NEC is kind of the budget end. I like them, but they can be inconsistent, so I switched to Eizo. I'm not saying wider gamut is bad. I'm saying that it's not always better, mostly because it's harder to control. Prior to Xrite's device (which is just okay in this regard) it was nearly impossible to get an Adobe RGB display (including the Eizos) calibrated properly without something like the discus puck or a spectrophotometer that supports transmitted light. I watched many people try the Datacolor Spyder, and the displays always came out looking a bit green. Keep in mind NEC and Eizo no longer use NEC, Mitsubishi, or Hitachi panels. They migrated to LG like everyone else. The difference is mostly in testing and what they add to it for control. In the case of LED, it's a similar problem, but it seems to get close enough for most people. I don't think this is a problem for the OP. I'm just saying that unless you can manage all of those colors properly, they can be inferior. The initial fear in them was actually banding, but dithering takes care of that, and it's usually unnoticeable if implemented well.
Now, the Apple and Dell actually use the same panel- so the gamut difference is due to the backlighting. White LED's still don't have as broad a spectrum as CFL's, and the color gamut is very dependent on the quality of the white light being shot through the colored pixels.
That's not exactly how it works
. Display gamuts have been boosted by RGB LEDs, but that's totally different It's more likely that it's a slightly different version and tuned differently for Apple but with the same underlying hardware. Panels have become very generic. Most likely the volume isn't there for custom designs. 76% is the same percentage as sRGB. Anyway on a positive note assuming good consistency, the adjustments noted over some of the previous 27" Cinema revisions sound excellent. The maximum brightness was quite high before, and even on low settings it was much higher than I'd want to sit at for a long period of time. He mentioned that it measured more like 6300K rather than 7000, which most people would definitely find more pleasing. If they switched to treated glass and improved the ergonomics, I'd probably want one. The reviewer also liked the NEC PA271W quite a bit, but it's not really necessary for the OP. If he was a photographer, graphic designer, etc. I'd say to look at that, as they've dropped in price to almost thunderbolt display level.
