Thoughts on iMac Display

[iMcLovin]

Because once you get the machine you stop whine about every little detail and nitpick and instead enjoy the iMac for what it is

[photoz]

I'm sure the screen on the new iMac when compared to any retina screen is going to be a let down. They don't have the same resolution. Period.

Anyone expecting the new iMac to look as good as a retina screen is fooling themselves.

I knew this going into the purchase, it had no sway on my decision.

[Chupa Chupa]

Originally Posted by hamiltonrrwatch

Yep. I was in an Apple Store yesterday and looked at two 21.5" iMacs. Overall screen quality was underwhelming at best.

It's been my experience that smaller screens have always looked sharper. But the new iMac displays didn't look much better than the iPad Mini's that were out.

What I'm surprised about is that there have been very few posts from new owners commenting on the screen one way or another.

Well I wouldn't go that far. The mini's text display is fairly obnoxious once exposed to a Retina iPad.

I have a new 21" which sits next to a mini display port Apple Cinema Display. The two are on par. For 2012, not great, but not horrible. Certainly I've seen worse monitors at Best Buy. But it does illuminate that Retina has amped up consumer expectations of display quality. What use to be regarded as fantastic is now only mediocre. Problem is manufacturing capability lags to satisfy us.

[Mac32]

Yep, retina is totally superior when working with text. Even if you sit far away from a "normal" iMac screen, you can still see the blurry edges of letters.
However, I still think the 27'' iMac screen is pretty awesome. But think of how demanding the retina 15'' screen is on the graphics card, and then imagine going 27''... Again, I just don't see it happen in the near future... But, then again, what do I know..

[ctdonath]

Originally Posted by MacFoodPoisoner

no one has come in these forums with a thread of how much they enjoy the laminated glass and minimal reflections.

Maybe some things, when done right, just don't warrant any commentary.

...which, methinks, is the underlying Apple axiom: the best user experience is one which isn't noticed at all.

[hamiltonrrwatch]

Originally Posted by Chupa Chupa

Well I wouldn't go that far. The mini's text display is fairly obnoxious once exposed to a Retina iPad.

True.

While two opinions don't make up a majority user experience, the person standing next to me, holding his iPad Mini up to the new iMacs, made the same observation as I did

Which makes me wonder who is manufacturing the 27" displays

[bubbleboyjones]

Originally Posted by ahbdesign

I am now very confused as to what I want. I can get an iMac , MacBook Air or 13" rmbp. I thought the new iMac screen would help me settle it but its just confused me more.

Just get a Air and an external display


Korean 27" IPS LED Monitor around $400(same basic panel as the iMacs I believe)
Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter - $100
13" Air 8gb - Around $1300


Total - $1,800. This gives you both laptop and a 27" IPS display with resolution of 2560 x 1440.

[MacFoodPoisoner]

Originally Posted by thelead

Maybe the glass is just much thicker which gives it the impression that there's a slight gap but I don't think it's much of an improvement. That said, it wouldn't hold me back from buying an iMac if I was in the market for one (I'm not a fan of all-in-ones so I was really checking it out for the future possibility of a new Cinema Display).

Thanks for the info buddy! That said, I am really sorry to hear you can't see much of an improvement... I expected the improvement to be quite obvious....

Originally Posted by ctdonath

Maybe some things, when done right, just don't warrant any commentary.

...which, methinks, is the underlying Apple axiom: the best user experience is one which isn't noticed at all.

Well, that's a positive way to look at it, . I hope that's the case, because I am in the market for one (and I've been for a long time, ever since they messed up the imac by slapping this untreated mirror glass on top of the display... I was just thinking some people would echo the sentiments of the reviews (not the suck ups on the verge of course, but the more objective reviews out there), a lot of which were really impressed with the screen, engadget comes to mind who called it the no. 1 reason to buy this mac.

[thelead]

We're on an enthusiast site, if the screen was THAT much better, there would be threads popping up. That said, it's not like its worse than the previous generation. It's just not a crazy improvement like some sites have reported (I think it was the verge that said it looked like images were sitting on the top the glass ). I was definitely hoping it was true...

[MacFoodPoisoner]

Originally Posted by thelead

We're on an enthusiast site, if the screen was THAT much better, there would be threads popping up. That said, it's not like its worse than the previous generation. It's just not a crazy improvement like some sites have reported (I think it was the verge that said it looked like images were sitting on the top the glass ). I was definitely hoping it was true...

Well said.

[ahbdesign]

Originally Posted by bubbleboyjones

Just get a Air and an external display


Korean 27" IPS LED Monitor around $400(same basic panel as the iMacs I believe)
Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter - $100
13" Air 8gb - Around $1300


Total - $1,800. This gives you both laptop and a 27" IPS display with resolution of 2560 x 1440.

That sounds good but I'd prefer to use one device. I think I have decided against any of the 13" laptops. Might do a 15" regular mbp and go high res on that. And I'll upgrade my iPad to retina display. In short, I've decided against the iMac

The screen isn't super different and the lack of upgradibility has pushed me away -_-

[mcpix]

Since the nearest Apple store is 2 hours away, I finally got a chance to check out the latest iMac at my local Apple reseller. It was sitting next to a 27" Thunderbolt display and I could see the reduction in glare and reflections immediately.

I think the new display looks great, and without the benefit of a side by side comparison, I think the reduction in glare is very comparable to the results I obtained by simply removing the outer glass on my 2011 iMac.

[ahbdesign]

Probably a little off topic but does anyone know if you can install Mac OS X on an external SSD?

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by ahbdesign

Yea I know it's a decent screen and retina has spoiled us all. I just expected it to seem better than the previous gen.

When I compare the iPhone 5 to the 4s/4, i notice a difference. It's just brighter and seems nicer. Same with the iPad mini! That air gap they eliminated seems to work wonders with the smaller devices. I just thought I'd notice a difference in the iMacs as well but so far I haven't.

Did you check out the glare? I took a look at the new 21.5" at Best Buy and while I wasn't expect the screen to be any better in terms of quality and resolution I was impressed with the glare reduction. They had it next to a 27" Thunderbolt display and it did have far less reflections. I use an antiglare 17" MBP so the glare is my biggest issue with the iMacs.


As for the iPhone, was the brightness set the same on both? When we got the 5 the Verizon store had the 4s and 5 on display and the 4s brightness was set to half that of the 5. Changed the brightness and they looked the same except the 5 has the 16:9 aspect ratio vs 4:3.

----------

Originally Posted by ahbdesign

Probably a little off topic but does anyone know if you can install Mac OS X on an external SSD?

Yes, you can boot OS X off USB, FireWire, and Thunderbolt. You can also boot Windows 7 off Thunderbolt.

[Mac32]

Just went to a mac store myself, and compared an 2011 27'' iMac with a 2012 21'' iMac. There's definately a difference in reflections, and the 2012 iMac is one beautiful machine.
I did some comparisons with the 27'' display and the retina MBPs, and the 27'' is one great display if you keep it at a reasonable viewing distance. Even when going back and forward between the 27'' display and the retina models, it still look very good. I feel totally comfortable with my iMac 27'' order, and plan on keeping the iMac for at least 3-4 years. It is possible that we'll get a retina 21'' mac display in a year's time, but there's a big difference and resolution going up to the 27'' display.

I also tried the iMac 27'' at the next highest resolution (1920x1200 I think), and it still looked quite good. I imagine this resolution will work just fine for gaming (for those extra demandig games).

I'm definately not gonna hold out for retina 27'', that's gonna be a loooong wait.

[Tri-stan]

For most people retina will be to expensive so their is not much point going on about it the whole time. Not many desktop screens can better the iMac's right now.

[Thunderbird]

Originally Posted by mcpix

Since the nearest Apple store is 2 hours away, I finally got a chance to check out the latest iMac at my local Apple reseller. It was sitting next to a 27" Thunderbolt display and I could see the reduction in glare and reflections immediately.

I think the new display looks great, and without the benefit of a side by side comparison, I think the reduction in glare is very comparable to the results I obtained by simply removing the outer glass on my 2011 iMac.

I also just had my first look at the new 21.5" iMac in the store today. The reflections have definitely been reduced.

Which leads to a question: what will happen to the MacFrames business now ?

[Nandifix]

The reflections have been reduced which is good. The 27 inch has a slightly higher ppi than the 21 inch anyway. 27 inch always looks better

[blanka]

Originally Posted by ahbdesign

I then jumped onto the MacBook Air 13" and everything seemed super sharp. And don't even get me started about the retina mbps.

The airs have the highest PPI of non retina macs, but the iMac is sharp too. The only thing where sharpness bothers, is with text. But text will be harder too read on the MBA than on the iMac, as everything is smaller, yet fonts have exact the same detail on both machines.

If you want sharp: install windows 7 on your iMac. OSX font rendering is quite soft and targeted at accurate object placement for layout, where Windows is more about crisp display with the sharpest possible fonts.

[Imaginethe]

Originally Posted by thelead

We're on an enthusiast site, if the screen was THAT much better, there would be threads popping up. That said, it's not like its worse than the previous generation. It's just not a crazy improvement like some sites have reported (I think it was the verge that said it looked like images were sitting on the top the glass ). I was definitely hoping it was true...

I would hope it is an enthusiast site, but I see very little of a product coming out and saying it's great. When products come out the threads are usually Apple did this wrong, that wrong, I'm not buying etc. As much as they have done right in these macs you would read the forums and think that performance has dropped etc.

People rarely go on forums to say something is working, however the moment it doesn't we are all here moaning.

I have seen people mention just how much better glare is though.

[MacFoodPoisoner]

Originally Posted by Imaginethe

I would hope it is an enthusiast site, but I see very little of a product coming out and saying it's great. When products come out the threads are usually Apple did this wrong, that wrong, I'm not buying etc. As much as they have done right in these macs you would read the forums and think that performance has dropped etc.

People rarely go on forums to say something is working, however the moment it doesn't we are all here moaning.

I have seen people mention just how much better glare is though.

I don't agree, there were a lot of threads raving about the retina screens on the ipad (besides the understandable complaints about the yellow hues etc.), not so for the imac, even though glare had been a no go for many people, you 'd expect to read somewhere a few "oh great, finally apple has dealt with the reflections properly", or echoing the sentiments of engadget that the display looks like it sits on top of the glass.

Originally Posted by blanka

The airs have the highest PPI of non retina macs, but the iMac is sharp too. The only thing where sharpness bothers, is with text. But text will be harder too read on the MBA than on the iMac, as everything is smaller, yet fonts have exact the same detail on both machines.

If you want sharp: install windows 7 on your iMac. OSX font rendering is quite soft and targeted at accurate object placement for layout, where Windows is more about crisp display with the sharpest possible fonts.

This is correct, and I am thinking very much indeed of going with windows in my work mac at least for that very reason. I 've ****ing had it with apple, unless they bring retina resolutions to the imacs their font rendering will remain sub par in terms of sheer clarity and also in term of size customization. To add insult to injury where they do have retina as in the rmbp their software implementation and/or their hardware for the retina is creating a choppy laggy interface in may apps....

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by MacFoodPoisoner

This is correct, and I am thinking very much indeed of going with windows in my work mac at least for that very reason. I 've ****ing had it with apple, unless they bring retina resolutions to the imacs their font rendering will remain sub par in terms of sheer clarity and also in term of size customization. To add insult to injury where they do have retina as in the rmbp their software implementation and/or their hardware for the retina is creating a choppy laggy interface in may apps....

Wow... That's a bit over the top....

[MacFoodPoisoner]

Originally Posted by KhrisGarcia

Wow... That's a bit over the top....

It's accurate though. Windows has an advantage with cleartype and they also have an advantage with custom dpi settings, which might not always work 100% in terms of layout, but at least on windows the rmbp does not stutter or lag in the ui, because ms's implementation is much less taxing on the gfx. Scaling, and to a lesser extent font types (because some may claim is a preference issue, I don't though) are major drawbacks of os x. At the moment windows can take advantage in terms of font scaling on any high ppi screen, imac 27" included, apple can only do it (with a lot of hick ups) on retina screens. Hence the tons of complaint and work around threads on the small font of the 27" imac, put windows on these babies and your problem is solved. As I am getting older that has become a priority to me, so I am seriously thinking of ditching os x and going with windows on the imac, at the very least I am going to dual boot.

[Apple souce]

Originally Posted by Mac32

I've seen several places predictions about 21'' retina desktop displays next year. Here is a link:

http://www.techspot.com/news/48165-i...tops-soon.html

This article has no facts/proof. Ofcourse the future will bring new tech and new screens but I doubt the iMacs will get retina in 2013, the new imacs dont even have SSD as standard and you would think that they should. Also think of the cost this will bring up.

[mrmarts]

Originally Posted by tim100

Once you have a retina it's hard to go back to a standard screen. I am considering am iMac 27inch but once I put in a fusion drive its $2000. It's hard to spend that much on a non retina

I could not agree more owning a macbook pro retina and having spent 3,400 on my 2010 iMac putting in a extra 4gb of ram, bumping the cpu and getting apple care, the new iMac may have better features and look slim but my 2010 imac is still working fine for me and at the front it still looks like the new imac, hence i prefer to wait for the retina imac too before cashing in another 3,400 to Apple.