17, 20, 23, 30, and uhh... 40+!?!??!! Cinema Widescreen Displays?

ReanimationLP

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 8, 2005
2,772
28
On the moon.
Apple will stick with its 20, 23, and 30-inch displays through the end of 2005, according to Apple sources -- but a new entry-level 17-inch widescreen and high-end 40-inch-plus model are both still in development as we reported in November of last year.

Price drops are in the cards, but are probably about six months away -- as is the release of the new high-end panel. Announcement of the 17-inch widescreen display could come at almost any time, as the unit is based on the same panel used in the iMac G5 and is basically ready to go. More display rumors later in the week once we've caught up with the latest Mac OS X developer betas!

Holy poop on a stick batman! 40 inches, muhahaha! This is off of macosrumors.com. Just imagine a 40 inch LCD computer display, and the box it'd come in... wait, imagine 2 of them! >:D I'm sure they'd be very high res too. Only time will tell though.
 

bigandy

macrumors G3
Apr 30, 2004
8,852
0
Murka
excuse me while i wipe the drool off my desk...

40" mmmmmmmmmm, but that's going to be EXPENSIVE. 17" widescreen i'm looking forward to as i'll buy one! (can't afford anything more than that).
 

AmigoMac

macrumors 68020
Aug 5, 2003
2,064
0
l'Allemagne
Reanimation_LP said:
Just imagine a 40 inch LCD computer display, and the box it'd come in...

Looking forward to the G6 40" iMac, from the creator of iPod... ;) , 1799 € would be too much for that :mad: :p :p
 

mrgreen4242

macrumors 601
Feb 10, 2004
4,355
1
I dunno... the 17" display would make sense, BUT, as it would logically be just the display from the imac it should be an easy thing to get ready, and you think they would have intoduced it at the same time as the mini, if they were going to do it at all...

Rob
 

wPod

macrumors 68000
Aug 19, 2003
1,654
0
Denver, CO
jimsowden said:
Yeah, who said this besides you?
heh, yeah. sounds like cool ideas. id love a 17" (cheaper than the 20" so i might buy one) but um, where exactly did these ideas come from? any sort of a reliable source?
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,561
0
VA
If you've actually seen a 30" display and been to one of the Apple stores and seen a dual 30" setup you'd have to question the need for a 40" display. It would be too big I think - especially to justify the money it would cost.

Although, I'd love to see a price drop in the 20" and 23" displays :D

And if a 30" came down under $2500 that would be a tough one to pass up on....

D
 

johnbro23

macrumors 6502a
Apr 12, 2004
770
0
Pittsburgh, PA
I can easily beleive the 17" low end screen. They need one for people who want to buy a low end display with their Mac mini. I don't know about the 40"... it seems a little unnecessary. If it comes with a price drop for the 23" I'd be happy.

Do you think this will make front page? Maybe page 2 at least?
 

Flynnstone

macrumors 65816
Feb 25, 2003
1,423
74
Cold beer land
I guess I have 51" Hitachi Cinema Display :)
I plugged my Mac into my widescreen TV. It would goto 1900x1080 interlaced. Very cool !

I wonder if a Mac mini will be able to play a DVD-HD, when available.
 

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
I can't imagine dual 30" Cinema Displays. It's simply too large to be of practical use. You'd need a chair with wheels to slide back and forth between the monitors. And even if you had at an angled position, your head would be in a awkward position much of the time. I say no to dual 30" displays.
 

Koodauw

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2003
3,939
175
Madison
Mr. Anderson said:
If you've actually seen a 30" display and been to one of the Apple stores and seen a dual 30" setup you'd have to question the need for a 40" display. It would be too big I think - especially to justify the money it would cost.
I think with 40'' you'd be looking at more than the desktop market. Perhaps conference rooms or areas with more than one person sees the screen.

As for the 17'' wide screen, It would be a no brainer, esp if they have the screens already from the iMac. Although one would think it would of been announced alongside the mini.
 

rhpenguin

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2003
929
0
London, Ontario
one would have thought that it would have been announced alongside the mini, but look how long it took to get aluminum displays. This could be true.
 

Ugg

macrumors 68000
Apr 7, 2003
1,991
16
Penryn
I believe the 17" rumor and I can see why Apple waited to introduce it. The pundits would have immediately said that the price for the computer would have been upped by the extra Apple KMM. I'll definitely buy one when I get my mini after Tiger comes out.

The 40" must be more of a video display, in line with SJ's HD TV/Video foray. The more I read and think about the Sony guy's appearance, the more I'm convinced that the iMS (iMovie Store) is about to become a reality. There's no way that Apple would launch such a thing without their own high end screen.
 

maya

macrumors 68040
Oct 7, 2004
3,225
0
somewhere between here and there.
Flynnstone said:
I wonder if a Mac mini will be able to play a DVD-HD, when available.
With 32MB of GPU ram, some frames on HD movies skip.

I do not think the Mac mini will play HD movies on BIG screens since it only have 32MB of GPU, for editing the mini is fine no speed monster however with HD movies its going to skip during playback.

If you want to view HD movies a decent amount is 64MB of GPU.

My 32MB GPU skips frames during playback of HD movies. :(
 

maya

macrumors 68040
Oct 7, 2004
3,225
0
somewhere between here and there.
Mr. Anderson said:
If you've actually seen a 30" display and been to one of the Apple stores and seen a dual 30" setup you'd have to question the need for a 40" display. It would be too big I think - especially to justify the money it would cost.

Although, I'd love to see a price drop in the 20" and 23" displays :D

And if a 30" came down under $2500 that would be a tough one to pass up on....

D
Apple is going to sell the 17" for what 499 USD, so it can market the 499 Mac mini + 499 17" ACD = 998 USD.

If a 17" ACD were to be released why wait, Apple already uses the same panels with the 17" PB and iMac G5...It's not like they are redesigning the frame. The ACD frame already resembles the Mac mini so this 17" is not very plausible.

As for a 40" <--- ROTF I don't think so, not yet anyhow. Its too large to even consider.

Yes, 2x 30" ACD side by side, its maddening. :)
 

Timelessblur

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,086
0
I would have to say the 40in would be to big heck after seeing the 30in monitor I going to have to say the 30in monitor is puhsing it on being to big.
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,801
1,254
New Zealand
Ugg said:
I believe the 17" rumor and I can see why Apple waited to introduce it. The pundits would have immediately said that the price for the computer would have been upped by the extra Apple KMM.
Yep, I totally agree. People would feel pressured into getting the Apple display, thereby increasing the cost of switching.

Personally, I'm still on a CRT so I'll probably buy a 17" widescreen LCD when available.
 

combatcolin

macrumors 68020
Oct 24, 2004
2,283
0
Northants, UK
Of course 40" is going to happen, just a case of when.

Be cool though eh?, your own "computer wall" just had a swivel chair and pretend to be Dr Evil!!!!
 

jadam

macrumors 6502a
Jan 23, 2002
699
1
Poff said:
You do realize that the DUAL DVI setup that the 30" need, won't be able to feed a 40"?
Assuming its resolution is some where around the order of 3600x1900 which is what the 22" IBM T221 has, then the 40" would require the use of both dual link DVI ports on the Geforce 6800 ultra in order to work with a decent refresh rate.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.