20" Cinema Display vs 17" Studio Display

[MarkW19]

I currently use a 17" Apple Studio Display (white flatscreen), which I really like.

But, having just ordered a MacBook Pro, I've now got to decide if I want to spend £80 on a DVI-ADC converter, or if I should just invest in a new screen (maybe new, maybe second hand; and sell my old Studio Display on eBay).

As the Cinema Displays are obviously widescreen, I'd like to know how the size of the new 20" (16:10?) will compare with my current ~4:3 17". I certainly wouldn't want it to be OVERALL (ignoring the width) smaller, as some widescreens can be, and I'd ideally like it to be bigger. Also, how will the picture quality have improved?

Thanks for any help.

 

[tersono]

The 17" studio display is a very nice screen (I used to have one), but times have moved on. You'll find the 20" to be overall that bit larger and a LOT more useable in terms of sheer real-estate.

I sold my 17" to replace it with a 20", so know where you're coming from - never regretted doing it, though =]

 

[MarkW19]

The 17" studio display is a very nice screen (I used to have one), but times have moved on. You'll find the 20" to be overall that bit larger and a LOT more useable in terms of sheer real-estate.

I sold my 17" to replace it with a 20", so know where you're coming from - never regretted doing it, though =]

Cool, thanks for the advice. I may try and pick one up on eBay.

Also much easier to get a DVI splitter than an ADC and DVI splitter!

What about the 23", is the extra size really worth so much more money over the 20"?

 

[Xeem]

As the Cinema Displays are obviously widescreen, I'd like to know how the size of the new 20" (16:10?) will compare with my current ~4:3 17". I certainly wouldn't want it to be OVERALL (ignoring the width) smaller, as some widescreens can be, and I'd ideally like it to be bigger.

Here are the dimensions of your 17":

Height: 17.3 inches (43.9 cm)
Width: 17.6 inches (44.7 cm)
Depth: 6.9 inches (17.6 cm) minimum; 9.8 inches (24.9 cm) maximum
Weight: 14.6 pounds (6.6 kg)

And the current 20":

Height: 16.1 inches (41 cm)
Width: 18.5 inches (47.1 cm)
Depth: 6.8 inches (17.4 cm)
Weight: 14.5 pounds (6.6 kg)

Keep in mind that the 17" has a much, much thicker bezel, so the height of the screen itself is larger on the 20". On the other hand, the thicker bezel gives the illusion of having a larger screen. I have the acrylic 20" Cinema Display from the same line as you (hooked up to my PC with ADC->DVI converter), and everyone thinks that it is 22" or 23" when they first see it. But the jump from 5:4 aspect ratio to 16:10 aspect ratio is going to give you a ton more real estate when you are watching movies, and you'll be surprised how much more usability it affords you in other tasks.

 

[MarkW19]

Here are the dimensions of your 17":

Height: 17.3 inches (43.9 cm)
Width: 17.6 inches (44.7 cm)
Depth: 6.9 inches (17.6 cm) minimum; 9.8 inches (24.9 cm) maximum
Weight: 14.6 pounds (6.6 kg)

And the current 20":

Height: 16.1 inches (41 cm)
Width: 18.5 inches (47.1 cm)
Depth: 6.8 inches (17.4 cm)
Weight: 14.5 pounds (6.6 kg)

Keep in mind that the 17" has a much, much thicker bezel, so the height of the screen itself is larger on the 20". On the other hand, the thicker bezel gives the illusion of having a larger screen. I have the acrylic 20" Cinema Display from the same line as you (hooked up to my PC with ADC->DVI converter), and everyone thinks that it is 22" or 23" when they first see it. But the jump from 5:4 aspect ratio to 16:10 aspect ratio is going to give you a ton more real estate when you are watching movies, and you'll be surprised how much more usability it affords you in other tasks.

Thanks a lot for the info.

So, the 20" won't be (and won't feel) much bigger then, just a better layout with it being 16:10.

The aspect ratio would be useful for DVDs, games and Logic Pro; but it's £399 new. Less £80 for an ADC-DVI converter, and maybe £50(?) for my 17" on ebay, so that's £269; maybe with a deal/ex-demo somewhere it'd be closer to £200.

So, ~£200 - is basically just the improved aspect ratio worth that?

 

[Xeem]

That's a pretty tough call. Again, the 20" is going to be much better when watching movies, and you'll get that oft-advertised ability to display two pages side by side, but I don't know if that is worth £200 for you. If you don't do a lot of movie watching, you could always pick up the ADC to DVI converter and an original Griffin iCurve (the original model was made to match height with the 17" Studio Display) somewhere to have a pretty sweet-looking dual display setup.

 

[MarkW19]

That's a pretty tough call. Again, the 20" is going to be much better when watching movies, and you'll get that oft-advertised ability to display two pages side by side, but I don't know if that is worth £200 for you. If you don't do a lot of movie watching, you could always pick up the ADC to DVI converter and an original Griffin iCurve (the original model was made to match height with the 17" Studio Display) somewhere to have a pretty sweet-looking dual display setup.

Well, it's going to be about £60 for the ADC-DVI, plus finding some sort of cheap monitor splitter box (to switch between my MacBook and G5) is going to be impossible, judging by the research I did last night. So there's the inconvenience of manually switching cables round and crawling about on the floor every night!

There seem to be some fairly good deals on eBay for new 20", which would mean I'd end up paying less than £150 (taking into consideration the adaptor I won't need, and selling mine for around the going rate of £60) for a nearly-new or ex-demo one. It may be worth it, for the future as well.

What about the picture quality of the 20" - is it sharper/cleaner/whiter/brighter than my 17", with it being a few years newer?

And, will I sit down and think "this is a good big bigger"? The actual height of my SCREEN (not surround) is just over 10.5", how high is the actual screen on the 20"? I could visualize it better then.

Thanks for the help.

OR, god forbid, are there any other decent monitors that are equal to the Apple Cinema Displays in quality, but cheaper, so I could get something bigger for the same money?!

 

[MarkW19]

And another question - does the power button on the Cinema Display turn on the computer it's connected to, like the Studios did? I'm guessing not?

 

[California]

And another question - does the power button on the Cinema Display turn on the computer it's connected to, like the Studios did? I'm guessing not?

I had the 17" LCD Apple Display for a good while. I liked it because it was "taller" than the 20 displays, and I use it for writing, not watching video. There was less scrolling because of the "taller" screen.

I was not happy with the 20" ACD that I bought right after the 17" was sold. I wasn't happy until I purchased the 23" ACD in aluminum. For cheaps, the 17" will do ya. Don't spend more than 70 USD on the acd/dvi thingy.

If you are like me, the 23" display is going to be your next option. The 20" acd just felt wider, not better than the 17". If you are going to jump up, jump up to the 23".

 

[MarkW19]

I had the 17" LCD Apple Display for a good while. I liked it because it was "taller" than the 20 displays, and I use it for writing, not watching video. There was less scrolling because of the "taller" screen.

I was not happy with the 20" ACD that I bought right after the 17" was sold. I wasn't happy until I purchased the 23" ACD in aluminum. For cheaps, the 17" will do ya. Don't spend more than 70 USD on the acd/dvi thingy.

If you are like me, the 23" display is going to be your next option. The 20" acd just felt wider, not better than the 17". If you are going to jump up, jump up to the 23".

This is really helpful, thanks.

I've decided to stick with the 17" for now, and keep my eye on eBay/Apple refurb for a good deal on a 23".

Do you feel the 23" is "much bigger" when you're sat in front of it, than the 17"? Is it a good/worthwhile upgrade?