24-Inch 4K Display from Dell Priced at $1399, 28-Inch 4K Model Coming at Under $1000

[bitmarket.io]

So I'm guessing the apple version will be around 1600 for the 24"

----------



It's so you get the idea for pricing and what panels are available for the Apple's version (if one comes out). Apple doesn't make it's own panels, so if dell releases a 24", chances are apple will.

Nope. I only buy shiny Apple branded stuff.

 

[blackhand1001]

Don't care. Where's Apple's version?

Why would you want apples version. The dell ultrasharp monitors have a much better warranty, height adjustment, tons of inputs, better color controls, and are overall a better value.

 

[MythicFrost]

It's almost always to do with yield, I'm guessing the 28" has a much higher yield than the 24" due to the pixel density.

The 28 is 8-bit whereas the 24 is 10-bit. The latter is like more professional, and I think the 28 is more consumer.

You can argue that the ipad mini retina PPI is even higher than the iPhone. I think it matters on the distance and screen size. A monitor with a higher PPI would be worthless as your eyes would never see it unless you are 4-5 inches from the screen. I might be wrong, but just makes sense to me.

Actually the Retina iPad mini and the Retina iPhone have the same pixel density. But you shouldn't really compare the iDevices to screens, it's a different scenario.

You're correct that distance and screen size matter, and visual acuity also. These vary (except maybe for screen size) greatly from person to person.

220 PPI would be very noticeable. I use this PPI calculator to figure out what the appropriate viewing distance is for a given resolution, screen size, and visual acuity: http://bhtooefr.org/displaycalc.htm

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

The Mac Pro hasn't really been released yet. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks.

TB2 Haswell rMBPs support also 4K.

 

[lewisd25]

I don't understand the hate for Dell's product design. They have been using the same styling for more than a decade...wait. Nevermind.

 

[MrX8503]

Why would you want apples version. The dell ultrasharp monitors have a much better warranty, height adjustment, tons of inputs, better color controls, and are overall a better value.

Dell doesn't have thunderbolt. I'll plug in my one cable, while you plug in your 6+ wires that looks like a birds nest.

 

[compute]

They only thing good about Apple monitors is that you always have a spare mirror.

 

[dalupus]

run on original thunderbolt?

Is there any way these monitors will be able to run on the original thunderbolt ports from the 2012 macbook pro retinas or am I going to have to upgrade to be able to use these monitors?

 

[warnergt]

Apple have a history of trying to create their own standard when there is a perfectly good standard being used by the rest of the industry. Remember Apple Display Connector , Apple connector that ran data and 25V of power to the screen using one cable. Using a non ADC screen on a Pro Mac or an ADC screen on a computer without the ADC connector (this included Mac laptops) required all kinds of adaptors.

Yes, and Apple refused to support Blu-ray even when they had the king of platforms for HD video. I think they really believe in their mantra "we suck less" because, sometimes, Apple's decision making really sucks. Microsoft may suck the camel's winkie but, at times, Apple sucks too. I love Apple but they definitely don't give me all I expect from the best.

 

[aloshka]

Why would you want apples version. The dell ultrasharp monitors have a much better warranty, height adjustment, tons of inputs, better color controls, and are overall a better value.

Because I can control brightness with my keyboard. And it has ambient light sensor and will be a TB display with Ethernet, USB ports, and the list goes on...

 

[warnergt]

You two do realize Thunderbolt was developed by Intel, right?

Yeah, but the point is only Apple has embraced it. You might call it "forward looking" but, right now, it is better characterized as "bone-headed."

There is no critical mass for Thunderbolt and this monitor appears to be yet more evidence that it isn't coming soon.

I love the performance of Firewire and will probably continue to use it as long as it makes sense. However, Firewire was never fully embraced by the industry. Consequently, it was an out-of-the-mainstream technology that, while good, came at a significant premium with lacking support. Thunderbolt doesn't yet look like it will achieve that level of acceptance. It is a virtual non-starter. Apple introduced Macs with Thunderbolt almost three years ago and we still have a negligible number of devices that support it -- and they are damn expensive!

----------

5) Why do you even care whether Thunderbolt is a success or a failure if you don't use it? Even if it was unanimously considered a failure, how would it affect you?

It affects me because I use Macs. And when Apple makes me connect everything to my Mac with an under-supported, overpriced interface, it costs me money.

 

[glitch44]

Could the current Mac Mini (Intel HD4000 chipset) drive a 3840 x 2160 display?

 

[Xerotech]

Care to explain why Dell's version is irrelevant, bearing in mind that they shared the same IPS panel as Apple's 27". Bit strange to dismiss something just because it's not Apple...surely you weren't being that shallow were you?

Apple's version would be the same panel in a different frame, maybe with a magsafe power cable added on or something for another ~$1k.

Thunderbolt docking purposes.
Also, many try to keep the same brand electronics together. A lot of people don't see "Dell" as a luxurious brand. I don't mind myself, but simply throwing that out there.

Yeah, but the point is only Apple has embraced it. You might call it "forward looking" but, right now, it is better characterized as "bone-headed."

There is no critical mass for Thunderbolt and this monitor appears to be yet more evidence that it isn't coming soon.

I love the performance of Firewire and will probably continue to use it as long as it makes sense. However, Firewire was never fully embraced by the industry. Consequently, it was an out-of-the-mainstream technology that, while good, came at a significant premium with lacking support. Thunderbolt doesn't yet look like it will achieve that level of acceptance. It is a virtual non-starter. Apple introduced Macs with Thunderbolt almost three years ago and we still have a negligible number of devices that support it -- and they are damn expensive!

----------



It affects me because I use Macs. And when Apple makes me connect everything to my Mac with an under-supported, overpriced interface, it costs me money.

Both Sony and Apple utilized Thunderbolt around the same time. I believe Sony incorporated it into their Vaio Z's for external graphics card + blu ray drive. Intel calls it Lightpeak.

 

[newagemac]

Care to explain why Dell's version is irrelevant, bearing in mind that they shared the same IPS panel as Apple's 27". Bit strange to dismiss something just because it's not Apple...surely you weren't being that shallow were you?

Apple's version would be the same panel in a different frame, maybe with a magsafe power cable added on or something for another ~$1k.

So Dell is going to give me Apple's industry leading support? And I can take my monitor to Dell's store down the road if needed? Cool that they are EXACTLY the same. I bet magsafe and Thunderbolt ports grow on the Dell units after the sale with a little water and sun.

 

[Xiroteus]

28" for under a thousand would be quite nice. Not too small or large.

 

[Xerotech]

So Dell is going to give me Apple's industry leading support? And I can take my monitor to Dell's store down the road if needed? Cool that they are EXACTLY the same. I bet magsafe and Thunderbolt ports grow on the Dell units after the sale with a little water and sun.

Dell computers may be awful but their support is excellent. You wouldn't have to go down the road if you needed to. Dell would ship you an entirely new replacement or send support straight to your home. I'm an Apple fan and recently one of my family members had an issue with their Dell laptop. I called Dell support and they immediately scheduled a support tech to come the next day. The person showed up on time and repaired the computer in an hour.

You can connect Dell monitors pretty easily with a mini-display port to display port cable. You'll get full resolution if you're on DP 1.2 and the cable is much cheaper than a Thunderbolt cable. There's always the HDMI option too, newer HDMI supports higher resolution as well. It is all up to preferences. The panels in the display are either by LG, Sharp or Samsung. Hence, not much of a difference. However, I do prefer the Apple monitor myself.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

1) You don't need any adapter for this monitor to work on a Thunderbolt-enabled Mac. It connects straight out of the box on a Mac just like on a PC. You lose nothing compared to a PC user.

2) Apple doesn't sell dedicated Thunderbolt hubs. You seem to be confused as to what Thunderbolt and mini DiplayPort are. Read up before complaining.

3) You didn't pay for Thunderbolt. It's simply an upgrade over mini DisplayPort which didn't remove any feature, didn't take more space on Macs and didn't cause any price hike.

4) How does the fact Thunderbolt has almost no adoption outside of Mac products make it a joke? Is the MagSafe connector a joke as well just because it's not standard and never found on other products? Some professionnals do use it and like it, those who don't use it have absolutely no drawbacks, that's what matters.

5) Why do you even care whether Thunderbolt is a success or a failure if you don't use it? Even if it was unanimously considered a failure, how would it affect you?

6) I'll remind you that Thunderbolt is also in part what made rMBPs thinner, by allowing to remove FireWire/Gigabit Ethernet ports without losing compatibility completely. Even if that was strictly the only thing Thunderbolt did over mDP, it still would have been a nice addition.

While we're at it, why not complain every time new speakers come out and don't support optical audio? MacBook Pros' 3.5 mm output supports optical audio even though 99% of people will only ever use it for analog audio. Why don't people complain about that as well? Just because it doesn't have a fancy marketing name?

This may be a long shot, but I'm guessing you like Thunderbolt?

BTW, while all your points are very arguable, your examples don't really fit the scenario here. Comparing Thunderbolt to Magsafe? Really?

 

[iSayuSay]

Don't care. Where's Apple's version?

And tell me exactly what's so great about this "Apple's version"? beside of Thunderbolt?

Last time I checked Dell monitors work with Thunderbolt Mac and PCs. It comes with multiple video input so I can plug several Macs PCs and even gaming console simultaneously.

It also used to have same panel as Apple display
It comes with 3 years extended warranty by default. No need to buy something like AppleCare like when you buy an Apple display.

It also priced more reasonably, the 2560x1440 Dell monitor is around $600 and it does a lot more than a mere $999 Apple Thunderbolt Display. I don't know what I'm missing with Dell
Oh yeah, a shiny aluminyum huh?

So to tell you the truth, I don't care about Apple's version ..

 

[Xerotech]

And tell me exactly what's so great about this "Apple's version"? beside of Thunderbolt?

Last time I checked Dell monitors work with Thunderbolt Mac and PCs. It comes with multiple video input so I can plug several Macs PCs and even gaming console simultaneously.

It also used to have same panel as Apple display
It comes with 3 years extended warranty by default. No need to buy something like AppleCare like when you buy an Apple display.

It also priced more reasonably, the 2560x1440 Dell monitor is around $600 and it does a lot more than a mere $999 Apple Thunderbolt Display. I don't know what I'm missing with Dell
Oh yeah, a shiny aluminyum huh?

So to tell you the truth, I don't care about Apple's version ..

The looks.
There are rich arses that like to have everything look the same.
OCD people?
Thunderbolt dock saves you $300.

 

[9000]

The 15" rMBP has a resolution of 2880×1800. That is a lot of pixel density. What took so long for somebody to make a consumer-level 24" or 27" 4K display? I expected Apple to come out with a 4K Thunderbolt display the day after the rMBP came out.

 

[iSayuSay]

You two do realize Thunderbolt was developed by Intel, right?

And then what? That makes Apple less innocent? Thunderbolt is a proprietary technology, and on top of that it's NOT commonly used.

So in all decency Apple could have add DisplayPort support into it. Or even better, add DVI DL and HDMI 1.4 so virtually any computer could make use of it.

Right now the $999 Apple display is pretty much shiny garbage unless you have Thunderbolt Mac. And I don't pay $999 for garbage.

 

[9000]

And tell me exactly what's so great about this "Apple's version"? beside of Thunderbolt?

So to tell you the truth, I don't care about Apple's version ..

Maybe he just has a portable Mac, and you have other things you want connected to it. It's like you're arguing over which shoe size is better. But Apple's warranty really should be better than what it is.

 

[iSayuSay]

The looks.
There are rich arses that like to have everything look the same.
OCD people?
Thunderbolt dock saves you $300.

A crippled Thunderbolt dock I might say. 3 x USB 2.0 only; FW and LAN. It doesn't even work easily with any PC.

And IMO, USB 3 hub, multiple inputs, and flexibility on the Dell makes up for $300 Thunderbolt dock.

 

[MacLC]

Remember the days when matte was standard and glossy was the premium version. Now it's vice versa

back in those days the limiting factor was brightness. The original Manta display up through even the 2005 Powerbooks were extremely dim. Originally a lot of glossy displays were also a lot brighter.
Most high quality large displays including my old Dell 2407 are, were, and will be matte. Matte is just easier for wannabe professionals such as myself as well as real professionals to work with accurately.

Now for entertainment, I sometimes prefer glossy.

 

[slapple]

24" monitor with 3840x2160 resolution? So will this monitor have 4X the desktop area than a 24" 1920x1080 monitor and everything on the screen will be half as big? Or is it like a "Retina" display where everything is the same size just more detailed?