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

[thekev]

Don't know why everyone automatically thinks that Apple's pricing will be more. If you compare the pricing on the 27" TBD to competitors' units that have the same specs Apple is usually the same price, and in some cases even cheaper.

It's kind of difficult to make a comparison there. I think the U2711 is better than the TBD. The U2711 can be easily located these days for around $700. Closer to $1000 I think NEC's PA271w is way better. Both of course lock the docking station functionality. If the reason for the purchase is the best possible display, I would suggest NEC or in some cases Eizo. Apple picked up a lot of value with the docking functionality, as most thunderbolt docks are quite expensive.

 

[jtrauscht]

Top priorities in any new Mac display

The most important features in any new Mac display (to me) are, and in this order:
1. Color accuracy, color accuracy, color accuracy
2. Matt, non-glossy surface option
3. Screens that don't have that weird drippy thing going on that the last matt screens had
4 & 5. Built-in iSight and Mid-size 24–27" option
6. Powered USB ports
7. Higher resolution

 

[gaximus]

All are 4K. The price appears to be a mistake.

4K is the resolution, not the pixel density. The bigger the screen the less dense the pixels.

 

[glitch44]

So can the current Mac Mini drive this level of resolution?

 

[Giuly]

So you can do Retina (300 or higher ppi) on a 7.9" iPad mini, an 9.4" iPad Air, a 13" and 15" MacBook Pro.

But not an 11" or 13" MacBook Air.

You can do 4k (140-185 ppi) on a monitor for a 24" monitor, a 28" monitor and a 32" monitor.

But not on a 22" monitor?

I'm confused.

I prefer using two 22" monitors. I'd really rather go with that than one giant one. Guess there won't be an option.

A 29" screen is about the size of two 21.5" displays next to each other.

 

[Bibbler]

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.

Oh My God, You mean you would buy a "crappy" Dell?? LOL.. While I think Apple's version may cost twice as much and probably will not have as good of resolution, it will be just gorgeous and oh so sexy. "Jony" cares about us, it's not all about money for "Jony" and "Tim". I believe that they truly want to take care of us.. And Apple's version will only have a "popular" magical Thunderbolt" port that will allow it to be hooked to MacBook Pros (only).......

 

[Michael Scrip]

A 29" screen is about the size of two 21.5" displays next to each other.

Hmmmm... not really:

http://www.displaywars.com/21,5-inch-16x9-vs-29-inch-16x9

 

[Beta Particle]

Damn straight. It'll be better.

Probably not. Apple's displays typically focus on achieving an sRGB gamut because that requires little in the way of calibration, and they rely on correction via the graphics card LUT (low quality) rather than letting you write to the monitor's internal LUT. (high quality)

One of the reason Eizo displays are so high quality for example is because they have very high quality internal processing and calibrate inside the display rather than relying on your graphics card. (which is only 8 or 10-bit)

Until Apple's own software supports color management (Firefox is the only browser that will look good on a wide gamut display for example) I doubt they will move beyond sRGB.

 

[rmwebs]

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.

You've clearly never used Dell support.

In any case, are you telling me it's worth paying nearly double the price for the option of walking into a shop and getting it fixed (and by the time you've added Applecare it will be double the price).

 

[prowlmedia]

And of course, no Thunderbolt support (unless you use one of Apple's exclusive Thunderbolt adapters, priced accordingly).

You know, when is Apple just going to admit this Thunderbolt of theirs is a joke; no one else has adopted it, and it's just too expensive for what few accessories out there.

Can't wait for the MacPro with its octopus-like Thunderbolt cable extensions linking everything to the motherbeast.

P.S. Yes, I'm an Apple user and have been since 1990. I just don't like this walled-in-garden approach they've been taking since 2007.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Walled in!?

Thunderbolt is not Apple it's intel.

Apple Created the Mini Display port, which uses the same connector as thunderbolt. BUT this is Freely usable and Licence free. Anyone can use it. USB is subject to all sorts of Licence Fees to the manufacturer. Although both Protocols are free to use.

Displayport is part of the TB Spec - So is USB and PCIE and ethernet all over one cable. So technically you could have a lot less wires. And Octupus!? You can daisy chain them, which you can't with USB.

PCIE only allows for 1 external connection per board. So you could have a fast Hard drive and thats all. Thunderbolt can channel bond and you can double the date rate.

there are PC thunderbolt Boards http://www.gigabyte.com/microsite/306/images/thunderbolt.html
http://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/Z87DELUXEDUAL/

For a studio you can create a direct 20gbs network between machines.

You could put those Stupidly expensive RED Rocket cards and External audio Cards in one Chassis and Every thunderbolt machine.... On the network can used the, without sitting idle 90% of the time.

Every machine can share a single network pool of Data at 20GB a second. Something that 2 years ago would have cost $100,000 in a multi raid setup.

Every machine could daisy chain up to a single 4K client monitor for example and All play direct to it. Lets see you do that with HDMI.

And... Oh look there are
scores of professional devices...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Thunderbolt-compatible_devices


Most importantly - Cameras are starting to get them, in the same way Firewire was adopted. But a dock is way more useful these days as most cameras have an removable SSD. Firewire was much faster than USB and Thunderbolt is MUCH faster than USB3 and way more useful.

Oh and finally... Walled in?! You mean like Windows? with their proprietary DLLs and the screwed up registry and hundreds of thousands of viruses?

You could go completely open source and get linux of course.

 

[prowlmedia]

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."

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!

There are actually Scores of devices, and yes they are expensive because they are professional level.

but You can create a storage pool for about $5K at 20gbs speeds that 3 years ago would have cost you 100K

you are NEVER going to see as many devices as USB as it's a simple interconnect.

The things you can do with one single Thunderbolt cable are incredible compared to HDMI, Ethernet, USB1,2 or 3. PCi-e is the only connection faster... BUT you can only have one and it's a direct feed into your PCI-e channels... so if that is operating at top speed, your internal bandwidth is degraded.

So by your assumption, Apple should have given up on Firewire ( which was actually developed by 10 companies inc. IBM and Sony, ) because you know it was first implemented in 1995... and wasn't included on cameras etc until 2000... Whereas we are already seeing it on cameras now such as the Black Magic. Not that actually matters as most cameras have removable SSDs and a hot-swap dock is more useful[

 

[Giuly]

Hmmmm... not really:

http://www.displaywars.com/21,5-inch-16x9-vs-29-inch-16x9

29" are not 16:9 but 21:9: http://www.displaywars.com/21,5-inch-16x9-vs-29-inch-21x9

I did say "more or less", didn't I?

 

[barkmonster]

How is the 28" version gonna be cheaper than the 24" model?

I imagine pixel density/DPI makes the 24" model more expensive to produce in the same way 24" LCDs are typically cheaper than 21" models even though they have the same 1920x1080 resolution.

It's basically a retina HD display and at present, the largest retina screen Apple offers is in the 15" Macbook Pro.

----------

Post deleted by moderator

You're forgetting (or simply lack the knowledge) that Firewire is closer to eSATA than USB because it offers full duplex throughput and no CPU overhead with just a dip in performance for it's 400/800Mbit limit.

Thunderbolt can offer the full bandwidth of SATA/eSATA with an SSD or HDD but doesn't offer the buspower of Firewire.

If you think the MB/s and burstrate of USB makes it anything like Firewire, you're mistaken. Even USB 3.0 is only dual simplex, which is an improvement but for higher bandwidth, zero CPU overhead usage, Thunderbolt is the new standard because it's PCIe-based but for some devices, to get the best of both worlds (Power and high throughput), portable devices that were previously Firewire only could start using Thunderbolt for bandwidth AND USB as a powersource simply because you can't just use a Thunderbolt cable alone to power every single device that Firewire has no issue with.

 

[maflynn]

[MOD NOTE]
Lets stay on topic and stop the bickering.

 

[ka-spot]

I want 28" but with TV option.

 

[the8thark]

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

So smaller displays cost more?

And in the display war, Apple clearly wins this one. I'd be willing to pay the Apple premium here. I'm sure a lot of people would want an Apple 4k display.

 

[attila]

The Dell version won't be glossy and will have multiple inputs. Oh and it will be cheaper too. This is one of the few areas where I would put Dell above Apple.

Yes, but not a Dell monitor, though!

 

[barkmonster]

Yes, but not a Dell monitor, though!

I think it's the brand of the physical panel, not the brand of the monitor as a whole that makes a difference. LG and Samsung supply a lot of displays to other companies so the difference between a Dell or an Apple monitor simply means paying 100s more for reduced functionality, reduced connectivity, a webcam you might not need anyway and Apple's aethetic design (which lets be honest, is always far cleaner and elegant than other brands, even if it mean form before functionality).

 

[Bantz]

The Dell version won't be glossy and will have multiple inputs. Oh and it will be cheaper too. This is one of the few areas where I would put Dell above Apple.

I have the Dell 27inch 1440p screen, its amazing and was about half the price of the Apple one. They have the same panel too.

 

[johnnyturbouk]

This is excellent new!
Can not wait until the 4K apps displays are released!

Still undecided between the Mac Pro + 4k-ATD, or an iMac and enough cash left over to cop a PS4

 

[yg17]

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.

I had an issue with my Dell U2410 monitor that was 2 and a half years old, one quick phone call with them and I had a new one on my doorstep the next day. Dell's support for the monitors is excellent.

 

[johnnyturbouk]

Yes, but not a Dell monitor, though!

I have a Dell ultrasharp U2713HM - love it.

However, since my rMBP 13" is rather limited in terms of connectivity, i would much appreciate the additional options on the apple monitor:magsafe, gigabit ethernet, more usb3 and tbs ports!

 

[XtraSmiley]

This is great news coming out of Dell. Regardless of which monitor you buy down the road (Dell or Apple), getting more 4k monitors on the market is good period.

Personally, I tend to go toward the nicer looking (frame not screen) Apple product unless the price is over double. That's part of the charm of Apple products, they are metal, and nice. That quality costs money.

There is room in the market for both level of product!

 

[kazmac]

nice news

It will be interesting to see how this shapes up.

 

[jfx94]

I'm guessing Apple's version will be 27" with full cinema 4K resolution (not Dell's somewhat smaller version). I also am guessing it will be in a new aluminum enclosure that resembles the tapered edges of the current iMac. Of course it will have thunderbolt 2 and I'm guessing they will keep the $999 price point.

Just my $0.02