27" LED Cinema Display $999 ?

[Woodcrest64]

What are your thoughts on a 27" LED Cinema Display by Apple under $1000 before the end of this year?

I can't think of Apple going over that amount considering how close it would be to the 27" iMac. If this ends up being the case then I think the 24" LED would be discounted and the 30" would be discontinued.

 

[Icaras]

What are your thoughts on a 27" LED Cinema Display by Apple under $1000 before the end of this year?

I can't think of Apple going over that amount considering how close it would be to the 27" iMac. If this ends up being the case then I think the 24" LED would be discounted and the 30" would be discontinued.

My theory has always been that it would be at the very least $1099, and maybe no higher than $1299.

I simply derived this by the fact that the 24" ACD was priced $600 cheaper than the previous existing lowest end 24" iMac at the time ($1499). It only seems logical to me that such a price difference between a 27" ACD and the low end 27" iMac, which is $1699, would remain about the same.

The only difference here is that the 24" iMac was not LED backlit, and so thats why I feel that a 27" ACD may be a bit higher priced because of this.

Anyway, take this theory with a grain of salt as I'm not even factoring supply and demand and production costs.

Whatever the case though, I do hope Apple does discounts the 24" a bit. It will be interesting to see if Apple decides to do a minor revision to the 24" by making it 16x9, adding an SD card slot, or what have you.

 

[foodle]

I would guess at least $1200. Dell sells their version of this display (U2711) for $1099 list and is on sale now for $999. I would expect Apple to charge at least a little premium over Dell.

 

[Hellhammer]

I would guess at least $1200. Dell sells their version of this display (U2711) for $1099 list and is on sale now for $999. I would expect Apple to charge at least a little premium over Dell.

But it can't be too much as 27" iMac is 1699$ and it's more than a display. 1200$ sounds reasonable, still 500$ less than iMac

 

[Ash9414]

Whatever the case though, I do hope Apple does discounts the 24" a bit. It will be interesting to see if Apple decides to do a minor revision to the 24" by making it 16x9, adding an SD card slot, or what have you.

This is just my opinion but I don't think they will change it to 16:9 as when the 24" was put into production it was meant as a desktop replacement with a MBP (which also has the 16:10). I understand why someone would want an SD card slot too, but seeing as the displays were designed with the MBP in mind, there is already an SD slot in the laptop.

Moving on, I would personally like to see a slight discount on the price of the 24" because if they don't update them then the technology is starting to get old (not that old, but Apple like to update their products quite often so relative to that the technology may be considered old).

 

[rnelan7]

They could go with the higher price so consumers think, "Oh, just $500 more and I get a full computer, this is a no brainer"

 

[Icaras]

This is just my opinion but I don't think they will change it to 16:9 as when the 24" was put into production it was meant as a desktop replacement with a MBP (which also has the 16:10). I understand why someone would want an SD card slot too, but seeing as the displays were designed with the MBP in mind, there is already an SD slot in the laptop.

Moving on, I would personally like to see a slight discount on the price of the 24" because if they don't update them then the technology is starting to get old (not that old, but Apple like to update their products quite often so relative to that the technology may be considered old).

Good point, they could retain the 24" soley for the Macbook lineup and introduce the new 27" (and possibly a smaller 21.5" or a larger than 30" display?) for the desktop counterparts that would be 16x9 and include the SD card slot as well. Makes perfect sense since they specifically designed the 24" with the special magsafe connector, short MDP cable, and like you also said, it's screen ratio does continue to match with the MBP screen (This of course, is all thrown out the window the minute Apple decides to update the Macbook lineup with 16x9 displays though). Anyway, if the new displays then are targeted for desktop use, Apple could do away with the magsafe connector to help differentiate them from the 24". I wonder however, if consumers will be confused by the ACD lineup if Apple does this.

They could go with the higher price so consumers think, "Oh, just $500 more and I get a full computer, this is a no brainer"

Hey, also good point. I think the right price distance between the ACD and the iMac starts to psychologically up sell to the customer. And more computers sold also means more OS X penetration into the market.

 

[skyline r34]

I just want one period, does not matter to me how much it is, Been saving for 2 years now for a 30-inch and know that I have the money to buy a 30-inch or 27-inch which ever size Apple does decides to come out with JUST BRING THE DAMN THING OUT ALREADY

 

[calderone]

I would guess at least $1200. Dell sells their version of this display (U2711) for $1099 list and is on sale now for $999. I would expect Apple to charge at least a little premium over Dell.

The Dell is also CCFL, so it may sell for even more than $1200…

It doesn't matter though, if the 27" is anything like the 24" I won't be buying it. I have no idea where Apple is going with these displays.

The 24" is made for a laptop; the length of the cables, the MDP and the magsafe make this obvious. Since this is really the only affordable option Apple has, I have had the unfortunate experience of deploying these monitors to Mac Pros. What a horrible setup.

Apple needs to offer up some options for those with desktops.

Allow the buyer to choose their setup and thus the resulting cables, this should be rather easy to accommodate during production, since you only need to pop in a different breakout cable.

In addition, matte options are needed. If Apple finally revamps the display line and keeps them in line with the current 24", more people are going to jump to Dell or HP.


/Rant

 

[Ash9414]

The Dell is also CCFL, so it may sell for even more than $1200…

It doesn't matter though, if the 27" is anything like the 24" I won't be buying it. I have no idea where Apple is going with these displays.

The 24" is made for a laptop; the length of the cables, the MDP and the magsafe make this obvious. Since this is really the only affordable option Apple has, I have had the unfortunate experience of deploying these monitors to Mac Pros. What a horrible setup.

Apple needs to offer up some options for those with desktops.

Allow the buyer to choose their setup and thus the resulting cables, this should be rather easy to accommodate during production, since you only need to pop in a different breakout cable.

In addition, matte options are needed. If Apple finally revamps the display line and keeps them in line with the current 24", more people are going to jump to Dell or HP.


/Rant

I understand your frustration but if you think about it the iMac was the last desktop to be updated and so they expect more people to buy that model which doesn't need a screen.

I believe they will update the displays when the updated Mac Pro's are released this summer (or whenever they are due to be updated). Also, the 24" was released around the same time as the Macbook Pro's last year so that's why they are more inclined towards the Apple laptop range instead of the desktops.

 

[jbyun04]

If it's going to be priced at $1299, Apple is basically telling me that:
3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB memory
1TB hard drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 4670 graphics with 256MB
is only worth $400?

In that case, why not just grab a 27" iMac to have as a desktop / external monitor?

Hopefully they lower the price on the 24".

 

[calderone]

I understand your frustration but if you think about it the iMac was the last desktop to be updated and so they expect more people to buy that model which doesn't need a screen.

I believe they will update the displays when the updated Mac Pro's are released this summer (or whenever they are due to be updated). Also, the 24" was released around the same time as the Macbook Pro's last year so that's why they are more inclined towards the Apple laptop range instead of the desktops.

Well, I don't really buy that. The LED display was released in October of 2008. The Mac Pro received an update in 2009. I don't see how the recent iMac update relates to the fact that the displays are tailored for the notebooks.

I don't have much faith in Apple getting the display refresh right. Given their focus on shiny consumer products, I fully expect a refreshed display line with glass, short cables and magsafes.

If it's going to be priced at $1299, Apple is basically telling me that:
3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB memory
1TB hard drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 4670 graphics with 256MB
is only worth $400?

In that case, why not just grab a 27" iMac to have as a desktop / external monitor?

Hopefully they lower the price on the 24".

I honestly don't think $400 is too far off based on retail prices, which we know Apple is not paying.

 

[Icaras]

If it's going to be priced at $1299, Apple is basically telling me that:
3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB memory
1TB hard drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 4670 graphics with 256MB
is only worth $400?

In that case, why not just grab a 27" iMac to have as a desktop / external monitor?

Hopefully they lower the price on the 24".

Which is why I reiterated rnelan7's idea of up selling the imac to customers rather than sell the ACD. More iMacs sold = growing OS X install base. I strongly believe Apple's ultimate agenda is to sell the hardware through the software.

 

[ValSalva]

If it's glossy only I'll get the Dell U2711 instead. I can get by with high gloss on a 13" or 15" display but it's unacceptable on a 27".

 

[0186279]

If it's glossy only I'll get the Dell U2711 instead. I can get by with high gloss on a 13" or 15" display but it's unacceptable on a 27".

Sorry but I just don't see the logic in this. If anything it should be unacceptable on a laptop considering they move around with you and will find themselves in situations where you cannot help the glare, especially outside.

Your 27" monitor will be stationary. It will not be outside and unless you deliberately place it somewhere that will give it glare, it will be place somewhere that is completely glare free, allowing you to benefit from the crisp colors...

 

[0186279]

I sure hope so! I would definitely get one then. Otherwise I will have to opt for the cheaper 24", which wouldn't be bad either.

 

[Ash9414]

Well, I don't really buy that. The LED display was released in October of 2008. The Mac Pro received an update in 2009. I don't see how the recent iMac update relates to the fact that the displays are tailored for the notebooks.

Oh ok, sorry, I thought the displays were last updated in early 2009 around the time of the new MBPs in June 2009, which would make sense. Perhaps Apple are seeing that the iMac and Macbook (Pro/Air) are the most sold products so I focusing more on them? That's the only explanation I have.

 

[gri]

If it's glossy only I'll get the Dell U2711 instead. I can get by with high gloss on a 13" or 15" display but it's unacceptable on a 27".

I had 2 Dell 3008. First one had dead pixels after about 6 months. Replacement was gone after 5 hours of use with half of the display not working. All had irregular color tints over the panel and needed calibrating out of the box. Great customer service gave me a refurbished monitor for a defective new one...

I have now a loaner 20' cinema display which I like more than the 30' Dell - I am now trying to return the Dell overall and get either (hopefully) a 27' (please at WWDC) or a 30/24, not yet decided.

 

[fr4c]

Enjoying every minute of my 30" ACD until Apple releases something new.

 

[-SD-]

I want a 27" CD with non-glossy option and a mighty beast of a new ATI GPU to plug it in to.