i think the 17" apple monitor will go well with my 17" macbook pro, but only if they are the same resolution
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple 17'' Widescreen LCD?
- Thread starter Spanky Deluxe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly that is why Apple needs a refresh to the prices. We both see eye-to-eye on the quality of their product and it's superiority. I'm just stating that their prices are stale and need a refresh. Something on the order of $499 (20"), $899 (23"), and $1699 (30").
Well think about it...all Apple's consumer products have iSights built in for "video-confrencing out of the box". If they want to push the MacMini, they will need a low-end display with a built-in iSight for this.
Sell it seperately at $249.
Maybe bundle a MacMini/display together?
MacMini- $599
bundled display- $200
$799 for a computer/display + mouse/keyboard
...your talking less than $900 for a full Apple system-not bad!
*And for everyone saying 17" is too small... Think of all the people who bought MacBooks at 13.3"! Nobody I know that has one uses an external display.
Sell it seperately at $249.
Maybe bundle a MacMini/display together?
MacMini- $599
bundled display- $200
$799 for a computer/display + mouse/keyboard
...your talking less than $900 for a full Apple system-not bad!
*And for everyone saying 17" is too small... Think of all the people who bought MacBooks at 13.3"! Nobody I know that has one uses an external display.
I don't understand this. Apple has carried a 20" monitor as their low end for two years. Why offer something even smaller after so long? This seems like a step backwards. Why not reduce the 20" to $399 and lower the price of the other two? Dell is putting major price pressure on Apple with their monitors; though they are not as good looking, the price has no doubt won over many would be buyers...not me of course.
Well, see... there's this little thing called market analysis and listening to the people you sell things to. I highly doubt Apple was sitting around going "we need to release something new because its been months. I know! How about a different monitor size!"
Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?
Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.
A 17" LCD screen made by Apple would be a good deal for people buying Mac Minis but, the price would have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen.
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen.
I still am failing to see a counter point.
We both agree that Apple has a higher quality display, that id required by professionals. We both agree that the prices a year ago were a good price, and competative. Now you are making a claim that the competition has lowered their prices (linky?), and that this proves me wrong. I've already stated that my quick searching revealed no such compition in that price point half of what Apple's is, and have put the ball in your court to show me otherwise. Surely if you are making these claims you are aware of a product?
It is not hard to find 20" LCD monitors that cost twice as much as Apple's (Check out NEC's site for example). So I'm failing to see an example of a similarly specced wide LCD to show me exactly how out of whack Apple is. All I hear is "too expensive!" and "100% more!!".
Sure, I'd like them cheaper too, but I'm not going to scream foul without being able to back it up with something.
Price is the main issue
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at £848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for £549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to £1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for £316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to £598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at £848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for £549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to £1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for £316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to £598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
*smacks head on desk*
Beating a dead horse...
Good for you.
Yeah Apple is really screwing us over, man oh man. And look at NEC, they must be absolutely mad to charge $2000 for their MultiSync LCD2190UXi
You made the right choice for your needs and your price. You bought a consumer monitor.
If people want to say that Apple should make a consumer level LCD (for cheap) than say so. But please, for the love of all things, stop dissing on Apple monitors just because you are happy with a Dell and they are cheaper. Many people are Happy with cheapo computers, and if all you need is to write and print word documents, do not buy an Apple computer. However that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't make a computer worth it's weight in gold... for those that need it.
If you don't need color accuracy, DO NOT BUY AN APPLE MONITOR, there are cheaper monitors that, though less accurate, will satisfy you just fine.
Do the math! A wide screen 17" display has fewer pixels than a 4:3 17" display (given the same dpi).
So I sincerely hope they aren't going to charge more for a wide display that has less pixels than a 4:3 display.
Do you think such a display would sport a pwning! S-IPS panel as the other Cinema Displays, or would it be throttled down to a Dell style S-PVA panel?
I willy, willy hope for:
17" (1680x1050), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 600:1, iSight, 400 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $399.
20" (1920x1200), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $699.
24" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $999.
30" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $1999.
Only the most hardcore Mac user would pay those prices. The 17" and 20" models are twice the price of their rivals.
well it depends on the resolution of the monitor. i don't really see this a big deal affecting me, but i can see alot of people buying them though. maybe it's good for Apple, but unless the 20" price comes down, doesn't really help me any
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
Terms such as "color accuracy" probably make people worry that Dell's display all reds as green whereas, in fact, we're talking about differences that are indiscernible to the untrained eye. I would wager that barely 1% of customers who pore such technical details actually need or even understand them.
You're right, Dell monitor's are fine for my needs. Before you write them off, however, as being "cheapo" and irrelevant to Apple's market, I suggest you take a look at one of these Ultrasharps - personally, I'm not a fan of Dell computers, but their recent monitors are catching up fast with Apple.
I agree, however, you get what you pay for, as has been proven many times before by apple. how many other monitors of the pix. dimensions of the 30' are there on the market? the resolutions are amazing! also, I haven't seen many dvi's, it amazes me that most consumer monitors are still vga. price = quality when it comes to apple.
Um where have you been looking. Look at all of these with DVI.
The competitors all use the exact same component as the Apple display even the same model number LCD from the same supplier the difference is the certification process the apple goes through for there color no difference in hardware just a procedure that is run. The fact is a year ago you paid $100 now your paying $300 for a the Apple display over a general consumer display. Apple may not have many competitors in the pro-color display market but they are still competing against the general consumer prices.
I hope it happens. This would not only be great for Mac Mini buyers, but also laptop owners. We already have 13-17 inches of screen real estate, so 17 more sounds just about perfect! I just hope there'd be a non iSight option so that laptop users wouldn't be paying a premium for something they already paid for.
No, actually, this thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor.
There is no mention of it being a compliment to the Mac mini, a smaller pro version for a ProMac, or what it is.
Of course, all this is probably a moot point because
1) It's Digitimes, so chances are it's bogus.
2) It's Apple, so no matter what they charge, people will buy it.
Apple needs to do something to distinguish their flat panels from most other available. How about integrated ipod dock? Oops - Viewsonic just beat them to the punch with 19 and 22" versions with integrated dock (VX2245wm) - they look sweet, and reportably can play your ipod videos directly on screen.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
.
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me
Well that is quite a claim there. I would never suggest anyone buy an Apple LCD over a Dell unless they need it. In fact doing a search on these forums will show me promoting the Dell over the Apple. Just like if someone is worried about a Macbook vs MacBook Pro, I would have them define what they need it for, and choose based on that.
Wait, there is no difference between the two and yet Dell is "catching up fast" ?
I agree, Dell is catching up. I was quite surprised with the quality of their monitors, and am quite happy with fine when compared with the price I paid.
Perhaps if you would like to reply to my post, you could reply to the entire post instead of picking a one liner that is relatively unrelated to my point, and replying to just it. I think it would help your reply as well as my understand of what it is you think I'm saying.
Cheers mate,
~Tyler
Certainly, but that's not the question. The question is, 'does Apple care?' And I think the answer is probably a resounding "no." If people don't care about sophistication and refinement, then all of the effort Apple puts into making its Cinema Displays is a waste on those customers--they'd never buy them anyway. Why go after customers whose only loyalty is to the best price? They're a finicky and transient group.
It's better to sell to a smaller market which will be loyal over time in Apple's view, and that's a perfectly legitimate strategy to have.
Funny that you say "accurate" color.....
Anyone ever hear of the "Pinkening" of the Apple displays over the last 2 years? If you haven't then you may have seen it on your trips to the Apple Store.
Apple LCDs have had a nasty habit of having a Pink hue to them that you cannot dial out of the display. Granted, Apple has been pretty good at replacing these models, but it has been a major issue to those it has affected.
True accurate color will only be had by using color calibration units. So with that rebutle I will say that you will be able to achieve "accurate" color with that $250 LCD monitor from Best Buy.
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.