Apple Cinema Displays Due?

[Digital Skunk]

Again, to notice the difference between TN and IPS you need to have two displays set up side by side. It's not something of any sort of magnitude.

Not necessarily the case with everyone. Most people can see the difference by looking at them. The TN panel will be noticeably darker due to the higher contrast, and depending on the resolution, may be a bit softer.

As far as my knowledge goes, the ACD and Dell UltraSharp 2005FPW, use the exact same panel inside: an LG Phillips LM201W01. They use different backlights, and the Dell has four USB ports, but essentially they are the same LCD.

Unless you're going for the all-Apple look and willing to pay the premium, get a much cheaper Dell (or any other brand for that matter) screen with the same/similar panel inside.

This is true. The only thing separating the Dell and the Apple is that the ACD is SWOP certified, again, needed for accurate color and professional (non-gaming TV viewing) tasks, and the backlighting is different.

The 23" and 30" ACD are also SWOP certified while the Dells aren't, and the Dell 24" 27" 30" all use S-PVA or TN panels, while the Apple's are still the top of the line S-IPS. Both are made by LG. The big problem with an update of the displays are the panels, since LG nor Samsung make any newer professional panels, there is nothing to upgrade to.

The only thing Apple could do is release a cheaper TN panel with a plastic bezel, or change the bezel on the current models or lower their price for a fourth time.

Again, in the professional world, there isn't anything that really competes with the ACDs other than the NECs and LaCies that come with color calibrators and slightly better casing. They are cheaper than the ACDs, and still give the superior panels.

 

[neiltc13]

Most people can see the difference by looking at them.

This is a ridiculous exaggeration.

 

[localoid]

As far as my knowledge goes, the ACD and Dell UltraSharp 2005FPW, use the exact same panel inside: an LG Phillips LM201W01. They use different backlights, and the Dell has four USB ports, but essentially they are the same LCD.

Unless you're going for the all-Apple look and willing to pay the premium, get a much cheaper Dell (or any other brand for that matter) screen with the same/similar panel inside.

True... AnandTech compared the Dell model you mentioned, but that was about three years ago...

AnandTech's LCD Thread is fair source of info re: LCD monitors, ballpark pricing, etc. IPS panels aren't especially plentiful (or cheap) these days...

 

[Digital Skunk]

This is a ridiculous exaggeration.

If you say so, then sure.

IPS panels aren't especially plentiful (or cheap) these days...

Preach man. The Nec Multisync 90 is so far the best there is as far as specs and price. The 30" runs $2200 and is so far the only IPS panel that I have seen that gives specs better than much of the competition.

 

[josjoslyn]

Fingers crossed for new ACDs

I do hope they come out with an updated/new range of ACDs..... they are getting a bit "long in the tooth", and there are other screens in the 30" domain now that are significantly better than the ACD - the DELL is a significant player. Whilst most of the Apple hardware range has been completely re-vamped in the past 3 yrs these baby's have been left behind.

I am in the market for a 30" monitor, and would dearly love for it to be an ACD, from a purely styling point of view and despite the technological drawbacks due to age, they are the sleekest, sexiest monitors in the market place today. BUT I am not going to be swayed on a purely "style" argument, the monitor HAS to deliver the goods I/we all need from a monitor - the viewable product.

 

[Digital Skunk]

.....

The only Dell 30" that uses an IPS panel.

The Apple 30" Cinema Display.

Now the only thing that separates the two are the backlighting which is why the Dell has a higher contrast ratio. The ACD is actually brighter, and the Dell has a quicker response time. Other than that, it's all about the case.

The ACD has FW400, while the Dell has HDCP the one thing the ACD can't get even with an adaptor.

Where is the big HUGE price savings? Now if we are talking about the TN panel, which will be fine for most TV viewing/game playing users, then the cheaper and not-as-professional 30" wins. And the cheaper TN panel would be preferred, and it's only $300 cheaper, and even dimmer than the ACD and has an even slower response time than the Dell with the IPS panel.

I hope that people are checking their facts before stating that a certain display is better than another. When you actually look at them on paper and in person, you will see that they aren't that different, and in most cases, the ACD is rightfully priced.

And read the threads that already exist. There are posts that say the same thing over and over again about the ACDs, many with me on them being schooled by guys that got the info and urged me to research.

Lastly, in this thread which isn't that long, we have gotten passed the "Dell/HP/Samsung are cheaper" comments and have proven why it's false and misguided.

If you want to play games/watch TV, go for the TN panels that are cheaper.
If you want to do professional/student learning to be a professional visual work, then go for the IPS and pay the price for quality. The only monitors on the market that are spec'd higher than the ACDs are the NECs and LaCie models which use the latest panels and cost accordingly.

I hope Apple does improve on the ACDs, but I hope they continue using IPS panels and keep them matte. No iSights. Skip DVI and just give me HDMI with HDCP and put FW800 instead of FW400 on the back. Nothing else will really add to the quality.

 

[gazfocus]

It really winds me up that people go on and on about how overpriced the ACD's are when they don't know anything about different panel types.

About 6 months ago, I knew very little about the different panel types, but since doing some actual research and eventually buying an ACD, I understand why they are the price they are.

I used to own a HP 24" display that used a TN panel, which cost me £230. The colours were horroble. Greens were outlined with a tint of yellow, and it was just a generally unpleasant screen to use. I since sold that, and bought a 2nd hand 2005 23" ACD for £400 and all I can say is WOW. The quality is amazing, the colours are consistant and spot on.

Also, in comparison to other high end displays (including High End Dell's offerings), the ACD's are actually a good price. Eizo in particular are alot more expensive that Apple.

All I suggest is do your research before making stupid comments saying TN and IPS panels offer no difference to an average user, because I WAS an average user, and it makes the world of difference to me.

Rant over

I hope Apple does improve on the ACDs, but I hope they continue using IPS panels and keep them matte. No iSights. Skip DVI and just give me HDMI with HDCP and put FW800 instead of FW400 on the back. Nothing else will really add to the quality.

I can't see Apple skipping DVI and replacing it with HDMi because Mac Pro's and Macbook Pro's currently only have DVI and don't have HDMi ports...Nice idea though Could be used with the Apple TV then which would make sense. Maybe the HDMi should be added as well as the DVI

 

[Digital Skunk]

I can't see Apple skipping DVI and replacing it with HDMi because Mac Pro's and Macbook Pro's currently only have DVI and don't have HDMi ports...Nice idea though Could be used with the Apple TV then which would make sense. Maybe the HDMi should be added as well as the DVI

Good point. I was rushing a bit on that one I can see. But when you look at it, there isn't much of a need for a dedicated HDMI port either. All we would need is HDCP and a DVI to HDMI adaptor which would run you about $30 or so and you are set.

The biggest issue people have over the displays that I can see, is that they want them SO bad because they are Apple branded. Since they see all these cheap monitors on the market, they automatically assume that the Apple's are overpriced. They completely forget about the REAL pro monitors out there from EIZO, yes which I heard are amazingly sharp, LaCie, NEC, and recent offerings from Dell.

They don't want to listen to reason or do the research, just spread the propaganda. I even read threads where they compare the 24" displays to the poor NON HD 20" ACD. WTFudge?

I have seen the Dell, HP, Samsung, etc equivalents, anyone with a Best Buy near them can, and they are great, and the IQ isn't going to be noticeable right from the start. Put them next to the ACD 23" which is the best value so far in that market, and you WILL see, especially after a year or so (like in my paper, the photo department has ACDs, the graphics have Dells and they are always complaining that something isn't toned right ).

Those TN and PVA panels are great for games and TV viewing, and I would never tell someone trying to use their monitor as a TV or for heavy gaming to get an ACD.

 

[Beau10]

This is a ridiculous exaggeration.

I have a Dell 2405 (PVA) in my office and a 23" ACD on my desk at home.

The difference is easy... slight changes in angles produce color shifting. Skin/fabric on images are not nearly as well fleshed out. Colors are quite muted by comparison.

 

[stainlessliquid]

A TN Dell cant cost $400. Thats either a PVA or S-IPS. 20" TN monitors are in the 200's, 24" TN might be $400 but they are pretty rare since the viewing angle becomes horrendous at that size. The new Ultrasharp 2009w is $289, so its probably TN (the viewing angle says 160/170, which might mean its another lottery, so youll get TN or PVA depending on your luck)

TN = 160 viewing angle
PVA = 170
S-IPS = 178

Thats how you can tell what type of panel it has. TN has a horrible viewing angle that you cannot escape regardless of how you look at it, PVA has a decent viewing angle that is fine if you sit infront of it and the screen isnt too big or close, S-IPS on the other hand is virtually perfect and its like looking at something printed on paper.

The tech specs are all BS, except for the viewing angle and brightness. Every manufacturer has a different way of measuring contrast and response time. Dont pay attention to those, they tell you nothing.

Again, to notice the difference between TN and IPS you need to have two displays set up side by side. It's not something of any sort of magnitude.

Thats not true at all. If you use an S-IPS monitor regularly and then move to a TN then the difference is extremely obvious, they dont have to be side by side. The same held true with CRT's and aperture grille vs shadow mask, shadow mask was crap with colors but good with refresh rates and resolutions while aperture grille had great colors and contrast.