Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm still very interested in the CinemaView monitor. The specs are not quite as good as Apple's, but it's a HECK of a lot cheaper. I think it's worth the trade-off.

And they're designed to look "mac-like" without being actual copies of Apple's displays. They also have the display port connection.

I don't need a new monitor right now, but I'll be keeping my eye on these guys if I ever do.

The CinemaView site has ONE model, a 24-inch 1920 x 1080 screen, for $499. I'll stick with my 23-inch ACD. The non-glare display is great. My one and only complaint is the inability to rotate the entire display to show images to others. (Mine is situated so that I am in a corner where I can see what is happening around me.)

Shouldn't these new devices have USB 3.0 since it is being utilized in electronics already?
 
Isn't the 27-inch iMac display exactly the same as the Dell U2711, meaning same manufacturer (LG, as I recall)?

anandtech said:
The U2711 has an extremely high resolution 2560x1440 panel - similar to the panel that's used in the Apple 27" iMac. Notice that we highlighted the word similar? That's because the two panels aren't identical; the glass might be the same, but there are definitely differences.

For one, Apple uses LED backlighting whereas the U2711 sticks with CCFL technology. But isn't CCFL worse? That depends on what you're after; the iMac 27 offers a 72% color gamut while the U2711 has a 102% color gamut (based on the CIE 1931 standard). Using RGB LEDs, it would be possible to get a similarly high color gamut, but our experience with RGB LEDs to date is that they cost more and consume more power than regular LEDs, so we can understand Dell's interest in sticking with the "older" technology. (We've only seen RGB LEDs in a few laptops so far, and as one example it's a $175 upgrade on the Dell Studio XPS 16 compared to a regular white LED display.)

Since this is a display rather than an all-in-one computer, there are plenty of other differences between the Apple and Dell LCDs. Dell includes just about every input you might want on the back of the LCD - DisplayPort, HDMI, two dual-link DVI connections (all with HDCP support, naturally); and just for good measure they toss in VGA, component, and composite video connections as well - not that we would recommend using those if you can avoid it, though the VGA connection is always good to have "just in case". Like most UltraSharp displays, you also get a couple USB ports on the back, two more on the side, and a handy flash memory reader.

Besides having a higher color gamut and different backlighting technology, Dell uses 12-bit internal color processing with the ability to output 10-bit color. That means you can get 1024 levels of grey instead of just 256, reducing the amount of banding present in certain situations. 24-bit vs. 30-bit color also means you get a color palette of 1.07 billion instead of 16.7 million, though we were unable confirm this in testing.
http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=3725

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2010/test-dell-u2711.html
 
Do you even have a clue?

And it will be even more over due by the time it actually happens. JUNE??? you have got to be kidding me. Ive already put off my new mac pro purchase long enough. this is ridiculous. does apple just not even care about their computer business anymore?

Yes please answer, because it will likely be a good laugh for many of us. The only rational CPU chips for a Mac Pro upgrade only came out earlier this week, so what would you have expected Apple to upgrade a Mac Pro with otherwise. On top of that the processors are only one check box that needs to be ticked off be for a new Mac ships.

I suspect that Apple cares a great deal about their computer business which is doing very well right now. However I suspect that it is growing tired of the immature whining and complaints about Mac Pros from people like you. You see the Mac Pro is in fact very much a business computer and is marketed to businesses as such. Most businesses do not want a platform that is constantly in flux. Instead they want a platform that supports professional usage and is built to last. The Mac Pro is not the platform for the secrataries desk.
The reality is this if you want an Apple product that responds consummer cycles and modest ineffectual upgrades then buy an iMac. If you want a Pro machine that can run at 100% capacity for days on end buy a Mac Pro. If you don't understand Apples upgrade cycles for the Mac Pro or can't read Intels road maps then the Mac Pro isn't for you.


Dave
 
Oh god. I take everything I ever said about ACD updates back.. I now hope they keep the matte 30" ACD in the line up :(
 
I wonder how much the price gouging will be. My 5 year old Dell 24" LCD (Samsung just rebranded) with 3 year replacement warranty cost me $699 back in 2005 and still runs perfectly fine.

New 24" Samsungs and Dells and others today sell for $299-$599 depending exactly what you need which is still far cheaper than any of Apple's 24" monitors.

My guess is the price will be $1599 with, of course, a weak 1-year warranty. And no, I'm not trying to compare this single 27" Apple with any single 24-27" non-Apple so don't reply stating "but Apple's is LED!" or "but Apple's has a Firewire port!"

I like the Apple monitors...but the prices are way out there.


-Eric

Sorry, but the backlighting/panels are a major concern for those who are professionals (photographers and graphic designers). Read up on panels, such as IPS ("In Plain Sight, meaning the image is NOT distorted no matter what angle), TFT and TN (used mostly in the displays you sighted, TFT are cheaper LCD monitors that typically distort image quality from various angles and do not have color matching necessary for Pro-users), S-IPS, H-IPS, S-PVA, MVA, etc. You will learn that there are important differences in display panel types that justify the different costs. EIZO monitors are one of a few industry standard display manufacturers, and Apple has tended to be highly regarded for Mac professionals as their monitors don't typically need hardware configuring for color matching/values (which is why there is considerably more Mac/Apple professionals). The screen to print is virtually identical depending on the software and printer utilized. I believe Apple has utilized IPS panels for their display line for years (aside from the discontiuned 20" CCFL ACD - and CCFL refers to cold-cathode florescent lamp traditionally utilized for LCD's).

Read up on the differences, you may grow to appreciate the subtle variations that are important to graphic designers and photographers who constitute much of the "Pro"-sumer market. As such, there are other manufacturers that produce top-notch displays that I would recommend over Apple displays, such as EIZO, but they are also priced significantly more.

EDIT: Someone posted a comment that suggested LED LCD's use more energy than CCFL LCD's, not true. In fact, LED LCD panel's typically use 40-50% less energy than CCFL panels. The reason they haven't been adopted mainstream yet is that they COST more to produce, not to power. Major significance.
 
Yes please answer, because it will likely be a good laugh for many of us. The only rational CPU chips for a Mac Pro upgrade only came out earlier this week, so what would you have expected Apple to upgrade a Mac Pro with otherwise. On top of that the processors are only one check box that needs to be ticked off be for a new Mac ships.

I suspect that Apple cares a great deal about their computer business which is doing very well right now. However I suspect that it is growing tired of the immature whining and complaints about Mac Pros from people like you. You see the Mac Pro is in fact very much a business computer and is marketed to businesses as such. Most businesses do not want a platform that is constantly in flux. Instead they want a platform that supports professional usage and is built to last. The Mac Pro is not the platform for the secrataries desk.
The reality is this if you want an Apple product that responds consummer cycles and modest ineffectual upgrades then buy an iMac. If you want a Pro machine that can run at 100% capacity for days on end buy a Mac Pro. If you don't understand Apples upgrade cycles for the Mac Pro or can't read Intels road maps then the Mac Pro isn't for you.


Dave

Since you know Apples upgrade cycles from the past, you also know that Apple got pre release Xeons in the past, and even anounced a new Mac Pro line before Intels announcement in the past. And since you know so much about businesses, you might also know that some businesses might care for VALUE for their MONEY. Something that the Mac Pro right now doesn't offer.
 
As everyone mentioned, this is long overdue, I gave up last month when Dell introduced the 27" 2550x1400 IPS based on the same panel as the iMac. I don't know if I'd give up for a new ACD considering the amount of inputs on the dell is amazing.
 
Connection

It'll be good if...you can connect it to ANYTHING other than a Mini Display Port... the one (and only) reason why I haven't already bought a 24".
 
It'll be good if...you can connect it to ANYTHING other than a Mini Display Port... the one (and only) reason why I haven't already bought a 24".

Display port is a new industry VESA standard that is quickly being adopted by mainstream and high end manufacturers alike. One of the pro's (besides smaller cables and faster rates) is the ability to daisy-chain displays. A huge benefit for those who utilize two or more displays for work.
 
Any chance of the ACD 27" using LightPeak for:
- video
- USB+FW+Video_Out hub

?

If LightPeak_enabled consumer Macs are coming this Fall, I guess MacPro and "DisplayPro" should get a taste of it in advance.....
 
Yet it's not an IPS panel, nor LED, so it's not on the same level as the LED LCD IPS panels utilized in the 24" LED LCD or the rumored 27".

And when you stand in front of both, you won't be able to say that the Dell is of less quality than the Apple Cinema Display.

I've used both and to my eye the Dell 30" display is as good as the 30" Cinema Display. It just costs less and has more features.

And the new Apple displays totally suck because they're glossy, so the Dell is the clear winner now.

It might be a good opportunity to buy one of the old 30" Apple displays when the successor is released.

But, I forgot... I get on-site-service for the Dell and not for the Apple.
 
Any chance of it using LightPeak for:
- video
- USB+FW+ethernet hub

?

If LightPeak consumer Macs are coming this Fall, I guess MacPro and "DisplayPro" should get a taste of it in advance.....

I hadn't read about lightpeak until earlier in this post. As I understand it, is it a replacement for SATA connections? It claims to have a faster transfer rate for optical drives, etc. If lightpeak (a SONY invention?) is going to be implemented in a new Apple system, if would be across product lines and when it has been utilized as a standard. I doubt the next Mac Pro will use it.

Also, could it be added through a PCI-Express card?
 
I have not read the whole thread so I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet but dell has a 27 inch monitor with a 2560 x 1440 resolution. Its the U2711 and its priced at $1099. Realistically the apple monitor will cost more than the dell so use that as a price point. Unfortunately, I think this monitor will be way over priced. The people that are going to buy it are probably not looking at an iMac so even if the prices are close, it doesn't matter. The mac pro user probably isn't going to buy an 27 inch imac to use as a display if there is a 27 inch monitor, even if the prices are close.
 
And when you stand in front of both, you won't be able to say that the Dell is of less quality than the Apple Cinema Display.

I've used both and to my eye the Dell 30" display is as good as the 30" Cinema Display. It just costs less and has more features.

And the new Apple displays totally suck because they're glossy, so the Dell is the clear winner now.

It might be a good opportunity to buy one of the old 30" Apple displays when the successor is released.

But, I forgot... I get on-site-service for the Dell and not for the Apple.

I have used Dell, and Apple and EIZO, EIZO hands down wins, with Apple in second and Dell last. It's not a bad panel, but not the greatest.

As for on-site service, the Applecare Protection Plan does offer on-site service and repairs. My father, who is handicapped, had to have his 2007 iMac examined and repaired. Apple sent someone out the next day and had his hard drive replaced in two. Unfortunately Apple seems to hush hush that fact, which ticks me off :(. I guess they want their customer base to come into their stores to cut costs.
 
Yes but the C2D aren't that bad at the moment.

What about their laptops? The C2D debuted years ago.

Apple certainly needs a laptop update but I'm not sure which way they are going to go. The built in GPUs on the current Intel Laptops suck royally and are a big negative even when coupled with an external GPU. It would be nice to see that Apple held off to address that issue.

The other thing is all the graphics testing being done in the Mac OS/X betas. This might be an indication of a new generation of GPUs or an attempt to make better use of two GPUs in a system at the same time. So maybe the hold up is GPU related.

Either way the lack of Mac Book Pro updates is more of an issue than the lack of a Mac Pro update. The thing here is that the new generations of both the CPU and the possible GPUs are out and have been for weeks or months. So we have a mystery which questions what is Apple up to.


Dave
 
I hadn't read about lightpeak until earlier in this post. As I understand it, is it a replacement for SATA connections?

No, it's a replacement for a lot of external connection.

In the beginning, being protocol-agnostic, it will be able to "carry" legacy protocols like DVI, VGA, USB, Firewire, etc and "recreate" them in a hub. Plus, it can daisy chain peripherals.

In the long distance, it could be come the "one port to rule them all", i.e. a port to do everything (audio, video, network, data, etc.). In a couple of years we could see a Macbook with only 2 or 4 identical Lightpeak ports.

If lightpeak (a SONY invention?)

An Intel invention after strong Apple inspiration/request. Endorsed also by Sony now, and others.

Also, could it be added through a PCI-Express card?

I don't know but it seems unlikely.
 
Sorry, but the backlighting/panels are a major concern for those who are professionals (photographers and graphic designers).
Talking about LED:
White LED do not offer better quality than CCFL. Apple is using white LED (and no RGB LED).


Read up on the differences, you may grow to appreciate the subtle variations that are important to graphic designers and photographers who constitute much of the "Pro"-sumer market. As such, there are other manufacturers that produce top-notch displays that I would recommend over Apple displays, such as EIZO, but they are also priced significantly more.
That is not true, e.g. S2431W (it is only true for the professional line with RGB LED backlights).
Don't forget: Eizo = 5 Year Warranty + more than just one Displayport.


Someone posted a comment that suggested LED LCD's use more energy than CCFL LCD's, not true. In fact, LED LCD panel's typically use 40-50% less energy than CCFL panels. The reason they haven't been adopted mainstream yet is that they COST more to produce, not to power. Major significance.[/B]

That is true!


Yet it's not an IPS panel, nor LED, so it's not on the same level as the LED LCD IPS panels utilized in the 24" LED LCD or the rumored 27".
You can not say that IPS is better than VA. Also VA is not better than IPS. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.
 
....
The Dell even has a Mac-friendly DisplayPort connector. Not to mention a ton of other connections (hdmi, 2xdvi, component, bunch of USBs, card reader, speaker attachment, etc.).

It is CFFL ( fluorescent lighting ) backlit though. Certainly though Apple will not have the card reader or variety of inputs (more likely just display port or maybe, if feeling unusually generous, an additional DVI one). However, most likely the equipment that Apple passes on probably won't offset the increase LED and Aluminum costs. It is going to come out higher than the Dell price point. Will be interesting to see just how close to the 27" iMac this will go. Wouldn't be shocked if priced in the not very rational range (from most consumer's perspective) . Relatively small gap between iMac and Display. They are already doing it now with almost 3 year old tech. Now sure why they'd change their game with modern tech.


Not sure if the iMac has the 12 bit Look Up Tables or correction capabilities they had to put in this to match the Dell.

If do this, good chance too will put the same three headed hydra on this as on the 24" version. (display port , mag safe , usb ) . Someone with a MBP 13,15,17 might want a 27" on the desk at home too.

Doesn't seem likely though. Dell is already here. HP is likely not very far away with a similar entry. NEC and Ezio likely not much farther behind them. Apple would know better if there is a large body of folks who buy the 30" displays even though they are way out of date.
 
Surely it would be more cost efficient for Apple to use the same 21.5" panel they use in the iMacs here as well.

Perhaps 21.5" at $799 and 27" at $999 (looking at the $200 difference between iMacs) would be killer. It would be nice if Apple did a 23" 1920x1080 too/ instead though :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.