Apple Preparing to Launch 27-Inch LED Cinema Display, Mac Pro Update by June?

[Jaro65]

I'm really curious about the pricing for that 27" ACD, given the prices of iMacs. I've been wanting a bigger screen, and so I may replace my 24" ACD with this one.

 

[hohohong]

You should sell ur 24” ACD before 27” release. You won’t get a high price if 27” is released.

 

[Padriac]

Hmm seems like a silly product next to the dell U2711. It has VGA, HDMI, DisplayPort, Component, Composite, and two DVI ports. It also has 3 usb ( 2 downstream 1 up) audio out and speaker port. No way the apple one is going to have anywhere near so many option in terms of video connecting.

Well shucks, sounds like I just need to make a monitor where the back is nothing but ports and I'll become king of monitor-world. Why hasn't anybody figured this out yet? I'm going to be rich!!!

 

[twoodcc]

what is wrong with apple? they need to update the mac pro now!

 

[Houston]

what is wrong with apple? they need to update the mac pro now!

I second that!!! Everybody and their Brother are going to be updating by the end of the month.

 

[Icaras]

You should sell ur 24” ACD before 27” release. You won’t get a high price if 27” is released.

Yea, and watch as no 27" ACD materializes. How many times have we been d*cked around from false hopes?

Welcome to Macrumors

And also assuming he even HAS a second monitor to work with until then. Kind of pointless if the 24" is his only one.

Edit: Just saw his signature. Sorry. I take that back, but there are still no guarantees this is even coming out.

 

[Stella]

June is really late... I wish Apple would focus more on their enterprise lines more... Although their consumer business is doing well, having a good enterprise business - will filter down to the consumer. If businesses buy XServes - easier to integrate OSX workstations. If staff enjoy their work stations, they'll buy Macs for their home use. Its a filter down effect.

Have a two pronged attack - consumer and business...

Alias, I feel Apple are abandoning the high end workstations / enterprise machines for the stake of consumer devices....

Although I like the current Apple displays, they are very overpriced. Dell monitors are very nice at a cheaper price.

 

[true777]

I bet there will be a larger display, too -- perhaps 32"?

 

[echoout]

It actually is very hard to make a business case for a Mac Pro, because there is only a fistful of applications where one might need a Mac Pro. I actually can only think of three areas, and those only count when your workflow relies on Apple's own software: Aperture, Logic Studio, Final Cut Studio.

I'm no Apple fanboy by any stretch but that's just silly. You don't see many Dells in the post production world for a reason, sorry.

 

[hohohong]

Do u think 27” LED won’t work well with MBA?

Reason I asked is I bought a Samsung 2333W. It has up to 1080. MBA when used in clam shell mode, the picture in samsung LCD looks weird, not clear at all.

When I use Samsung and MBA screen together (dual screen mode), it looks fine.

So, I went to Best Buy and plug their MBA to the 24” ACD and put MBA into clam shell mode. It looks fine.

So, will 27” ACD have similar problem to the Samsung?

 

[Undo Redo]

I bet there will be a larger display, too -- perhaps 32"?

I think the trend is toward smaller pixels and higher density. Does anyone know the maximum resolution mini-DisplayPort can handle? A 32" display at about 3200 x 1800 would be nice. I don't see it happening for another few years though; maybe after Light Peak arrives.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

I hope every single display they make from now on is glossy.

I love hearing that matte-only people moan.

You shouldn't use it where that's bothersome.

Yes, even in photography. No issue.

Too Funny. me i prefer Matte. less reflection.

but, my main issue here is that i want Blu-Ray full compatibility. Maybe the new monitors will be HDCP compliant for BD. who knows maybe even have an HDMI input for sound/video and... having multiple inputs.

 

[puckhead193]

I do hope they keep the 24" as the 27 will be too big for my workspace... But the mac pro update is killing me... June is useless for me as my video work will be over by then and won't start up until late August/September...For waiting this long apple better wow me with something out of the ordinary.

 

[La Porta]

I'm praying for June (or earlier): that is when my residency starts. I want at least a week or two to fool around with it before I get slammed at work!

 

[Yankee617]

Well shucks, sounds like I just need to make a monitor where the back is nothing but ports and I'll become king of monitor-world. Why hasn't anybody figured this out yet? I'm going to be rich!!!

Yup. Having more ports does NOT make a better product. I want the product I buy to have ONLY the ports I'm going to actually use. Those extra/unused ports just muck up the aesthetics, making for an inferior product. I actually DO care about having a simple/clean system with a minimum of unsightly cables, etc... its one of the reasons I like Apple products.

 

[vohdoun]

I really can't be bothered reading 9 pages.

They have to have a matte (anti-glare) option..

They can't have their whole display lineup as glossy only. Bad enough that the iMac's are glossy only.

A matte 21.5" ACD and a matte 27" ACD would be awesome. Silver enclosure please.

Silver is so much better than black. It doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. It doesn't make my eye go to it either.

"Housed in an aluminum enclosure, the display has a thin bezel that enhances visual accuracy."

What are the chances that the 27" LED Cinema Display will have the dreaded YELLOW TINT?

Apple 23" suffered the pink tint, now the 27" suffers a yellow tint?

 

[Uragon]

watch apple do one gigantic media coverage and debut mac pro, macbook pros and new iphone 3xx all on the same day at WWDC! lol

..but you might be right

 

[backdraft]

They need to offer a Matte option and have 1 video card that with two mini display port connections. Don't want to have to use two slots just for two monitors.

 

[jragosta]

no, but what exact advantage do you perceive from a white led backlit screen, other than it being one of the latest buzzwords?

Brighter, better lighting uniformity, lower energy consumption, longer lasting. Is that enough?

Hmm seems like a silly product next to the dell U2711. It has VGA, HDMI, DisplayPort, Component, Composite, and two DVI ports. It also has 3 usb ( 2 downstream 1 up) audio out and speaker port. No way the apple one is going to have anywhere near so many option in terms of video connecting. And I would be very very very very surprised to have it priced at 1099$ which is what the dell is going for. (ITS ON SALE FOR 799 IN DELL CANADA TODAY ONLY)

The connections might not be an issue for some people, but cmon, if the thing is priced higher than what dell offers, this is a no brainer for me. There would have to be something to justify a higher price and not just pretty looking apple design. But thats just me.

I guess that means a Ford Focus is a better car than a Ferrari because it has more seats, right?

If you were the least bit rational, you'd look at what the user NEEDS, not play silly 'my monitor has more connections than yours' games. No one in their right mind buys a monitor solely on the basis of number of connectors. Now, if they need lots of connectors, the Dell might be a better choice, but simply saying 'more connectors = better' is foolish. For most people, a single power connector and single video connector is fine.

That said, I've never purchased any of the Apple LCD monitors because I wasn't willing to pay the price. I would venture that very few people need the consistency and performance of the Apple monitors enough to justify the price.

OK. I'm the Pro that this is aimed at.

I will NOT buy a glossy screen. Period. I have a problem with the 27" iMac that I just bought - I cannot dim the screen to match what my big printers will be printing. The LCDs are too bright.

If Apple can make a non-glare 27" monitor that I can calibrate to match my printers, I'll buy one - otherwise I'll stick with NECs.

Then don't buy one. It's amazing how many people never realized that Apple gave up trying to make products that suit everyone. If they suit your needs, buy them. If not, buy something else. It's that simple.

In terms of performance per dollar, Apple's quad core is crappy no matter how you slice it. Only the dual quad core machines are competitive on price.

Really? Like the 27" iMac with quad core? Name another PC that matches it.

If you're comparing the Pro, compare it to similar systems with the SAME CPU (it's not enough to say 'quad core' since most of the systems you are comparing are using the cheaper i7.

 

[AidenShaw]

Those extra/unused ports just muck up the aesthetics, making for an inferior product.

Classic "form over function" argument. That, and the Dell monitors
that I use put the ports in a hidden region - so aesthetics are not
compromised.

I actually DO care about having a simple/clean system with a minimum of unsightly cables, etc... its one of the reasons I like Apple products.

Why would you run unsightly cables to ports that you don't use?
To what are the other ends of the unused cables connected?

It would seem to me that everyone would have the "minimum" of cables
since there would be no unused cables. If you need a port, you connect
a cable. If not, no cable.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I'm no Apple fanboy by any stretch but that's just silly. You don't see many Dells in the post production world for a reason, sorry.

Some big studios have partnerships with HP, but plenty of other studios have partnerships with Dell for workstations and servers for renderfarms. Just off the top of my head, I think Dreamworks and Soho VFX, respectively.

I can't think of many studios that use only macs, but I think the VFX team behind "The Cave" were running Maya on macs. I could be wrong.

 

[matticus008]

I think the trend is toward smaller pixels and higher density. Does anyone know the maximum resolution mini-DisplayPort can handle?

DisplayPort was designed to be more flexible. It has no maximum resolution except based on the link bandwidth (currently 17.2Gbps; more than double dual-link DVI [which caps out at 2560x1600]).

A 32" display at about 3200 x 1800 would be nice. I don't see it happening for another few years though; maybe after Light Peak arrives.

DisplayPort can handle 3840x2400 (or 2160p QuadHD) today. Those panel resolutions aren't even expected to be feasibly manufactured in the next five years.

LightPeak can't come close to that. When/if it is ever finished and released (there are no plans or timetables set yet), it will unify the peripheral buses long before it hits the extreme high bandwidth connections of video buses. By that time, DisplayPort will be well on its way to higher bandwidth links.

 

[heisetax]

FINALLY. It's about time. Aside from the 24" LED LCD Apple launched in 2008 for their notebook line, the ACD's haven't been fully refreshed since 2003. The 30" ACD CCFL LCD is a good display, but not in todays market especially given that LED backlit panels are becoming more commonplace. I hope Apple does refresh their "Pro" line, they need to recommit to their high end user base that has long been a game player in Apple "computer's".

I have both a 30" aPPle display & a 30 HP display. The HP display is brighter& gives a much less washed out picture.

These new 27" size will not fit in with the older 30" models. 2560 X 1440 may look good by itself, but it is not as good as 2560 X 1600. Any new display has to be at least 2560 X 1600. A 16 X 10 screen in the computer field is a better compromise than a 16 X 9 screen more commonly found in the entertainment field. Any screen size is constricting. After using 2 30" screens to do my main work on with a 28" * 47" to fill in for some special needs, I will not consider an Apple 27" model.

 

[teohyc]

I have both a 30" aPPle display & a 30 HP display. The HP display is brighter& gives a much less washed out picture.

These new 27" size will not fit in with the older 30" models. 2560 X 1440 may look good by itself, but it is not as good as 2560 X 1600. Any new display has to be at least 2560 X 1600. A 16 X 10 screen in the computer field is a better compromise than a 16 X 9 screen more commonly found in the entertainment field. Any screen size is constricting. After using 2 30" screens to do my main work on with a 28" * 47" to fill in for some special needs, I will not consider an Apple 27" model.

At that sort of resolution, I don't know if the lack of a vertical 160 pixels even matters.

Those with 30" probably won't buy this set as I see it as downgrading.
For those coming up from the 1920x1200 resolution, they will be seriously tempted.

 

[xbjllb]

Yet, it can be argued that the iPhone/iPod Touch ARE computers .

My microwave computes how long to stay on for some items, yet that doesn't make IT a computer anymore than it does the iPhone/iPod.

Ditto my toaster.

Correct. As xbjllb said, in a dark room lit only by a red candle. That might work for me.

Yes indeed. Only make sure you put it BEHIND your monitor, not behind you, or Steve-o will materialize in the glare of the candle on your monitor and melt all your Appleabilia.

Not pretty.

Quick call the WAH-mbulance!!!!
APPLE'S RELEASING YET ANOTHER GLOSSY SCREEN!!!!!

Get over it people.

If you don't want it buy a different monitor.
If you don't want a glossy screen iMac, then buy a Mac mini, Mac Pro or one of the MacBook models and attach them to your beloved matte screen.

Plain. Simple. End of Story.

Oh yes. Absolutely. Why should Apple listen to its customers? Especially its high-end high-ticket enterprise line customers?

The new Apple commercial:

"Hi. I'm a Mac. Shut the ef up and take me as Lord Stevo-o made me or leave me."