Apple's 27" LED Cinema Display Now On Sale

[ovrlrd]

I have actually grown fond of glossy displays, and have been looking to buy a glossy monitor. It's just personal preference, and I don't want it to turn into a glossy vs. matte debate.

I like the 27" apple display, but hate the fact that it has limited connectivity. I believe the comparable Dell one's are matte. Is there any 27" glossy display in the market with an IPS display, and has HDMI. I need one at the budget comparable to the Apple or Dell displays. Any options?

Don't think there is any 27 inch high res (2560x1440) displays that are glossy other than the Apple one. It seems like in this category there is more of a demand for matte ones. Based on the amount of responses in this thread you can figure that makes sense.

Personally I wish there were more glossy. I have used matte LCD displays for 10+ years and I love what glossy does for the contrast and colors. Every person I know with the matte option on a MacBook Pro loves their display, but when I compare them to ones with the glossy, I always come out liking the look of the glossy more. They are also way easier to clean.

I have complete control over the lighting environment where my computer is so I never have issues, which is really important no matter what display you have.

 

[(marc)]

I don't understand why they didn't keep the 24" around, or even make a 21". For many users, $1000 is just too much for a display.

 

[UTclassof89]

This sums it up for me, having a glass/glossy display is not a feature. I don't know why Apple constantly uses product images like this that show the issue with screens like this for many people. I can't even use a them in the Apple Store because of the lighting there on those screens make my eyes bleed and gives me a headache after 5 minutes.

If only the glare was as subtle as their fabricated image suggests. I fear the days of me buying Apple Displays are gone--I hope my matte ACD lasts another 10 years!

 

[DesmoPilot]

I have yet to understand peoples fascination with Dell monitors...

Great monitors at a great price? Pretty easy sell for me.

 

[meatballs]

Let's face it, doesn't really want anyone to buy this display.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Sad but true

I like the feature that allows you look at yourself and everything behind you when you're trying to work.

Another bonus is the special "make display useless" surface that kicks in when the sun hits it.

Thanks, Steve!

I guess Steve likes to work in the dark. Those of us who work in lighted areas will be buying models available with antiglare.

 

[ovrlrd]

I guess Steve likes to work in the dark. Those of us who work in lighted areas will be buying models available with antiglare.

Anyone who needs the best contrast and color reproduction is going to be working in a darker room anyway. An environment with bright lights is going to hurt any display's output no matter what coating it has on it. Even the brightest of LCDs have problems with that. Matte displays are better for it but it's not a real solution for the ambient light problem. People love to talk up matte display like it's something pros use, but in reality pro displays use minimal coating (not glossy but not really full matte) and use a "shroud" to block out surrounding light.

It is like sound reproduction, in studios they pad the walls and all the equipment is certified to make no vibrations or unwanted noise. The amount of ambient noise in the room can have a major impact.

 

[bart4u]

Glossy Screen

I am a professional photographer and I work with a number of images in both Photoshop and Lightroom. The shinny screen is a big big issue with me. I respect the Apple brand and for me the color balance on their LCD monitors is usually right on. If this new screen came with a matte option I would buy it. I agree with one comment I saw, when I went to visit the monitors at the Apple store there were a number of reflections in the monitor and it was hard for me to see a clear screen. I work in a light filled space so the shinny screen will not work for me. I wish apple would read these forums because there sure are a lot of folks with the same complaints. Over the past few years I believe Apple has shifted their focus to the Iphone/Ipad market and they have forgotten their core computers users. The creative industries has keep Apple in business for a number of years. Since the 90's I have bought six Apple computers, 4 monitors and various software. It has taken Apple four to five years to come up with a new LCD/LED screen for the Mac Pro user and it was hard to believe they could not come up with a matte option. Apple we love your products but please listen to us and respect our opinion about having a matte screen.

 

[3282868]

Anyone who needs the best contrast and color reproduction is going to be working in a darker room anyway. An environment with bright lights is going to hurt any display's output no matter what coating it has on it. Even the brightest of LCDs have problems with that. Matte displays are better for it but it's not a real solution for the ambient light problem. People love to talk up matte display like it's something pros use, but in reality pro displays use minimal coating (not glossy but not really full matte) and use a "shroud" to block out surrounding light.

It is like sound reproduction, in studios they pad the walls and all the equipment is certified to make no vibrations or unwanted noise. The amount of ambient noise in the room can have a major impact.

This. Spot on...

 

[morgmorg]

I like the feature that allows you look at yourself and everything behind you when you're trying to work.

Another bonus is the special "make display useless" surface that kicks in when the sun hits it.

Thanks, Steve!

It allows you to look at yourself - it's a feature - because you're - because you're worth it!!

The sad thing is that you supposedly don't need that "pro" stuff anyway, Steve suggests you to buy those little Apple things you don't need.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Anyone who needs the best contrast and color reproduction is going to be working in a darker room anyway. An environment with bright lights is going to hurt any display's output no matter what coating it has on it. Even the brightest of LCDs have problems with that. Matte displays are better for it but it's not a real solution for the ambient light problem. People love to talk up matte display like it's something pros use, but in reality pro displays use minimal coating (not glossy but not really full matte) and use a "shroud" to block out surrounding light.

It is like sound reproduction, in studios they pad the walls and all the equipment is certified to make no vibrations or unwanted noise. The amount of ambient noise in the room can have a major impact.

I never said I was a color photography pro. And, I'm not as sensitive to glare/reflections as many people. But, recently Apple has gone off the deep end with the glossy look. It seems like they are trying to make stuff that looks like a modern art sculpture. What is that about? The last thing I want is a shiny monitor screen.

You do bring up an interesting point about pros, though. What do the pros use? A few minutes on the web led me to the Eizo ColorEdge CG243W. I've never seen one, and, it is a bit expensive.

 

[wolfie37]

Let's assume an average 5% US Sales Tax, giving us $1048.95. That's currently £667.61. Add VAT @ 17.5% and you come to £784.44. I was expecting the final retail to be £799 or even £849 at a push. But no, Apple decide to make this £100 more than it really should be. Can't say that I'm suprised though.

I'll still buy one though. But I'm not happy about the US/UK price difference.

Most companies add a further 7% to cover the extra expense of trading in the UK (higher wages, transport costs, rent, etc) that takes a direct costs comparison to around £810, so £849 would have been a more respectable price.

 

[gameface]

You do bring up an interesting point about pros, though. What do the pros use? A few minutes on the web led me to the Eizo ColorEdge CG243W. I've never seen one, and, it is a bit expensive.

That or the HP Dreamcolor should be the absolute bottom end for a true color correcting pro. And honestly, those aren't even the good ones. But, they will blow any other sub $5000 monitor out of the water.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

That or the HP Dreamcolor should be the absolute bottom end for a true color correcting pro. And honestly, those aren't even the good ones. But, they will blow any other sub $5000 monitor out of the water.

There are surprisingly few monitors in this category, consider the thousands of monitors on the market. I did find one more that looks very promising -- the NEC MultiSync PA271W.

 

[ntrigue]

The new iMac's can work through DisplayPort via the Macbook Pro, correct? Why would someone ever pay £899?!

 

[FranklynRecords]

for £899 - Apple are taking the piss - There's nothing more to say really.

 

[ovrlrd]

The new iMac's can work through DisplayPort via the Macbook Pro, correct? Why would someone ever pay £899?!

Not everyone wants an refurb iMac (the closest to the price) to take up the extra power and noise (requires to be booted into OS X) and having to deal with enabling target display mode every time they want to use the display. An iMac is great for someone who needs a second computer, or someone who has a computer that is worse than the iMac and is looking to upgrade. For people have a computer that is better than the refurb iMac and don't want to have to deal with all the non-sense of using it in target display mode (instant-on ability to use a display is an important feature), it doesn't make any sense to spend that extra money.

People seem to think that just because you spend a bunch of money, it's somehow okay to spend a few hundred more, because "hey the difference is minor at that point right?" WRONG. Every bit of money you have to spend counts, and we aren't really talking 50 more, we are talking a few hundred more, and for a brand new iMac it is even more than a few hundred. I can buy a lot of things with a few hundred, why do I want to waste it on an iMac I would never use? It's really not that hard to understand.

I am not saying the non-US pricing isn't a bit high, but it's ridiculous to tell people that an iMac is a better buy, for the vast majority of people who are in the market for an external display it really is not. The only people who would ever consider an iMac over this are people who are looking for a new computer AND a new display, they can save quite a bit of money by getting both out of an iMac, but then again, that has always been the allure of an iMac.

 

[3282868]

Apple's stance on the glass fronts is based around their recent commitment to environmental awareness in technology. Standard CCFL LCD's use more energy and plastic panel fronts. Apple uses arsenic free glass that is 100% recyclable. So the trade-off is some people don't like it. Actual professionals know the drill, use a shield. Even matte displays have downsides as they may blur pixel clarity (matte displays simply disperse light). A true professional would most likely use Eizo displays with a shield to eliminate glare, and even high end monitors are now moving to glass fronts as they offer crisper imaging for editing.

Those complaining about the glass displays from Apple most likely aren't professionals as they would know that a display shield would remedy the issue. As well, find an LED LCD IPS panel with a built in webcam/mic and speakers for under $1000. I'd be surprised.

 

[chrono1081]

Apple's stance on the glass fronts is based around their recent commitment to environmental awareness in technology. Standard CCFL LCD's use more energy and plastic panel fronts. Apple uses arsenic free glass that is 100% recyclable. So the trade-off is some people don't like it. Actual professionals know the drill, use a shield. Even matte displays have downsides as they may blur pixel clarity (matte displays simply disperse light). A true professional would most likely use Eizo displays with a shield to eliminate glare, and even high end monitors are now moving to glass fronts as they offer crisper imaging for editing.

Those complaining about the glass displays from Apple most likely aren't professionals as they would know that a display shield would remedy the issue. As well, find an LED LCD IPS panel with a built in webcam/mic and speakers for under $1000. I'd be surprised.

+4509435083

People just love to cry and complain and hate Apple. Thats all it is.

 

[DesmoPilot]

snip

 

[jns2001]

Darn, six pages and people not even reviewed the monitor. How about getting out of home on a nice Sunday and getting a cone, just for kicks. I am interested in getting one of those, but the show stopper is the single input(mini display: what if I decide to no longer keep only macs, do I throw the monitor away. Reminder, a monitor will outlive your computer.

 

[ArcaneDevice]

Apple's stance on the glass fronts is based around their recent commitment to environmental awareness in technology. Standard CCFL LCD's use more energy and plastic panel fronts.

No it's a commitment to aim all their products at basic consumers because those are the people Apple prefer now. They want that demo to plug this into their laptop and watch movies or look at snapshots and as a display for Mini's and ATV's.

Apple are taking their cues from the HDTV market, which are shipping with glossy displays to make their images artificially pop. When that shopping demo goes into an Apple store that big shiny display is what they like to see. Pros don't shop for hardware at retail stores. They know what they want and have no need to be "impressed" with a big mirror.

Apple used to have the slogan "Think Different" with images of Einstein and Dylan. Now they should change it to "Oooh, shiny." and have images of Paris Hilton and Ryan Seacrest.

 

[DesmoPilot]

No it's a commitment to aim all their products at basic consumers because those are the people Apple prefer now. They want that demo to plug this into their laptop and watch movies or look at snapshots and as a display for Mini's and ATV's.

Apple are taking their cues from the HDTV market, which are shipping with glossy displays to make their images artificially pop. When that shopping demo goes into an Apple store that big shiny display is what they like to see. Pros don't shop for hardware at retail stores. They know what they want and have no need to be "impressed" with a big mirror.

Apple used to have the slogan "Think Different" with images of Einstein and Dylan. Now they should change it to "Oooh, shiny." and have images of Paris Hilton and Ryan Seacrest.

Wow, amen sir. Couldn't of said it better.

 

[chrono1081]

No it's a commitment to aim all their products at basic consumers because those are the people Apple prefer now. They want that demo to plug this into their laptop and watch movies or look at snapshots and as a display for Mini's and ATV's.

Apple are taking their cues from the HDTV market, which are shipping with glossy displays to make their images artificially pop. When that shopping demo goes into an Apple store that big shiny display is what they like to see. Pros don't shop for hardware at retail stores. They know what they want and have no need to be "impressed" with a big mirror.

Apple used to have the slogan "Think Different" with images of Einstein and Dylan. Now they should change it to "Oooh, shiny." and have images of Paris Hilton and Ryan Seacrest.

Glossy is for pros Who want the best color accuracy they can get without going above three to five grand but no one on this thread or site will even try to compare the two like i have. Glossy = better color accuracy. If anyone says otherwise then the obviously haven't tried comparing the two. The difference is very noticeable. People are too content to believe what others have wrote and are also afraid to simply admit that they like matte over glossy and have to try and justify their choice by claiming all sorts of reasons why they cant go glossy.

Seriously people before crying about no matte option if color accuracy is important to you PLEASE try for yourselves and compare two calibrated monitors and printers and see which monitor gives you more accurate results.

Also, on a side note: Matte screens disperse light, which is why they have less glare (although at the expense of sharpness). Guess what dispersion also does....it mixes colors.

 

[bart4u]

If you were a pro

I would like to make a comment to some responses that state if you were a pro you would be using a more expensive monitor. I am a pro. Been in the photo business since 1980. I shoot editorial and advertising. With the economy being the way it is and the editorial/advertising market have hit rock bottom we all have to work within our means. Buying an expensive monitor is not an option for many photographers. I myself am self employed like many photographers and I have to buy an extremly expensive health insurance policy, so I will have to buy a larger monitor that is within my budget plus there are lots of pros that don't like a shinny screen and yes there lots of us who like working in light filled spaces.