Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dell 24" Widescreen vs Apple Cinema 23"

Maxiseller said:
The trouble is how do you quantify a "rip off"?

Do you argue that in terms of price, the Apple is a rip-off because it's more expensive? Can you say that the reasons behind that are the same that people buy a car by the name of Mercedes?

I Don't know - I'm happy in the knowledge that I didn't mind paying a bit more to get something that isn't necessarily run of the mill.
Click to expand...
I quantify a "rip off" by someone paying more for less, or paying more than what you get in return (comparatively, within whatever product's market).

This is, of course, as I said, if money is even a thought in your mind.

Oh, and I wouldn't pay for the mercedes, either. But, your analogy is wrong, anyways, because a mercedes offers a lot more than a Kia, and therefore you're paying more, but getting more as well (luxury things, but more nonetheless). This is not the same for the ACD.
 
ironjaw said:
where did you find that info that apple lcd is TW-IPS?
Click to expand...

It's taking too long to find and frustrating me right now.
So,
you can think about it like this:
Apple is SWOP certified. Dell isn't.
Apple boast "full gamut of colors." Dell don't.
PAV= higher contrast ratios
IPS= lower contrast, but "increased color gamut for professional/ photography LCDs."

Makes sense on it's own, but I'll keep looking for the better proof. ;)
 
xfiftyfour said:
I don't care if I'm insulting the ACD owners out there. IMO, if money is even a thought in your mind, then you SHOULD be insulted, because IMO, you were ripped off. Better specs, bigger screen, more inputs and ports, and for $400 less...? uhm, yup. sounds like a rip to me.
Click to expand...

So you think having the same number of pixels spread an extra inch is better than having them closer together...? The Apple has a smaller pixel pitch and offers a better image just by that fact alone.

In real life, the specification difference (Brightness 400 cd/m² vs 450 cd/m² or contrast ratio 700:1 vs 1000:1) is pretty useless to talk about since they do not utilize the same panel technology. No matter how high brightness or contrast ratio the Dell has, it still uses what is considered an inferior panel compared to the Apple Cinema Display.

What the Dell has talking for it, is the price and for some the extra connectivity is important (my personal opinion is that I don't need that and would barely qualify it as a plus rather than a disadvantage).

I appreciate my 23" Apple Cinema Display everyday and are glad I picked it over the Dell. But then again, money wasn't an object and I would much rather be seen alive with the Apple, than dead with the Dell.

Dell isn't about lifestyle. Apple is.
 
All of this and still no one looking at the future...


HDCP


Why doesn't the ACD have it?
Personally, If I'm spending $1k on an LCD, I DON'T want to replace it to watch HD content.
 
Pressure said:
Dell isn't about lifestyle. Apple is.
Click to expand...
It's those kind of comments that make me embarrassed to be a Mac user. Like Mac users lifestyles are so very different from those who use Dells, Sonys, etc. because they seemingly have chic Jetta-like cars, are hip photographers or musicians who live in nice penthouses in San Francisco while the "other side" doesn't, and those who use the "others" are box-handlers or nerdy mortage lenders sitting in cubicles in Boohickville, Missouri/Wisconsin/Ohio/Pennsylvania or anywhere else not considered "hip." It also gives PC users more ammo when arguing how ridiculously elitist some Mac users can be, all because they paid more for a machine than most people would.
 
Veritas&Equitas said:
It's those kind of comments that make me embarrassed to be a Mac user. Like Mac users lifestyles are so very different from those who use Dells, Sonys, etc. because they seemingly have chic Jetta-like cars, are hip photographers or musicians who live in nice penthouses in San Francisco while the "other side" doesn't, and those who use the "others" are box-handlers or nerdy mortage lenders sitting in cubicles in Boohickville, Missouri/Wisconsin/Ohio/Pennsylvania or anywhere else not considered "hip." It also gives PC users more ammo when arguing how ridiculously elitist some Mac users can be.
Click to expand...

So, in short, you say Apple isn't a lifestyle brand?

It isn't about who specifically uses a Mac and what their occupation may be.
 
Pressure said:
So you think having the same number of pixels spread an extra inch is better than having them closer together...? The Apple has a smaller pixel pitch and offers a better image just by that fact alone.

In real life, the specification difference (Brightness 400 cd/m² vs 450 cd/m² or contrast ratio 700:1 vs 1000:1) is pretty useless to talk about since they do not utilize the same panel technology. No matter how high brightness or contrast ratio the Dell has, it still uses what is considered an inferior panel compared to the Apple Cinema Display.

What the Dell has talking for it, is the price and for some the extra connectivity is important (my personal opinion is that I don't need that and would barely qualify it as a plus rather than a disadvantage).

I appreciate my 23" Apple Cinema Display everyday and are glad I picked it over the Dell. But then again, money wasn't an object and I would much rather be seen alive with the Apple, than dead with the Dell.

Dell isn't about lifestyle. Apple is.
Click to expand...
I'm a GC major, so I know about stretching pixels and resolutions and all the no-no's and what have you. I understand what you're trying to say, but honestly, there comes a point where our eyes can't see it anyway. If you can find me someone who honestly and without bias can tell a difference between the two, or who sees image degradation in the Dell, THEN I'll give your argument some merit.

And yes, I agree that the specs are moreso just on paper than anything else (like that discrepancy in the pixel pitch.. oh, love how the specs that the Dell win are "pretty useless," and the one that Apple wins is high and mighty, btw).. but that just lends credence to my argument: The ACD is a rip-off. At *best* you are getting the same panel for $400 more! In reality, you're getting less connectivity and worse specs.

And how can more connectivity ever be a bad thing? So what if you don't use it? So the ports sit, hidden behind your monitor, unused. That makes it a disadvantage? Please. You don't use it now, but I sure as hell would rather have the option and expandability than not. TV, gaming consoles, second computers... yeah, horrible. How dare Dell.

But then again, money wasn't an object and I would much rather be seen alive with the Apple, than dead with the Dell.
Click to expand...
This is such a horrible argument that it doesn't even deserve acknowledgement. Yeah, I'd rather die than look at my perfect, massively large flat panel monitor, too...

Hop off your high horse, fanboy.
 
I've seen too many 23" ACDs with horrendous pink casts to be able to recommend them. My local Apple Store even has the temerity to have a pink one out on display and they don't give a monkeys about it.

Talk of it being SWOP certified is a joke.
 
Honestly friends, we are at a crossroads on video display technology.

Any display will become virtually useless with HDTV soon. Unless the display will be HDCP compliant now... good luck watching movies or TV shows in future on your mac.

The machines, video cards and more, will be undergoing drastic changes in the near future.

the way to protect yourself here, is either buy a currently compatible HDCP monitor, or wait.

if you are happy with a display which will only be for a second screen, great.

but just know the landscape will change soon. Apple is also joined a new HDMI type consortium. so they will soon come within 2007 with new monitors and wires.
 
My dad has the 24" Dell 2405, and I think it is a great monitor for the price. Longer warranty than the ACD, built in memory card reader, and lower price, despite not being an Apple. I also like the way it looks, even a little more than I like the look of the ACD. Not sure about the 2407 though.

But most importantly, my dad did do something to the Dell to make sure it worked with his Powermac. He covered the Dell logo on the front of the monitor with an Apple logo that was on a brushed metal surface (from a dog tag that was given out when Panther was released). That makes the monitor MUCH MORE PLEASING TO THE EYE than it would be with the Dell logo in plain site, and it saved a huge amount of money over the ACD when my dad got the Dell in 2005.

-Sam
 
xfiftyfour said:
Oh, and I wouldn't pay for the mercedes, either. But, your analogy is wrong, anyways, because a mercedes offers a lot more than a Kia, and therefore you're paying more, but getting more as well (luxury things, but more nonetheless). This is not the same for the ACD.
Click to expand...

I've got a Mercedez and I tell you what - I've drive many cars over the years and the Merc is beyond brilliance - I've driven it all over Europe and never been let down - I even got hit by a car and mine only suffered a scracth whilst the other driver's cars front was smashed. It's happened to me 2 times in Spain and 1 in the UK. My Mercs great very solid build.

There is something *special* about the car and that is what you pay for. If I had a fiat or Kia or Ford or any other car I'm sure it would have gone down hill.

However, I do agree that the ACD needs to offer more and thus justify itself price wise.
 
Veritas&Equitas said:
It's those kind of comments that make me embarrassed to be a Mac user. Like Mac users lifestyles are so very different from those who use Dells, Sonys, etc. because they seemingly have chic Jetta-like cars, are hip photographers or musicians who live in nice penthouses in San Francisco while the "other side" doesn't, and those who use the "others" are box-handlers or nerdy mortage lenders sitting in cubicles in Boohickville, Missouri/Wisconsin/Ohio/Pennsylvania or anywhere else not considered "hip." It also gives PC users more ammo when arguing how ridiculously elitist some Mac users can be, all because they paid more for a machine than most people would.
Click to expand...

13 years I've been a PC users - 13 can you believe and every second of it was dreadfull - the reformating every 3-6 months - the virusses - defrag every month - Firewall zone alarm, anti virus programs, and other jack sh*t that had to install blah blah. I hated it!

Since my switch back in 2003 I've never been happier - This is the way computing was supposed to be.
 
ironjaw said:
13 years I've been a PC users - 13 can you believe and every second of it was dreadfull - the reformating every 3-6 months - the virusses - defrag every month - Firewall zone alarm, anti virus programs, and other jack sh*t that had to install blah blah. I hated it!

Since my switch back in 2003 I've never been happier - This is the way computing was supposed to be.
Click to expand...
ain't nobody arguing with that! :p
 
xfiftyfour said:
But, your analogy is wrong, anyways, because a mercedes offers a lot more than a Kia, and therefore you're paying more, but getting more as well (luxury things, but more nonetheless). This is not the same for the ACD.
Click to expand...

Ok...

Firstly the analogy is fine because I didn't compare a car to another.

You can't compare a Kia to a Merc - that will OBVIOUSLY be a worse drive.

We've had mercs in our household for years (although not at the moment) and the last three have been horrendous to drive. They swing the backend, the technology is outdated...don't tell me you're not paying for the badge.

My point is that the Merc offers a great interior, a badge that people are proud of.

Enter the ACD. Svelte, clear, Form (possibly over function?) nevertheless - I love the fact I turn on my Powermac and the screen's all ready. Everything is easy, and it looks great. (not to mention accompanies the Powermac) You won't convince me otherwise.
 
I have a Dell 2005FPW 20.1" widescreen, and it's turned out to be a great display for me for a couple reasons:

- I simply couldn't (and still can't) afford the Apple displays

- I use the extra inputs all the time

- the quality and appearance might not be as good as Apple's, but it is acceptable

IMHO, Dell's bigger LCD dislpays are pretty much the only products they make that are worth buying.

I'd probably go with the Apple displays if I had the money - but I'd miss the extra inputs. Right now I have two computers connected to my LCD and I use the component input often as well.
 
I have just got a 2007FPW 20.1" and I love it. It is perfect. I can afford buying the 20" ACD but I couldn't justify paying 320 Euros extra just for the looks. Plus, I can adjust the height of the screen on the Dell and you can't on your uber-cool ACD :p

BTW, the Dell 2007FPW has an IPS Panel which is exactly like the one in the 20" ACD.
 
Compile 'em all said:
I have just got a 2007FPW 20.1" and I love it. It is perfect. I can afford buying the 20" ACD but I couldn't justify paying 320 Euros extra just for the looks. Plus, I can adjust the height of the screen on the Dell and you can't on your uber-cool ACD :p

BTW, the Dell 2007FPW has an IPS Panel which is exactly like the one in the 20" ACD.
Click to expand...

but how is the picture quality--do you think theres a big difference? I've used a viewsonic 19 inch before, and it looked good to me.
 
don't know if this helps but i did post a topic on this not too long ago. too lazy to look it up. I sold my 20 acd for a dell 24, in that forum i was defending the dell. I got it and looks wise i had no problem with it, i even like the footprint of the dell better than the apple ACD. But i sent it back almost immediately because, the screen quality just wasn't the same. There was a lot of banding. i could write more, but it's better if you just look up that thread. Go with the apple. I swallowed my words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back