Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
First 24" LED Cinema Displays Arrive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mini displayport ONLY? WTH?
Apple, you seriously confuse me. I thought you were trying to sell products and make money. Sure the panel may be great quality and have wonderful LED backlighting, but if no-one (other than the biggest techno-geek) can use it, its sorta pointless.
I love high quality Apple displays and all, but a few months ago I bought a cheap dell 24" for $407 AUD, as opposed to the $1500 AUD apple is selling their monitor for.
There is no denying that the Apple LED Cinema Display is a much higher quality monitor (High quality LCD panel, LED backlighting, iSight, Glass/aluminium construction), but I would struggle to pay 3.5 times the price for it.
Still, I hope the purchasers enjoy the monitor. I would if I could afford it.
Apple, you seriously confuse me. I thought you were trying to sell products and make money. Sure the panel may be great quality and have wonderful LED backlighting, but if no-one (other than the biggest techno-geek) can use it, its sorta pointless.
I love high quality Apple displays and all, but a few months ago I bought a cheap dell 24" for $407 AUD, as opposed to the $1500 AUD apple is selling their monitor for.
There is no denying that the Apple LED Cinema Display is a much higher quality monitor (High quality LCD panel, LED backlighting, iSight, Glass/aluminium construction), but I would struggle to pay 3.5 times the price for it.
Still, I hope the purchasers enjoy the monitor. I would if I could afford it.
No, you can't. But a good portion of Mac users aren't in the market for a $1000 professional grade display, especially the new users who are coming in.
Well, there are people who think JBL speakers sound great, too.
In any case, I hate the new Cinema Display, I just get annoyed when people use flawed arguments.
Totally agree. Also, I wouldn't even call the new LED display professional grade.
Dear Apple,
I am getting this display ASAP! I was looking to buy a nice display.
But wait, it doesn't work with my 1 year old MBP? What the $#%^ Apple?
It will work, you just need to buy an adapter. However the isight (and possibly sound) won't work. This isn't Apple's fault, but the old connectors don't support the extra stuff that the new one does.
I love high quality Apple displays and all, but a few months ago I bought a cheap dell 24" for $407 AUD, as opposed to the $1500 AUD apple is selling their monitor for.
There is no denying that the Apple LED Cinema Display is a much higher quality monitor (High quality LCD panel, LED backlighting, iSight, Glass/aluminium construction), but I would struggle to pay 3.5 times the price for it.
Still, I hope the purchasers enjoy the monitor. I would if I could afford it.
It's so expensive because it's LED backlit. Your cheap dell monitor definitely isn't
Link to the adapter please.
I won't say it's possible until these adapters are out yet. Any claims before that are wishing thinking and heresay.
No, he's right - it won't work. The adapters are to let the new DisplayPort Macs connect to other screens, not let this screen connect to other computers. There's a massive difference. The adapter he needs doesn't exist yet, and may never exist.
Apple has marketed this new display at the new Macs. If you have an older one, it's not meant for you. Just like the lower wattage power adapters aren't meant for a more power-hungry Mac. It's been designed for the new Macs, and that's as far as it was meant to go.
To everyone responding to this thread about "this isn't used for professional color work" or "professionals wouldn't use a glossy screen for color" blah blah blah have no idea what their talking about.
Anyone that uses the screen for color doesn't know what their doing. Plain and simple. They're relying on the crutch of calibrations and color profiles to save them and hold their hands...but the simple fact is that someone that does this for a living should be able to color correct an image using a black-and-white monitor. While this may seem like an extreme example, my point is that you don't rely on the transmitted RGB color of a monitor to color correct something that's going to be a printed CYMK or even something CMYK with 5th, 6th, 7th or more colors. I remember when Barco came out with monitors that had calibrators built right into the monitor (you pulled out the calibrator with it's suction cup and attached it right to the screen), yet every shop I went to that had these monitors, never used the calibration at all. We'd get new employees coming in with little to no experience sometimes, and they were shocked to learn we didn't use anything and they were totally lost.
While I know I've just pissed off a majority of the people out there that think they're knowledgeable professionals and hey, maybe you do make a great living on what you do. But if you rely on your monitor for accurate color, you're not as knowledgeable as you think you are. Unless of course it's just "good enough" for you. The "good enough" crowd seems to have taken over the graphics world and I look around and see how badly it's all become. The attitude permeates the industry now with "hey, such-and-such uses calibrations and profiles and they do work that's good enough, so we should also. I don't have time to learn all that stuff when this software and profiles are good enough to get what we want".
Hey, if it's "good enough" for you, have at it. But get used to complaining about monitors like this because all of a sudden you can't work like you want to, where I could sit down in front of this monitor with a huge, sunny, south-facing window behind me and I'd be able to work just fine. I guess I'm special.
Anyone that uses the screen for color doesn't know what their doing. Plain and simple. They're relying on the crutch of calibrations and color profiles to save them and hold their hands...but the simple fact is that someone that does this for a living should be able to color correct an image using a black-and-white monitor. While this may seem like an extreme example, my point is that you don't rely on the transmitted RGB color of a monitor to color correct something that's going to be a printed CYMK or even something CMYK with 5th, 6th, 7th or more colors. I remember when Barco came out with monitors that had calibrators built right into the monitor (you pulled out the calibrator with it's suction cup and attached it right to the screen), yet every shop I went to that had these monitors, never used the calibration at all. We'd get new employees coming in with little to no experience sometimes, and they were shocked to learn we didn't use anything and they were totally lost.
While I know I've just pissed off a majority of the people out there that think they're knowledgeable professionals and hey, maybe you do make a great living on what you do. But if you rely on your monitor for accurate color, you're not as knowledgeable as you think you are. Unless of course it's just "good enough" for you. The "good enough" crowd seems to have taken over the graphics world and I look around and see how badly it's all become. The attitude permeates the industry now with "hey, such-and-such uses calibrations and profiles and they do work that's good enough, so we should also. I don't have time to learn all that stuff when this software and profiles are good enough to get what we want".
Hey, if it's "good enough" for you, have at it. But get used to complaining about monitors like this because all of a sudden you can't work like you want to, where I could sit down in front of this monitor with a huge, sunny, south-facing window behind me and I'd be able to work just fine. I guess I'm special.
Apple isn't even using the capabilities of DP (see USB sound). Plus the Cinema Display looks like it is direct drive. So no passive converter is going to work.
To everyone responding to this thread about "this isn't used for professional color work" or "professionals wouldn't use a glossy screen for color" blah blah blah have no idea what their talking about.
Anyone that uses the screen for color doesn't know what their doing. Plain and simple. They're relying on the crutch of calibrations and color profiles to save them and hold their hands...but the simple fact is that someone that does this for a living should be able to color correct an image using a black-and-white monitor. While this may seem like an extreme example, my point is that you don't rely on the transmitted RGB color of a monitor to color correct something that's going to be a printed CYMK or even something CMYK with 5th, 6th, 7th or more colors. I remember when Barco came out with monitors that had calibrators built right into the monitor (you pulled out the calibrator with it's suction cup and attached it right to the screen), yet every shop I went to that had these monitors, never used the calibration at all. We'd get new employees coming in with little to no experience sometimes, and they were shocked to learn we didn't use anything and they were totally lost.
While I know I've just pissed off a majority of the people out there that think they're knowledgeable professionals and hey, maybe you do make a great living on what you do. But if you rely on your monitor for accurate color, you're not as knowledgeable as you think you are. Unless of course it's just "good enough" for you. The "good enough" crowd seems to have taken over the graphics world and I look around and see how badly it's all become. The attitude permeates the industry now with "hey, such-and-such uses calibrations and profiles and they do work that's good enough, so we should also. I don't have time to learn all that stuff when this software and profiles are good enough to get what we want".
Hey, if it's "good enough" for you, have at it. But get used to complaining about monitors like this because all of a sudden you can't work like you want to, where I could sit down in front of this monitor with a huge, sunny, south-facing window behind me and I'd be able to work just fine. I guess I'm special.
I would think that, for press anyway, one uses a monitor to get "in the ballpark" with regard to the rendering of color, then run rough drafts out for proofs to double-check what the design will actually look like on paper with dyes and inks. I mean, really--even a theoretically 100% true and perfect screen will have a different look from a paper image due to the luminescence of the screen and what that does to your eyes, and what the physical mixing of inks in color processing does to the final product. Right?
Unwanted glare would be an annoyance for a graphics professional, I'm sure. But for a couple of decades now there has been one reliable solution to that problem: a MONITOR HOOD. Is that such a terrible solution?
So, isn't much of the histronics on this thread really irrelevant to working graphic design professionals? Aren't people really taking the lack of matte screens PERSONALLY, like Apple is hell-bent on intentionally disappointing them?
Man, I should start the "iHood" company, make a classy-looking aftermarket product that visually matches the new ACDs, and cash in on all this FUD.
I'm pretty sure that's the width of the whole machine, not just the screen. The resolutions of the two are equal.
Monitor hoods help prevent ambient light cast and visually isolate the screen from its surroundings. What I don't like is reflections from windows and other light sources, or even seeing my silhouette. By having sharp-edged reflections on a different focal plane, it makes a busy display just that bit more cluttered and a working day more fatiguing.
I will not be buying one of these displays for that reason alone, apart from qualms about ports and the like. To be honest, at the price, I think this display as it is may have a good chance of being the display equivalent of the iPod HiFi. Expensive and slightly over-reaching in a crowded market where for many people, good enough is good enough. It just seems like an odd product for Apple to release when it can only connect to so few other products.
pricey
it is somewhat pricey, even for apple. but at the end of the day maybe they can pull some magic out of their ass quality wise that would make this a somewhat viable option for someone seeking out a new display. i have to say the use of LED backlighting does make it enticing
it is somewhat pricey, even for apple. but at the end of the day maybe they can pull some magic out of their ass quality wise that would make this a somewhat viable option for someone seeking out a new display. i have to say the use of LED backlighting does make it enticing
Well, I guess I must be that big of a sucker. I'm posting using my new 24" LED Cinema Display/Early Christmas Present. It's gorgeous and will be really helpful when I've got a good helping of windows open for programming.
What a beautiful display. Worth every penny. You really have to see and use this display in order to realize how good it is.
Mini displayport ONLY? WTH?
Apple, you seriously confuse me. I thought you were trying to sell products and make money. Sure the panel may be great quality and have wonderful LED backlighting, but if no-one (other than the biggest techno-geek) can use it, its sorta pointless.
I love high quality Apple displays and all, but a few months ago I bought a cheap dell 24" for $407 AUD, as opposed to the $1500 AUD apple is selling their monitor for.
There is no denying that the Apple LED Cinema Display is a much higher quality monitor (High quality LCD panel, LED backlighting, iSight, Glass/aluminium construction), but I would struggle to pay 3.5 times the price for it.
Still, I hope the purchasers enjoy the monitor. I would if I could afford it.
I actually think apple will make a good deal of money because of this. People are going to buy their notebooks, like myself, and some of those people will want to get a monitor for it and what do you know, they make one "just for" a laptop so they'll buy it. Apple effectively sold two products at once. As for myself, I just replaced my PB g4 with a new mbp and I love it to death so far. I also want to replace my 20" dell with a nice cinema display, but since the mini-display can handle dual-link dvi, I might go with a 30" if i can find the cash somewhere.
I knooowww...right? The one on display at my Apple store was SCORCHING hot!!! I thought LED is supposed to be much cooler than LCD. But I'm still getting one, of course.
But I'm still getting one, of course.
The one at the Apple store where I bought mine was really really warm, too. However, I've had mine up and running since about 1:30 and it is no where near as warm as the one in the store...