iMac/Cinema Display Overrated?

[accountforit]

What do you think? You can't buy either with a matte display which is what a photo editor really wants, and many non-editors as well.

Anand (who some here treat like God) never gave the iMac display that great of a review until this past year. It, and the Cinema Display, were always just described as good and many other monitors on the market beat out both displays in many categories. However, when you come to this forum, people talk about the displays as being the end all be all.

What gives? Are we looking at the external appearance and paying out the arse for that forgetting about what really counts? Especially now, when you can buy a pretty darn good IPS display for <$200.

I have owned many iMacs but only recently got over the fact that I hate being tethered to my desk so I switched to an external display/MBP setup. While looking for monitor information, I realized that Apple displays don't really seem to be anything special beyond hardware build quality. When you consider the price of the Cinema Display, it really makes me think people are getting the short end of the stick.

 

[leman]

Well, the iMac is a really good IPS display (obviously not the best one) + a computer, which is still thinner than many 'normal' displays on the market. That should account for something, at least. I never understood why people would buy a Cinema Display - there are way better alternatives for the money.

 

[tomwvr]

The Thunderbolt display is old and outdated. - it was released in June 2011.

Apple has no new monitors. I was expecting them to bring out a new one made from the current iMac Display, but that has not happened. So because of this I would either expect one of two things to happen - 1) apple no longer will make a display or 2) apple will be getting into the 4K display world.


Tom

 

[Zellio]

The newest dell monitors are better, but also have quality control issues.