Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I don't know what you mean. 24" at 1920 x 1200 is a perfectly usable size. If you double both dimensions and apply Apple's 4 pixels as one thing, you're back to the same size.

I'm just asking you will have to scale it , not a major issue, myself I can't see myself going back to ever using a 24" . Next monitor will be 34" 2k
 
The best looking display on the market right now is the Acer H7 without a doubt. It's aluminum, has super thin bezels, and USB-C (on the gold model). If they update this to 4K in 2017, it would be a very nice option for many.

https://www.acer.com/ac/en/US/content/series/h7

I'm just too much of an Apple guy to stare at non-Apple aesthetics while using macOS, so waiting for the next 5K iMac revision.
They did update it: now they have a 4K usb-C model in silver, for $650. Look it up.
 
Gorgeous? It's a 1440p display for chrissakes. If anyone should be "ashamed" here, it's Dell for shipping 8 year old technology in 2017!
You do know that most PC monitors being sold today are still 1080p? Right? In a market where most people are still going for 1080p monitors it's obvious that a 1440p monitor is going to be a much easier sell from a price perspective. The focus here is definitely on shifting a lot of these rather than a few to people with ether deep pockets or good credit ratings.

Still, $700 for a 1440p/60Hz monitor in 2017? That may have been a reasonable price a couple of years ago, but not today.
 

should have put 1440P
[doublepost=1483451486][/doublepost]
You do know that most PC monitors being sold today are still 1080p? Right? In a market where most people are still going for 1080p monitors it's obvious that a 1440p monitor is going to be a much easier sell from a price perspective. The focus here is definitely on shifting a lot of these rather than a few to people with ether deep pockets or good credit ratings.

Still, $700 for a 1440p/60Hz monitor in 2017? That may have been a reasonable price a couple of years ago, but not today.

Valid point. Also for many 4K or above it too expansive or in applications such as gaming, poor performance. I would not recommend getting a 4K + monitor in 2017, wait a few years for when they are pushing 100hz +. I got 1440p and 4K, the 1440p 144hz is so smooth compared to the 4K 60 hz.
 
Obsessing over thin for marketing appeal, choosing glossy.

Well we can see Apple's anti-professional attitude is spreading to other manufacturers...
 
...
Second, not everybody wants - or has a computer that can support - 4k or 5k (and 5k still requires Thunderbolt 3 or a dual DisplayPort 1.2 cable, DisplayPort 1.3 GPUs still being like hens teeth). ...and not everybody is a graphics pro: "wide gamut" is more of a liability than an asset unless you're using properly colour-calibrated pro software (or perhaps you like hideously over saturated colors?)
...

But many people have chosen to move ahead rather than stay clinging to the past. Thus, for example, Apple's 5K iMac with wide gamut display, which I've had for a year. And LG's 5K display which can be driven directly by Apple's touch bar MacBookPro. Use color-managed software/apps and browsers (like Safari) and there will be no overly-saturated colors. Indeed, my 5K iMac when not calibrated looks gorgeous and extremely natural.

The LG 5K display at under a grand is a steal. 5K resolution, 10 bits per color (rather than 8), and a wide gamut panel lead to superior displayed images. The fact that it supports display data, display control, speaker audio, microphone audio, web cam video, and laptop charging all over a single thin cable is icing on the cake.

Glad Apple is going in this direction... First step was Apple using hi-resolution "retina" displays introduced a few years ago. That produced noticeably better image quality. Second step is using wide-gamut display panels across Apple's product line (and currently in the latest MBP, iPhone 7, iMac 5K, and iPad Pro - with more coming). Each step produces a better image, but taken together, the resulting displayed images are extraordinary.

It's a great strategy that never gets talked about.

Why post stories about displays using tech that's 5+ years old? People already know about that and there's a ton of low-cost poor-performing displays out there from all the low-cost manufacturers. OTOH, seems many here are obsessed with bezels rather than superior image quality.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ctyrider
Who cares how thin the monitor is? It's sitting on a desk with the front facing me, not the sides. And that picture is as far from realistic color as you can get. All it tells me is that someone messed with the contrast settings in Photoshop..
 
Just wondering, how long does these monitors last in average use? Like does a user replace them every 2 years or like every 6 years?

Can't a 2015 MBP connect to them through display port or TB2?
 
Yup, this is the kind of excitement that Apple _could_ be creating around products, rather than releasing rehashes year after year. Ashamed is right.

Remember the coolness of the 2002 iMac G4?


But oh, how times have changed...
The iMac G4 design was so jaw dropping revolutionary that Time Magazine actually couldn't wait and leaked the design before the keynote.
jobs_timemag.jpg
 
'HDR10'

Anyone who has worked in photographer and film for the last few decades knows this is a silly marketing term by TV/monitor marketing departments. It's never been used in that way by content creators.
 
Just wondering, how long does these monitors last in average use? Like does a user replace them every 2 years or like every 6 years?

Can't a 2015 MBP connect to them through display port or TB2?
People usually keep their monitors for many years, they have one of the lowest replacement rates.
 
You know, I just miss Apple displays already.

None of these have the aesthetics the ACD and TB's I still own.
These displays are terrible. Apple stopped being a design business when they stopped designing their own displays. A terrible move.
 
These displays are terrible. Apple stopped being a design business when they stopped designing their own displays. A terrible move.

Yeah, same thing when Apple stopped making their ImageWriter dot matrix printer, daisy wheel Letter Quality Printer, and LaserWriter family of laser printers of the 1980/90s.

A terrible move. I'm shocked the company has survived.
 
I guess Dell forgot, that this is Apples' gig and no one else should be doing it... Do all of you complaining seriously hear yourselves? Apple did this for ages with their cinema and then thunderbolt displays and charged $999 for them. How is this Dell display that much different?

Also, what makes people think these were made for the new MacBook Pro? You all do realize that some Dell computers have had USB type C since late 2015 to early 2016? The company I work for has been using Dell Precision 5510 notebooks, that have USB C, for almost a year now. But they also maintain USB 3.0 ports and as card slots. As well as an HDMI port.

It just bothers me that people assume this new fangled USB C movement was started by Apple. This movement has been going on for a long time now. This is just the year every manufacturer will be pushing it hard. All of these devices being revealed at CES have been in development long before Apple released a single device with USB C.

The problem here is MR's suggestion that this product is being aimed solely at Mac users, or as if USB-C 3.1 only exists in the Apple garden.

Dell is positioning this squarely as a mainstream monitor (because of those mainstream specs) as other manufacturers introduce laptops with USB-C. Dell's own laptops have USB-C. And for the PC realm, AMD and NVIDIA will undoubtedly have USB-C on their next gen cards this year.

So here we have a monitor manufacturer (and a well-regarded one at that) actually getting out ahead of 2017 product releases so that people can make use of those USB-C connections. Dell should be commended, not ridiculed. I see a lot of ignorant FUD in this thread.

If you're a 2016 MBP owner, you're not the intended market for this monitor.
 
So here we have a monitor manufacturer (and a well-regarded one at that) actually getting out ahead of 2017 product releases so that people can make use of those USB-C connections. Dell should be commended, not ridiculed. I see a lot of ignorant FUD in this thread.
It is better to buy a DisplayPort monitor, and a USB-C->DisplayPort adapter. Unless maybe if it is 5K.
 
Why post stories about displays using tech that's 5+ years old?

Because it is one of only a few displays available with a USB-C interface?

This sounds like a good companion for a 12" MacBook - its got enough power to charge it, and the MB's relatively weak GPU and CPU won't struggle to drive a 1440p display. Might be good for the non-TB MacBook pro as well, and since (unlike the Apple/LG display) it also has HDMI, you could use it with your existing rMBP

The LG 5K display at under a grand is a steal.

True... at the current hefty discount.

Thing is, that sort of discount over the announced price is common in the non-Apple display world... which is why I'd be very surprised if the $700 Dell will actually cost $700 if you shop around. (Another example: HP's 5k display is $1999 on the HP site and $907 from Amazon!)
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Yeah, same thing when Apple stopped making their ImageWriter dot matrix printer, daisy wheel Letter Quality Printer, and LaserWriter family of laser printers of the 1980/90s.

A terrible move. I'm shocked the company has survived.
Well in a lot of ways, my thoughts are spot on. There are a lot of rubbish printers on the market, large, chunky, inefficient. Apple in that space would have continued to make a difference. That's the point I'm making.
[doublepost=1483466999][/doublepost]
Yup, this is the kind of excitement that Apple _could_ be creating around products, rather than releasing rehashes year after year. Ashamed is right.

Remember the coolness of the 2002 iMac G4?


But oh, how times have changed...
Personally, that iMac isn't my favourite. I'm a big fan of the original flat panel aluminium all in one introduced in 2007. But from a design point of view, that G4 model is one beautiful classic that sets the tone of a company that can and will do anything to surprise -- and that is really missing today at Apple. No surprises. No passion. Let's hope the new campus creates a new environment for innovation and advanced design.
 
Last edited:
Well in a lot of ways, my thoughts are spot on. There are a lot of rubbish printers on the market, large, chunky, inefficient. Apple in that space would have continued to make a difference. That's the point. Please don't mock the comments and have a nice day.

People buy printers based on cost and performance.

There is no way Apple can compete in the world of $100 laser printers that are excellent and quite remarkable with respect to features, performance, and quality.

Brother's highly-rated, Energy-Star efficient, very compact 27 page per minute, automatic full duplex printing, 1,200 dpi resolution printer for $93 is just one example.

Apple would get clobbered in that market. And it would be a terrible distraction for Apple.
 
Last edited:
The problem here is MR's suggestion that this product is being aimed solely at Mac users, or as if USB-C 3.1 only exists in the Apple garden.

Dell is positioning this squarely as a mainstream monitor (because of those mainstream specs) as other manufacturers introduce laptops with USB-C. Dell's own laptops have USB-C. And for the PC realm, AMD and NVIDIA will undoubtedly have USB-C on their next gen cards this year.

So here we have a monitor manufacturer (and a well-regarded one at that) actually getting out ahead of 2017 product releases so that people can make use of those USB-C connections. Dell should be commended, not ridiculed. I see a lot of ignorant FUD in this thread.

If you're a 2016 MBP owner, you're not the intended market for this monitor.
Great point. Also people need to remember that Dell's pricing strategy is very different than Apple's. Dell regularly release products with very steep initial MSRPs, then drops the price very quickly after release (on an almost weekly basis) depending upon the demand they find for the product. This thing will either not sell well, and keep its existing price or the price will drop very quickly.

If this had came out listed at $400 no one would be complaining about it. That is the price point this display will eventually target similar to the U2717D. This is essentially just a redesigned U2717d with USB-C, and rearranged internals. Within a year or so I expect it to occupy a similar price range.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.