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.
New Cinema Displays? what happend!!!!
- Thread starter umbilical
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I own a 20in cinema display, and I really don't think I could ever bring myself to buy a non Apple display. They just go too well with the computers (in my case, a MBP, but equally so the Mac Pro).
The alu keyboard just tops it all off.
The alu keyboard just tops it all off.
Seriously...
How many creative pros you know, who actually have time for A/V messengering? Most of us wanna get out of the studio and into a bar where we can chill-out and forget work!!!
Just choking? I wanna kill the designer who put portrait option on f'in Apple Display control panel but didn't think to add the functions to the back stand. I'd love to have dual 30" portrait/landscape panels just so i can see some of what I'm doing. Without propping the panels against the wall!!
I think Apple's design team has hit the brick wall with displays.
Nah... I reckon the next would should stick with the same dimensions, at 16:10 so professional users can have more pixels, display our useful pallets (both Photoshop, Illustrator, Animators & Flash developers alike) but maybe upgrade the panel to ultra high resolution OLED's. This way, Apple can develop a display without back-lighting, emitting less heat and consuming less power. You might think this is insane but OLED panels don't need additional back-light, so our physical screen could be thinner! Yep, thinner!!
But since Apple doesn't make the actual panels that are in our ACD's, we'll all have to wait a while panel makers gear up it's development process... I think there's a long way to go before we actually see large format OLED versions with CRT like quality....
Before all this, Apple has has to make the leap from CCLF to LED back-light in it's ACD line - our beloved panels will still go dim in time
Oh.. and Wannabe 'home cinema enthusiasts' can buy third-party displays with faster response for games and High-def video. They can have cheaper 16:9 panels cause they don't need to comply with "SWOP", Pantone and various other colour standards. Hell.. You can even have a hook to hang your display mascots!!
Considering how many people carp about wanting Blu-ray on every Mac and such playback would benefit most from a 16:9 display, you would think that everyone wants the next ACDs to have 16:9 panels.
Why not have a 16:10 monitor and simply not use
the extra pixels when you want 16:9 (letterboxing)?
I am totally against blu-ray have been from the very beginning. Most designers and professionals want even more real-estate not less as 16:9 gives you.
I am not against BluRay. All BluRay does is give use more storage on a disk, allowing 1080P (Full HD) and better sound. There for I support it on the entertainment side of things. But I have no question in my mind, that BluRay can't support 1920x1200. Since BluRay in it's own is just storage, so it could hold it. But I am with you as I prefer more real-estate, 16:10. Editing Photos it's great to have as much real-estate as possible. But keep in mind that motion entertainment, 16:9 has many benefits. I think the best thing Apple could do is offer 20" and 23" in 16:9. But still keep the 30" at 16:10 with options for the others. Whether Apple would do this, I think it's highly unlikely.
Ok But what would the resolution be if the Screen were 20" it is 1680 x 1050 now.
Yes, we know, or at least I do. Having two ACDs makes the bottom of your desk look like garbage. I love having the hubs in the back, and the ultra thin ACD on my desk, but that cord system has to GO!
The ACDs are much thinner, and don't pack the power brick in the back like the iMacs do.
For me, I just want an up-to-date display on par with the NECs and LaCie's and Eizo models. I know the price would go up dramatically but I think I could stomach a 24" H-IPS (like the 24" iMac's) at around $1200 or so.
Also, the connectivity can really take a hike. Display port since it's smaller than DVI would be wonderful, but HDCP and so forth don't interest since TVs were made for that. Keep the current aspect ration please, I see a lot more and I have done the thin and long monitors and they SUCK.
So because you personally don't use them, nobody should have them? I don't see the point in encouraging Apple to continue on their current path of absolutely sucking genitals when it comes to the usefulness of their displays. Right now, the only people who buy Apple displays are professional users, and idiots. They could easily sell more if the displays weren't so second (or even third) rate in terms of connectivity and overall specs.
No, I just don't think they should be used as TVs. Especially since you can get far better, bigger TVs for less money.
Again, since you personally don't have use for it, you think nobody should be allowed to have it? This may come as a surprise, but there are plenty of people who would like their display to double as their television.
This is the same mindset that leads to all the stupid nanny state laws where people try and legislate their views onto other people. Just because you don't do it doesn't mean everyone else should be prevented from it.
I'm cognizant of that, I've taken them apart many, many times. The glass isn't what gives them the crappy viewing angles, though.
The Cinema Display Can still have a black bezel with a matte screen without the glossy glass in front.
My guess is that they wanted to keep all sources of interference as far away from the panels as possible. Personally I'd prefer the power supplies be kept separate.
A lot of measurebators hate on the ACDs because of this stat or that stat, but honestly there are very few displays that can compete. There are comparably priced displays with better stats, but many of those displays happen to also be wide gamut and have all of the baggage that comes along with that (Dell 2408WFP). The only displays I've looked at that's been more impressive than the ACD are the NEC 2490 and some of the heavy hitting Eizos. The NEC 24 costs a couple of hundred bucks more than the ACD and the Eizos are substantially more expensive than the ACD.
You seem like one of those posters that is going to start getting emotional for NO reason.... I will watch what I say then.
The H-IPS panel is WAY over-priced for simple TV viewing. You will pay thousands of dollars for even a 30" monitor just to watch TV. Most people are better off getting less color specific high end monitors.
Either-way, I don't really care, so SURE... you are right and I was SO trying to legislate my view onto other people.
Measurebation (what a great term, thank you for that) aside, one thing that I think is universally true is that the contrast ratio on the displays is really quite bad. If you ever watch a film on it (be it for pleasure or work) in a darkened room, they don't get anywhere near a true black.