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

Why bother with 20" ACD model?

princealfie

princealfie

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Mar 7, 2006
2,517
1
Salt Lake City UT
I am puzzled that Apple has a 20" ACD model in its lineup. I find that the monitor is way too small to do anything in general particularly photo editing. I really think that base model should be 23" and up.

Who would get a 20" to begin with? Honestly, Apple needs something like a 42" model at some point.
 
I just bought a 20-inch ACD two weeks ago with no regrets. The screen is gigantic compared to my 12 inch PB. It's more than adequate for the small amount of photo editing that I do. The 23-inch costs a little more than I can afford anyway.
 
princealfie said:
I am puzzled that Apple has a 20" ACD model in its lineup. I find that the monitor is way too small to do anything in general particularly photo editing. I really think that base model should be 23" and up.

Who would get a 20" to begin with? Honestly, Apple needs something like a 42" model at some point.
Click to expand...

Ah, you're the guy that was whining about how small the 23" was in the other thread. These type of posts sound like nothing more than flamebait to me. I think you know damn well that not every single person that uses a Mac needs a gigantic screen for photo and video editing. You're just doing this to get attention. Most people I know have 19" or smaller screens.

Oh, I know! I'll start a thread "Why do people buy piece of crap 4-cylinder cars when they should all buy V8 BMWs?"
 
Well. I looked at all the ACDs.

Then for about what the 20 inch ACD would have cost with Apple Care I bought myself a 24 inch BenQ 241W.

Great monitor. Apple needs to offer this kind of feature set. Apple also needs to sort out their UK Apple Care. If anything goes wrong with the BenQ over the next three years I pick up the phone and have them deliver a replacment and take away the old one. With Apple I would have to haul the defective item along to the "nearest accredited service centre" and then wait for them to get back to me when it is fixed and then go collect it.

Anyone surprised I went with the BenQ ????? :D
 
mrogers said:
Ah, you're the guy that was whining about how small the 23" was in the other thread. These type of posts sound like nothing more than flamebait to me. I think you know damn well that not every single person that uses a Mac needs a gigantic screen for photo and video editing. You're just doing this to get attention. Most people I know have 19" or smaller screens.

Oh, I know! I'll start a thread "Why do people buy piece of crap 4-cylinder cars when they should all buy V8 BMWs?"
Click to expand...

I disagree with you on this point in fact. I don't have the best eyesight but I found the 23" was barely adequate to read the 2 page spread of a pdf file. I was stunned honestly and that's sitting about 1.5 feet from the monitor itself. Photo and video editing isn't the only thing that I think that 20" monitors have a problem with but even web surfing is extremely difficult as websites have larger page sizes that require scrolling. In fact, ironically I was testing the 20" monitor and scrolling was quite a hassle on a 20" even with the Safari browser maxxed out.

I'm not saying that the 20" ACD is junk. It is a beautiful piece of sculpture but I find it practically unusable even for everyday tasks like web surfing and even design layouts.
 
princealfie said:
I'm not saying that the 20" ACD is junk. It is a beautiful piece of sculpture but I find it practically unusable even for everyday tasks like web surfing and even design layouts.
Click to expand...

I'm sure once you move up to a 23" or larger display it is a real pain to use anything smaller. I have a 19" 4:3 here at work (Web design) and a 17" 4:3 at home where I do video editing, graphic design and compositing. They suit my needs just fine for now...l but I am looking to upgrade. Just thought I'd let you know that it is physically possible to do design work on a "smaller" display.

I don't think I have ever had to scroll horizontally when viewing a web page on my 17" at 1280x1024. And if you have to scroll horizontally at the resolution I think the web designer needs a smack in the head.... In terms of vertical resolution?
 
princealfie said:
I disagree with you on this point in fact. I don't have the best eyesight but I found the 23" was barely adequate to read the 2 page spread of a pdf file. I was stunned honestly and that's sitting about 1.5 feet from the monitor itself. Photo and video editing isn't the only thing that I think that 20" monitors have a problem with but even web surfing is extremely difficult as websites have larger page sizes that require scrolling. In fact, ironically I was testing the 20" monitor and scrolling was quite a hassle on a 20" even with the Safari browser maxxed out.

I'm not saying that the 20" ACD is junk. It is a beautiful piece of sculpture but I find it practically unusable even for everyday tasks like web surfing and even design layouts.
Click to expand...

Unless you have the 23" with low resolution, a 20" and 23" will have almost the same font size with the same zoom. As for web surfing, how hard is it to use your middle finger to scroll down? It's not like a 20" will display only 5 sentences and will require you to scroll every 4 seconds.

I'm a graphic designer and use a 20" ACD. Sure, a 23" or 30" screen would be better, but I find it adequate enough for everyday use. Just because you don't find it good to use, not everyone else feels the same about it. I agree with mrogers, you are like a kid just trying to get attention, just like with your "Why is push email so important?:mad: " thread.
 
If you expect web pages to be viewable without scrolling you have a problem. Most pages are designed to be viewed on an 800X600 screen. Scrolling is a fact of life. Most people cannot afford the thousands of dollars to by a huge screen that saves them the quarter of a second it takes to flick your finger.
 
Well princealfie, I agree that larger screens are fantastic, but I hope you see how your posts are coming across. Your logic is flawed in your assumption that everyone else uses their computers the same way as you do. I myself have to have at least two screens (currently two 20"), and always have 2GB or RAM in my Macs. But that doesn't mean I tell people who ask me for recommendations on what to buy that they have to get dual 20" and 2GB of RAM. That probably would be a waste, depending on their needs, given how expensive larger screens are. Basically, your posts are saying "why isn't everyone else like me?" Different needs, different priorities.

Most "regular" users only do one thing at a time on their computers, maybe two things, and are smart enough to use Expose or Windows task bar to switch between their apps. If wishes were horses, we'd all have five 30" ACDs on our desks and 12 more 30" Dells on the wall.
 
mac-eroni said:
I'm sure once you move up to a 23" or larger display it is a real pain to use anything smaller. I have a 19" 4:3 here at work (Web design) and a 17" 4:3 at home where I do video editing, graphic design and compositing. They suit my needs just fine for now...l but I am looking to upgrade. Just thought I'd let you know that it is physically possible to do design work on a "smaller" display.

I don't think I have ever had to scroll horizontally when viewing a web page on my 17" at 1280x1024. And if you have to scroll horizontally at the resolution I think the web designer needs a smack in the head.... In terms of vertical resolution?
Click to expand...

Same situation here, but reversed. I have a 17" CRT at work and a 19" 4:3 LCD at home. I do web design, database design (needs more screen space than you'd think), photo manipulation, starting to get into basic video editing, etc. on both systems.

This is the stupidest thread I've seen on MR in awhile, and from a long time user no less. Normally this is newbie member flamebait material. I'm just now feeling cramped on my 19" LCD (1280x1024) as I start to do some video editing and looking at a 20 or 22" (same res) widescreen, which I think will help a lot for video timelines.

I thought that the complaint was going to be that since Apple's 20" is so much more expensive than the competition why bother... seriously, though. The average screen size is still about 17", and people seem to be doing OK. You (the OP) need to learn how to use expose more effectively, or get better glasses, or something.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
video editing and looking at a 20 or 22" (same res) widescreen
Click to expand...

I was looking at a 22" as well a while back. Don't do it, especially if your in graphics/video.

All the 22" lcd's on the market right now have panels made by the same manufacturer - Chi Mei. These panels only have 6-bit color per channel (so 18-bit color instead of 24-bit color). Definitely not something you want for graphics/video.

a lot of them use software to simulate the other colors, so they still advertise as 24-bit color. If it's 22" it's no more than 18-bit native.

sorry for the tangent... just thought I'd help out a fellow display consumer! :)
 
Cost is the big factor, plus the 20” is a good size. I use one at home and I use one a work, they look great and do what I need them to do. :)

The 23” is also very nice gives you more space but those extra inches are expensive. As for the 30” (which is also at work) I find it a bit too big. It's the only monitor I have used where I need to turn my head to see what I’m doing. Also, the screen is SO big that when I pay Unreal Tournament on it I constantly get flanked. Lol.

:D :D :D :D
 
I did...mostly because it looks great, and has the FW and USB port in it. I didn't need the 23'', so the 20'' was fine. If Apple stopped selling the 20'', the Mac Mini wouldn't be a good buy without a non-Apple screen, which isn't a great idea.


Buy the computer from us, and the screen somewhere else. To much work for the average consumer
 
mac-eroni said:
I was looking at a 22" as well a while back. Don't do it, especially if your in graphics/video.

All the 22" lcd's on the market right now have panels made by the same manufacturer - Chi Mei. These panels only have 6-bit color per channel (so 18-bit color instead of 24-bit color). Definitely not something you want for graphics/video.

a lot of them use software to simulate the other colors, so they still advertise as 24-bit color. If it's 22" it's no more than 18-bit native.

sorry for the tangent... just thought I'd help out a fellow display consumer! :)
Click to expand...
I'm aware of the TN panels and their 6-bit colors. I'm not a graphics pro by any means, and my video work is very amateur type stuff. Still, I'm going to go look at a bunch of LCDs in stores to see how the 6-bit panels look to me. I'm slightly color blind anyways. :p

I'm trying to decide between getting the extra 2" (of just size, I know the resolution is the same - I actually kind of like having everything look a little larger) and the full 8-bit color. The 2007 and 228 (Dell's high end 20" and 22" LCDs) are the same price in their refurb store.

I've just got to go over to CompUSA and do a close in person inspection of a 6-bit panel...
 
erickkoch said:
I just bought a 20-inch ACD two weeks ago with no regrets. The screen is gigantic compared to my 12 inch PB. It's more than adequate for the small amount of photo editing that I do. The 23-inch costs a little more than I can afford anyway.
Click to expand...

Hey I have the same setup as yours....very nice....I just got the 20-inch ACD today....I love it....how do you use your? just curious? as a mirror?
 
no, but it is possible.

I was just assumed it would look nice.

I have a dual monitor set up but its ugly as hell because it is a CRT and i only did it for fun and don't really use it.
 
BigPrince said:
no, but it is possible.

I was just assumed it would look nice.

I have a dual monitor set up but its ugly as hell because it is a CRT and i only did it for fun and don't really use it.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok. I asked because I might buy another 20" to go with my iMac. But now that I think of it, 40 inches of screen is a little much for someone who just goes on the internet a lot (me) Thanks though.
 
I'm sure for video editing the 20" is great; as a matter of fact, I sold mine to a tv video editor out here, and bought it nearly new from a music editor.

I got the HR 23" ACD as that is all my 12" PB and 1.5 PPC Mini, both with 64mb video ram, will support -- and frankly, all my pocketbook could tolerate.

The twenty*three is some improvement over the twenty inch screen; but for writing, barely better than the 17" ACD I had previously. The only thing I agree with OP on is that personally, I don't care about width, I need height for less scrolling.

An Apple developer I once knew told me that scroll time for reading/writing on the web/word processing is actually a BIG waste of time. I never forgot his advice.
 
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