WWDC: New LCD Displays

[Capt Underpants]

just surfing pass the BARCO site, they have this monitor:
CORONIS® 5MP MAMMO with 2048 x 2560 pixels but only 21.3" screen.
don't know how much, but i think it will be more expensive than apple 30"?

Yes, but it will also have a better picture.

 

[wdlove]

it's a STARCK design. commissioned by Microsoft. it feels rather cheap in the flesh.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that it came from Microsoft. I would want to keep it away from my Mac.

 

[Mercury]

No one said assuming the same proportion at first?
Good point you are saying if I hear you correctly, measure a 17" and than put another 17" on the top right corner of the screen and you will get 34, so I am right, however your top right area is no empty as is your bottom right, so if you fill those in, you will then have 4 17". which would mean we are both right, 2 17" =34" two ways diagonal, way 4 17= 34 four ways diagonal.
Of course i could argue proportions, resolutions, pixels,wide or standard format, all play equally. it can be any where from 1-10 17"'s. as there are 17"crt's at least that can display up to1920x1080 to as little as 640X480, I dont know if there are 34", but Apple's 30" can show very low resolutions, lower than the 17" or very high resolutions, So unless you give a specific formula for the computation, it can be all over the place.
NICE PLAY ON WORDS in technicality. but you can just take a tape measure and measure each seventeen inch monitor, i guarantee if you then add those to together you will get 34!
know i do get your point that a single 34" monitor would have roughly 3-5 times the pixels because it would scale in width and length.
Just like Apples 30" has roughly 4 times the pixels as a 17" and twice the pixels of (77%) the 23".
But that can be played the opposite way also. the IBM 221 is 22.2" and has 9.2 million pixels. The Apple displays are 30" and have 4 million pixels, so 30"+30" does not equal 22.2 using that same equation.
So I stand by my first statement, 17"+17" diagonal equal 34" diagonal when asked in the simplest way. However if you are comparing the two by pixels or two screens to one or adding anything or ratio like screen length etc. to the formula, you can custom make any legitimate answer.
It all depends on how the question is ask and what formula you used, and you never gave us a formula you just said two 17's do not equal 34, so the ones like me that took that at it's simplest terms, disagreed and rightfully so, but your point is true, depending on how the sum is arrived at.

Even without the same proportions, you can't just "add" the diagonals. I was just saying that to avoid the fact that different proportions would equal slightly different results, diagonally, depending on the width:height ratio. In your "diagonal," you'd have huge gaps of space! Since the term 17" Diagonal means that there isn't a huge chunk of missing space from where the diagonal is arrived at...the diagonal of a rectangle, for instance, which is what this. To even pretend it's a diagonal, you'd have to at least have some sort of quadrilateral, though it really does need a rectangle.

 

[daveg5]

Even without the same proportions, you can't just "add" the diagonals. I was just saying that to avoid the fact that different proportions would equal slightly different results, diagonally, depending on the width:height ratio. In your "diagonal," you'd have huge gaps of space! Since the term 17" Diagonal means that there isn't a huge chunk of missing space from where the diagonal is arrived at...the diagonal of a rectangle, for instance, which is what this. To even pretend it's a diagonal, you'd have to at least have some sort of quadrilateral, though it really does need a rectangle.

Sure you can, and I did 17"+17" equal 34" period.
then we can take into account the huge empty space on the width height ratio. and add that to the computation. I am not disagreeing with you. in the simplest terms as it was first framed 34-17-17=0. In the way you frame it now it does not and there are huge varables you can throw in to really make things complicated. like max res, pixels, length and width, rectangle, quadrilateral, etc. some times two different answers by two different people can both be right, depending on how the question is framed differently to both. P.S. That was a nice drawing! And it shows that two 17" monitors added together equal 34" better than i could.

 

[aussiemac86]

Sure you can, and I did 17"+17" equal 34" period.
then we can take into account the huge empty space on the width height ratio. and add that to the computation. I am not disagreeing with you. in the simplest terms as it was first framed 34-17-17=0. In the way you frame it now it does not and there are huge varables you can throw in to really make things complicated. like max res, pixels, length and width, rectangle, quadrilateral, etc. some times two different answers by two different people can both be right, depending on how the question is framed differently to both. P.S. That was a nice drawing! And it shows that two 17" monitors added together equal 34" better than i could.

Yeah but if apple were to say look we are releasing a 34" monitor, whilst the diagonal would be twice that of a 17"(if it wasnt widescreen) then the viewing area of the screen would be four times that of the 17". This is of course assuming they are all square screens, but with widescreen it is the same general idea just less so, but 2 17" monitors will not have the same viewing area as a single 34"....i could do the maths calculations to take into account for the widescreens...but then i do have better things to do, as we all should have.

 

[sfwalter]

Anybody have an update on ship dates? Wil the 20" and 23" still ship in July?

 

[IIc]

What about the rest

Has anybody else noticed though..PowerMacs released in nice Aluminium, now they have matching screens..But still the same old white keyboard and mouse...Blaaah

How about a nice aluminium look keyboard in the same vein as he 17inch powerbook with the firefly backlighting and a mouse in the same shape as now but instead of the white under the glasslike exterior make it a grey colour ?

Come on Apple, lets have the whole package...

 

[Mr MacNabbit]

Well, Apple increased the Contrast Ratio and Brightness considerably,

You are kidding right!? - The contrast ratio jumped a meagre 50 to 400:1
My Samsung 173Ps have a 700:1 contrast ratio, and a pair of them gives virtually the same desktop space as a 30" for nearly a third of the price!!!
I don't know whether some of you guys ever look around, but there are quite a few manufacturers out there making way better LCD than Apple sell at silly prices.

 

[Mr MacNabbit]

I guess it is time to start finding out who makes the best third-party displays, especially if they are aluminum style. Formacs are G4 styled, but nice. Who else?

Samsung

Nearly twice the contrast, very bright, crisp and clear monitors with brushed aluminium finish, VESA wall mounts or pivot stand included... a no brainer.

 

[MrSugar]

You are kidding right!? - The contrast ratio jumped a meagre 50 to 400:1
My Samsung 173Ps have a 700:1 contrast ratio, and a pair of them gives virtually the same desktop space as a 30" for nearly a third of the price!!!
I don't know whether some of you guys ever look around, but there are quite a few manufacturers out there making way better LCD than Apple sell at silly prices.

This is absolutely incorrect. There are VERY few manufacturers that have LCDs out that compete on all the levels which Apple's do. As has been said many times here a 400:1 contrast ratio is very nice, most people turn down the contrast / brightness on high end displays because it hurts their eyes.

Please please look around and give me some monitors that compete with apple's for such a great price as you say. . .

 

[MrSugar]

Samsung

Nearly twice the contrast, very bright, crisp and clear monitors with brushed aluminium finish, VESA wall mounts or pivot stand included... a no brainer.

Here is the specs of the samsung you just posted....

Screen Size 17"
Resolution 1280x1024
Brightness 270cd/m2
Contrast Ratio 700:1
Viewing Angle (H/V Degrees) 178/178
Response Time (ms) 25
Inputs Analogue/Digital
Multimedia Speakers -
Wall Mount VESA 75mm
Colours Silver/White
Power Consumption 40 watt
Dimensions (WxHxD) 382x395x236


A no brainer huh? For starters 25ms response time. That alone makes this monitor not in comparison to the Apple monitors. Second, it's only 17" ... you can't compare apple's to orange's. Otherwise brightness, and viewing angle are both the same as apple. You don't get a firewire hub, you don't get a aluminum enclosure. I don't know if you get 100PPI but I seriously doubt it.

Edit: I did want to say that for the money, yes, Apple is expensive. This Samsung might be a good option, but I really do want people to understand that the Apple displays are extremely nice. They can't just be tossed in with any old display because they are good on many levels and not just a few.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

This is absolutely incorrect. There are VERY few manufacturers that have LCDs out that compete on all the levels which Apple's do. As has been said many times here a 400:1 contrast ratio is very nice, most people turn down the contrast / brightness on high end displays because it hurts their eyes.

Please please look around and give me some monitors that compete with apple's for such a great price as you say. . .

You are right. I have been looking at the specs of the Apple 20" compared to some other 19" and 20" monitors. Now I see that with the EDU pricing (for me at least) the Apple 20" is not that bad of a deal.

 

[mstecker]

This is real life, buddy. A normal, sane person would not drop down $9000 (CAD) for a computer and moniter.

I just ordered a 30" and a 2x2.5 G5 after watching the Stevenote. In all other respects, I'm normal and sane.

This was a heck of a lot cheaper than the Dual NeXTDimension system that I bought 12 years ago.

 

[stuBCN75]

ok. 2 * 23" Displays side by side would give you a 42" ( diagonal ) display.
I think ?

Does this help anybody ? probably not

EDIT: ok. i give up whatever it is 2 x 23" is quite big !, 2 x 30" is HUGE

 

[letterbox]

ok. 2 * 23" Displays side by side would give you a 42" ( diagonal ) display.
I think ?

Does this help anybody ? probabl

It makes a point, however the ratio is way off from the 16:9 of the widescreen displays. If I am correct, and I am probably not...eh, I don't feel like doing the math, but the ratios are off.

 

[Mr MacNabbit]

This is absolutely incorrect. There are VERY few manufacturers that have LCDs out that compete on all the levels which Apple's do. As has been said many times here a 400:1 contrast ratio is very nice, most people turn down the contrast / brightness on high end displays because it hurts their eyes.

Please please look around and give me some monitors that compete with apple's for such a great price as you say. . .

Which bit of what I said is 'absolutely incorrect' ? - the Samsungs are better than an Apple LCD side by side without a doubt. Don't get me wrong, I love Apple kit, but their monitors break little ground, and appear to be sold only for cosmetic reasons if people are honest. I choose monitors based on quality and colour accuracy first and then the all important cost and obviously their appearance, so when you compare (as I was) that you can get a pair of 17" Samsungs offering a total 2560x1024 pixels with over 30" of screen real estate, with nearly twice the contrast ratio of the 30" Apple monitor for less than a third of the price, let alone that you need to buy an additional £500 video card, it is a no brainer.

As for the 25ms response, unless all you do is play high frame rate games all day, you wouldn't really notice that as any kind of valid impedement, I dont notice it on these with 3D or video work etc.

As for USB and Firewire ports - do you really need to spend that much money on a monitor to get a few extra ports?

 

[wdlove]

Has anybody else noticed though..PowerMacs released in nice Aluminium, now they have matching screens..But still the same old white keyboard and mouse...Blaaah

How about a nice aluminium look keyboard in the same vein as he 17inch powerbook with the firefly backlighting and a mouse in the same shape as now but instead of the white under the glasslike exterior make it a grey color ?

Come on Apple, lets have the whole package...

I agree, it would certainly be the right thing for Apple to also give us updated keyboard and mouse. I dislike the current model. They are certainly so 20th century.

How soon do we thing that Apple will update the keyboard and mouse?

 

[the future]

... so when you compare (as I was) that you can get a pair of 17" Samsungs offering a total 2560x1024 pixels with over 30" of screen real estate, with nearly twice the contrast ratio of the 30" Apple monitor for less than a third of the price, let alone that you need to buy an additional £500 video card, it is a no brainer. ...

You are right that on a pixel/buck basis, 17" lcds are the "best deal". This has, however, nothing to do with Apple and their display prices as they are really competitive compared to other quality lcds of the same size. Bigger lcds just are disproportionally more expensive. Now, to me, if you have the money, getting that gorgeous, industry first 30" is actually a no brainer...

 

[daveg5]

Yeah but if apple were to say look we are releasing a 34" monitor, whilst the diagonal would be twice that of a 17"(if it wasnt widescreen) then the viewing area of the screen would be four times that of the 17". This is of course assuming they are all square screens, but with widescreen it is the same general idea just less so, but 2 17" monitors will not have the same viewing area as a single 34"....i could do the maths calculations to take into account for the widescreens...but then i do have better things to do, as we all should have.

Yea, no one is really wrong in this discussion, it has too many variables, so i call a truce.

 

[daveg5]

You are kidding right!? - The contrast ratio jumped a meagre 50 to 400:1
My Samsung 173Ps have a 700:1 contrast ratio, and a pair of them gives virtually the same desktop space as a 30" for nearly a third of the price!!!
I don't know whether some of you guys ever look around, but there are quite a few manufacturers out there making way better LCD than Apple sell at silly prices.

Take all contrast and brightness and viewing angles specs, response time, with a HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEE Grain of SALT, as they have been disproven numerous times, LCD Panel construction is still far from a science. dot pitch and resolution and screen size or usually the only truly accurate measurements. the others are more like wishful educated guesses, no matter what the name brand.

 

[cr2sh]

How soon do we thing that Apple will update the keyboard and mouse?

Well, once these new displays start shipping this notion of "gee... that mouse sure is white." will occur to everyone who has ordered a new display to match their g5. I'm sure apple will have something to suit their new found longing.

No doubt we will be getting that pro mouse (wired of course) in mid/late-august and about 6 months later we'll see the bluetooth version.

 

[zsmooth]

All this complaining about these monitors is mind-boggling. I was at WWDC last week. I saw the new monitors in person. They flat-out blew me away. They are gorgeous. The picture is unbelievable - best I've seen so far (and I've seen a lot of LCDs).

And to all of you who can't understand the 20" and 23" not going down in price - the new monitors required a lot of new engineering to fit them in their AL cases. The bevel is about half (or less) as much as the old ones, and they are way thinner. Smaller form factor + better picture + same price = sounds pretty good to me.

Bottom line - wait until you see one of these in person before you start (or continue) all your blathering.

 

[groovebuster]

All this complaining about these monitors is mind-boggling.

I find it more mind-boggling how you are defending Apple like this...

I was at WWDC last week. I saw the new monitors in person. They flat-out blew me away. They are gorgeous. The picture is unbelievable - best I've seen so far (and I've seen a lot of LCDs).

Ahem... then I feel really sorry for you that you only saw crappy LCDs in your whole life before.

Apple is not manufacturing the panels themselves, they are buying them from one of the big panel manufacturers like everybody else. Exactly the same panels you find in at least 10 other LCDs from well-known manufacturers.

And to all of you who can't understand the 20" and 23" not going down in price - the new monitors required a lot of new engineering to fit them in their AL cases. The bevel is about half (or less) as much as the old ones, and they are way thinner. Smaller form factor + better picture + same price = sounds pretty good to me.

Sounds pretty crappy to me. Apple finally caught up with the rest of the industry regarding the form factor (There are still other displays out there that have an even smaller bevel). And as I said before, Apple is not using some kind of voodoo panel, they are buying at the same places as the other ones. If the difference is so obvious for you it just tells how long Apple didn't update their LCD monitors... that's all.

So once again we are supposed to pay just for the design and the name. I bet the aluminum enclosure is big part of the reason why the monitors seem like a rip-off. Off course the material looks nice, but in the end a computer is a frickin' tool and I want to get my work done with it. The hundreds of dollars that I pay more for Apple Hardware just because it looks nice(r) I have to earn at some point before (and economy still sucks here in Germany).

I said it already before, the only hardware I will buy from Apple in the future is the computer itself in the most possible stripped down version. Everything else I can get cheaper with the same quality somehwere else.

Once Apple returns to decent prices for peripherals and their BTO options, I will maybe change my mind again...

Bottom line - wait until you see one of these in person before you start (or continue) all your blathering.

Blah...

groovebuster

 

[groovebuster]

Now, to me, if you have the money, getting that gorgeous, industry first 30" is actually a no brainer...

Is it?

I can't think of any situation in my daily work so far that cries for a monster like this. Two good 20" (1600x1200) LCDs (not from Apple) costing together as much as the 23" Cinema Display are doing a really great job...

 

[Euthyphro]

Apple is not manufacturing the panels themselves, they are buying them from one of the big panel manufacturers like everybody else. Exactly the same panels you find in at least 10 other LCDs from well-known manufacturers.

Where else can i find 20" Widescreen lcd monitors for sale?

thanks,