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

WWDC: New LCD Displays

Re G5 iMacs:

Chip NoVaMac said:
the only reason to release today as opposed to any other day is that the world is watching.
Click to expand...

All thing being equal, I agree. New iMacs/iPods/whatever today would have been fun! But the world isn't watching WWDC... beyond the developers in attendance, only a select segment of Mac fans and notoriously under-informed analysts are watching WWDC. And of the people who are, only a tiny fraction of them honestly think Apple can't release something at another time than WWDC. There are some vocal anonymous complainers in Mac forums, but those few voices don't add up to much for Apple's business.

I short, I don't think there was any compelling business reason for Apple to choose WWDC for a hardware product like the iMac. There are MUCH bigger and better reasons to choose a date--manufacturing, inventory, marketing campaigns, not distracting from other things, avoiding Apple and non-Apple events what would distract from it, component costs, supplier delays, legal agreements, etc. etc.... Those all add up to SO much more than trying to please a few vocal Mac forum goers who took WWDC rumors as fact.
 
army_guy said:
The resolution of the 30" is low considering there are 1920x1200 15.4" panels like my DELL laptop. I would of prefered something abit higher like 3500-4000 etc.
Click to expand...
i can do 1920x1080 on my 13.8 viewable sony crt from 5 years ago at 60hz. thats pretty small but viewable.
crt's 20" have been doing 2000+X1500+ at 85HZ for years and its quite viewable at about $500
but I bet the 30" looks much better.
 
letterbox said:
The "old" style apple displays run/ran on ADC, which probably (?) supports higher resolution than dvi. That would seem like a reasonable explanation to me.
Click to expand...

I think ADC is just DVI with Power and USB. But even if was different how will the new 23" DVI monitors work with a Single vs. Dual DVI to handle the 1920x1200 resolution when single DVI is only rated for 1600x1200 resolution.

Thanks



I did a search and for this info about DVI

WHAT ARE SINGLE AND DUAL LINKS ?



" The Digital formats are available in DVI-D Single-Link and Dual-Link as well as DVI-I Single-Link and Dual-Link format connectors. These cables send information using a digital information format called TMDS (transition minimized differential signaling).
Single link cables use one TMDS 165Mhz transmitter, while dual links use two. The dual link effectively doubles the power of transmission and provides an increase of speed and signal quality; i.e. a single link 60-Hz LCD can display a resolution of 1920 x 1080,
while a dual link can display a resolution of 2048 x 1536."

So a single link with support 1920x1200.

Sorry about the confusion.
 
Only one input?

That's very dissappointing. I'd love to buy a 23 inch. But not being able to connect to computers and switch between the two (without having to buy an expensive DVI switchbox) is a killer. :(
 
nagromme said:
Re G5 iMacs:



All thing being equal, I agree. New iMacs/iPods/whatever today would have been fun! But the world isn't watching WWDC... beyond the developers in attendance, only a select segment of Mac fans and notoriously under-informed analysts are watching WWDC. And of the people who are, only a tiny fraction of them honestly think Apple can't release something at another time than WWDC. There are some vocal anonymous complainers in Mac forums, but those few voices don't add up to much for Apple's business.

I short, I don't think there was any compelling business reason for Apple to choose WWDC for a hardware product like the iMac. There are MUCH bigger and better reasons to choose a date--manufacturing, inventory, marketing campaigns, not distracting from other things, avoiding Apple and non-Apple events what would distract from it, component costs, supplier delays, legal agreements, etc. etc.... Those all add up to SO much more than trying to please a few vocal Mac forum goers who took WWDC rumors as fact.
Click to expand...

Don't sell short the stock market. It will be interesting to see what happens in the price. It already closed at 3.59% down from open. So I guess the world wasn't watching....
 
Chip NoVaMac, I see some of your points however...

Here...
There are those of us that see the bigger picture. The G5 iMac would have been a great addition for us, but we are also looking towards those that are buying their first Mac.
Click to expand...

you argue for the general person and here...
The only advantage that I see to the 20" is for us PB users is the extra FW400 port (and maybe the extra USB 2.0 port).
Click to expand...

you preach to yourself and the PB crowd you are a part of.

That being said...iMac's today would have been welcome and for those in the bigger picture (pun kinda intended...don't shoot) the new design (aluminum, mountable...) of the displays plus the fw400 ports is worth the paying the price for what you would've paid yesterday for "old" tech.
 
jackc said:
How much was the 23" and 20" before this update? Why don't any Mac sites put up a comparison when new products come out, for those of us who don't have the product line memorized? :D
Click to expand...

Here ya go:
 

Attachments

  • s.gif
    s.gif
    46.7 KB · Views: 210
cr2sh said:
You sound like someone who concerned about price.

Those who buy the 30" want the best, and some combo / side-by-side, bezel down the middle, cheaper answer.. isn't going to cut it.

You've argued price.. not an issue to those people.
You've argued lcd/crt, that issue regards all lcds vs. crts, so not really valid here.

The guys who come here a lot kinda knew this was coming, what we didn't know about was the video card and the added $600. Not the best execution.. but whatever, its top of the food chain over here.
Click to expand...

Just thinking aloud about all the options. And it seems for me that, 2-23" ($4000)are the way to go if going LCD's only.
If you dont mind the Latest Quality CRT's then you could actually get two of those and a Dual 2.5GHZ G5($1100+$3000), which I think is a viable option for many
Or even 1 23"($2000) and 1CRT($500) and a dual 1.8 G5($2000) for $4500.
So what is the best way to spend $4500 "in your opinion" assuming you still have a G3/G4 like me and a 15" display.
 
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL
This advanced graphics card is required for the new 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Display. [size=large]$599.[/size]

OMFG, are you kidding me? And none of the new Cinemas come w/ the VESA mount adapter? This is insane!!! Well, at least they lowered the price of the ADC to DVI connector.
 
It's just fine...

OK, all in all I'm satisfied.

The prices? Could be lower but it's ok - especially for introduction.

Design? Yes, it's not so beautiful as the last one but it's still great and better for G5 environment. I didn't like G5 tower design at first but when I saw it live... I was in love...

I'm I buying? Of course - one 30" for home and one for work with three 23" for "middle" work stations. I waited too long for this and now I don't ask too much... just give me those displays...

Nice touch - at last they matched color of the keyboard and the mouse with G5 look...
 
kingslod said:
Hey Alex,

Calm down there buddy. ;)

I'm actually looking forward to getting a new 23! And maybe a dual 2.0... :D

David (formerly with lbmca-west)
Click to expand...

Hey David!! How the heck are you?! I am calm, I guess I don't sound like it though. Pretty big displays out there now! Heck, a cheap 30" flat panel TV cost around $3,000 and I doubt it has a resolution better than 1280 x 768, so David, I think this would look very nice in your new living room.

Imagine Photoshop on this beauty!

David, I saw a picture of Final Cut Pro running on this new display. Three previews on top, the timeline in the middle, and the bin, audio mixer, and a preview bin on the bottom. Saw a picture of Jobs standing next to it. You really get an idea of the size. It's simply insanely huge. I say a guy running a huge magazine would need this huge monitor. :)

-Alex
 
iMac Compatabiltity

I was just wondering if this will run on my imac dv 500 purple. it is overclocked to 500 and has a 7200 rpm drive and a gig of ram!

BTW the new displays are freaking fugly the old ones had style but these are just lame as hell.
 
This is insane. Now these monitors as as expensive or more expensive than the Eyegonomic ones, and the eyegonomic ones include all adjustments in x-y-z planes, plus they have more features and include a anti-glare glass protector infront of the actual LCD.
 
Ewww

i was really hoping they wouldn't look like those skanky artist's renderings.

Seems they aren't cutting edge in brightness/contrast and besides, they are so terribly bland looking and uninspired esthetically. The build quality will likely distinguish them from your generic Dells up close but I was just hoping for something more original. Did Ives design those things? Perhaps he ought to change his name to Jonathon Le Corbusier.

Here's hoping for an un-Dell-like iMac G5 ASAP.
 
Capt Underpants said:
How is the 17" more affordable. It was $699 before, and it's $600 now. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

According to the apple store I'm looking at its $699 now.

Might have been a typo on your part, I dunno.. but it still costs the same. :confused:
 
aswitcher, or anybody else...

does BT really provide the same sensitivity and accuracy as a wired mouse?
if not, wouldn't many "pro" users prefer the wired? not to say that it isn't needed, I would love to have a BT setup.
 
For those of you complaining about ehe design or Dell-ness, of the new display, I have one thing to say: Can you do any better? Look, they may not be the best, or as innovative as most of us come to expect from a company like apple, but there's only so much you can do with a computer monitor.
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
Nice smokescreen argument. As far as I can tell the monitors don't offer much more than what others are offering. No extra value or ease of use. unlike the iPods that had ease of use and unique value compared to the others. The only advantage that I see to the 20" is for us PB users is the extra FW400 port (and maybe the extra USB 2.0 port).
Click to expand...

Did you see my earlier post? These monitors are offering roughly the same that others are offering for roughly the same price. No, it's not the bargain of the century, but all these people crying "rip off" are simply wrong. These prices are right around the industry standard for this quality display.
 
Maxx Power said:
This is insane. Now these monitors as as expensive or more expensive than the Eyegonomic ones, and the eyegonomic ones include all adjustments in x-y-z planes, plus they have more features and include a anti-glare glass protector infront of the actual LCD.
Click to expand...

And what is their resolution?

That is what is important here. Anyone can buy a 30" screen for cheap. Heck you buy a projector and project to 30" for less than a $1,000.00. The issue here is how much screen real-estate do I get. Think about the compositors that use After Effects for example. The timelines open from top to bottom, and we always need multiples open at once. This causes us to constantly adjust the view up and down.

What about the people using Combustion, Shake, or the people using Flint on something other than a Macintosh. Remember, this is not ADC, so this monitor is no longer specific to Apple customers. It is clearly a monitor designed for a larger, more professional audience. If you don't fit that description, you would not likely care about this monitor. Not everything Apple makes is designed for all of Apple's customers. Apple does have varying audiences to cater to.
 
cr2sh said:
According to the apple store I'm looking at its $699 now.

Might have been a typo on your part, I dunno.. but it still costs the same. :confused:
Click to expand...

It was a typo. STUPID KEYBOARD MAKERS MADE THE 9 AND THE 0 TOO CLOSE!!!! ;)

It's fixed now.
 
macwarehouse.com shows a ship date of the 20" in 4-6 days. Do you think this is true? I find it odd, since Apple's online store shows 2-4 weeks..
 
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