Originally Posted by spliff monkey
I'd rather an "ipad" talk to the computer than actually touching the screen itself. A touch screen imac would just be...
1) dirty (too many fingerprints and grease; ewww; our workstation are dirt enough and skeeve me out when I think about the germs, really bad in multiuser environments in terms of hygiene) and
It seems to be odd to mention a touchpad device in a favorable manner in a post suggesting it's bad to have touch controls on a display. Have people been having major problems with fingerprints on the iPad and iPhone?
2) not ergonomic at all. Unless they have a really cool stylus in the works my "pad/ tablet" suggestion would really only work for navigation and manipulation, but not useful to artists without pressure sensitivity. Hmmm
In many ways, I agree, they would have to make major changes to the machine.
Originally Posted by anakin1992
why 27? what stops apple to release an update version of their existing 30 cinema display? putting a 27 display aside with 30 ACD, it just does not make sense.
I don't think they would be expecting buyers to use the new and old displays side-by-side. The 27" has a slightly higher dot pitch anyways, that might be slightly disorienting.
Originally Posted by solipsism
Isn’t the 30” ACD dramatically different tech that we can probably expect from the 27” LED Apple Display? Do they make ≥ 30” LED backlights that are viable for mass production and adequate Apple’s needs as a computer display? Are there any other issues between these two display types that would make it harder to produce a ≥ 30” LED Apple Display? Who else is selling a prosumer or better display of that size?
I would expect that the technology would be a lot different in whatever replaces the 30", whatever size or shape it will be. I don't think there was a 30" computer monitor until Apple introduced theirs. I recall Apple paid LG seed money up front to build the building and make the production line, in exchange for a certain exclusivity time period. LED backlights are available for much larger TVs and I sure haven't found any reason to complain about the quality of those backlights.
I don’t mind 16:9 for a desktop. The displays are large enough now to have plenty of height. What I don’t care for is smaller notebooks (anything less than 15”) with 16:9 or any “widescreen” ratio for a reader device, like the iPad. I think Apple was very smart here even some say that 4:3 is “obsolete”. Those “widescreen” tablets and netbooks are simply murder for anything but watching video.
I really don't understand the drive to 16:9 computer displays at all. I watch a lot of video on my computer, but most of the time I do other things too. I really don't want to resort to portrait orientation to maximize height, moving to 16:9 doesn't help maximize height.
Originally Posted by Smiles77
RGB, like they always have.
Are you sure Apple has always used the RGB type? The tech specs don't say.