Apple now taking orders for 24-inch LED Cinema Display - Page 2

In searching for an alternative to the glass-covered new 24", came across a new Eizo 24" LED back-lit monitor (matte screen - also touts energy-saving) .

The Eizo specs seem the same as 'known' specs of the new Apple unit. Anyone know if the panel mfg is the same?

http://www.eizo.com/products/lcd/ev2411w/index.asp

Supposed to cost about $700 w/ 5-yr warranty.

Also very-much like the HP LP2465w (H-IPS) 24" (matte), 3yr warranty $574.00

http://www.provantage.com/hewlett-pa...a~7CMPK0P6.htm

I haven't read all the posts after yours, so it's possible that your errors have already been pointed out, but incase they weren't, I'll ask:

Have you read the title and body of the story?

You are aware that this isn't a 20" monitor as you seem to assume in the beginning of your post. What's the point of comparing the price of an 24" LED BL 1920 x1200 monitor to non LED 20" 1680 x 1050 monitors, when they are so much cheaper than any 24" model?

Viewsonic has a new 22" monitor, the VLED221wm, which is only 1680 x 1050, and sells for an average of $440. This a cheap model, as is most of Viewsonic's products these days, sadly enough.

Samsungs 24" model, the XL24 sells for about $2,230, and lists for $3,629.

The Hp LP2480zx 24" costs about $2,440.

Apple's model is pretty cheap actually.

You should learn to compare like to like.

Some Pc users know more about displays than some Mac users, and some Mac users know more about displays than most PC users.

We discuss displays here as well. You are just too new to know anything about it, even if you have been invisible before you signed up.

my thought exactly... i started the whole discussion a few posts earlier, and it is insane how the fanboys keep claiming that the apple monitors are better, when the new LED one is not even available !!!!!

I repeated 3 times that my Dell is equal in quality to the cinema display STANDING NEXT TO IT... a first-hand comparision.
..
..
noone agrees !

insane

i just hope they come to their senses, because if they would, price might come down. As long as there are sufficient fanboys saturating the buyer pipeline, there is no need for apple to lower their prices.

You're saying that that Samsung had LED backlight.

You know, unless a monitor does, you aren't saying anything relevant.

The only valid comparison is a 24" 1920 x 1080 LED backlit monitor.

Nothing else matters.

Please keep personal attacks out of it. You can say his views are foolish.

And exactly, what blindness is this?

If you don't know the difference between LED backlighting and standard backlighting, and how it affects prices, aren't you the one with the problem here?

I'm reading the Ezio as about $800. Interestingly enough, while the monitor is guaranteed for 5 years, the panel and backlight is only good for three years.

The Hp isn't a LED backlit display, so doesn't count.

Dell makes some good displays, and they make some bad ones. It's not that simple.

Apple's line of displays were excellent when they first came out. You can look for the reviews. But for whatever reason, Apple has chosen to not update them. They are now old by industry standards. So yes, newer monitors have gotten better, while Apple's remain the same.

People have to stop calling others fanboys just because they don't agree.

Should we call you a troll?

It's the same thing.

SO let me get it, you want Apple's monitor but don't want to pay their price so you justify this by bringing cheap monitors to prove your point.

Just reading Eizo review on German site lists at 560 Euro = $706.

I'd like to know if it's the same panel as used in the Apple LED 24".

Listed HP due re: H-IPS screen, excellent color (if you're involved in image work) and relatively low price compared to matte Apple Cinema units (although, supposedly all AC will be glass covered in '09)

It would be nice to compare oranges with oranges.

So far the only monitor that comes close to the new Apple LCD specs in the Lenovo's ThinkVison L2440X which sells for $750.* Besides the fact that the ThinkVision hasn't gotten quite qood reviews, it is without a built in camera, and something to really ponder about, it is about 4 pounds lighter.

I would suggest that aluminum vs. plastic does have added value.

Of course there is LeCies 724 LCD† which when it arrives costs $2,650. It does however, come with a hood, Calibration Software and Colormeter. My experience with LaCie's monitors tells me these should be well worth the price if you are doing high-end colour proofing. But so would Apples Cinema displays. Can't say that for Dells For sure not the current models.

OOPs. The EIZO's FlexScan EV@$11W at $790** is yet another one coming and it was expected to hit the Japanese market in October. Don't know the weight, however the stand certainly looks sturdy and as far as we know, no built in camera.

* http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/c...3EAE93B7B4AEF6

† http://www.lacie.com/us/products/product.htm?pid=11094

** http://dcuser.net/others/eizo-led-ba...n-ev2411w.html

The article says the price in Japan is JPY$83,000, which translates today to US$855 and doesn't include import costs.

Can't say I quite agree.

In side-by-side comparisons, most reviews certainly pointed out that the Apple Cinema Displays were more often more expensive. However, they would also conclude that if price wasn't the object, buy it.

And well worth repeating:

If you are serious on getting a new monitor, perhaps this particular response from jackdesign in a Macworld review http://www.macworld.com/article/6119...wxm.html?t=218 will help direct you

IN PARTICULAR, jackedesign comment*:
Tue Nov 27 14:16:42 PST 2007 Re: NEC MultiSync LCD205WXM monitor
This review would have benefited from the listing of what panel this NEC uses, (TN, PVA, IPS, etc.) This specific monitor uses a TN panel, which we all know is the bottom of the barrel in quality and color reproduction. (Although NEC's are well above average for LCD's.)

…the reason why the Apple Monitors are superior with color is because they use S-IPS panels. IPS's are made for high end color, which is why they generally have slower response times. (Doesn't matter since we want to edit photos and design layouts, not play games.) PVA's come in second with a nice mix of color and speed.

Eizo's are by far the best for graphics professionals, but the cost is very high. You get what you pay for. Apple's are up there as well in cost, mostly because of that panel. Now, the only exclusion is that alot of the Eizo's use PVA's, but you will be hard spent to find a PVA by another brand that can come anywhere NEAR an IPS.

If you can't afford an Eizo, go for an Apple, or my favorite - NEC. Dell's 2007WFP started out as an IPS, but after the reviews rolled in, they quietly replaced them with less expensive PVA's... so now its a panel lottery for which one you'd actually get. Google it to get the appropriate serial numbers so you know what to look for.

one more thing...heres one place to look to see what monitors use what panels. http://www.flatpanels.dk/panels.php (just type what panel you are looking for in the search field... i.e. IPS) *http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...=1#post1241144

Right at this moment it is $860US.

That Insight Camera is starting to look like a real bargain.

Calm down. We do have many years' history of Apple Cinema displays to go by and some of us have many years' history with other manufacturers' displays and know something of panel technology and know what to look for in a quality panel.


And how does video compare between the two? Instead of repeating yourself, you could have provided some new information such as this.


It's a question of whether we believe your judgement enough to just let it slide, not whether we agree.

Don't forget, you were completely wrong to compare a 20" to a 24".

You can't make a direct comparison between prices overseas (to the US) for a direct price comparison. The price here is higher for this.

And the Hp, as I already stated, is NOT LED based backlighting.

Not true according to Apple's web site:

After having used this new MacBook for a few weeks, I really don't think I would buy another display that isn't LED backlit. I have an Ultrasharp next to it (and when it isn't crashing due to that MacBook external display bug), the LED just looks better, it is a nicer/crisper light.

Having said that - 999$ for the 24' (apple Canada) seems a bit crazy. Is Samsung the only other company that makes LED backlit displays? If so, the Apple 24' LED is a relative bargain, although it would be nice to have the option to use it as something other than just a monitor, the mini DP is a bit limiting if you want to use it as a non computer display, unless I am missing something.

At the time, they had the best IQ. That's the main reason why people were told to buy them if they would pay the extra price.

But, actually, even that isn't quite true. Every time Apple had come out with a monitor, they were CHEAPER than any of the others, if even any others were out that matched them.

The problem is that because Apple doesn't come out with new models every 6 to 9 months as some of these others do, their prices, despite the drops, end UP being more expensive.



You'll have to try that again. I got a 404 error when I tried it.

Its difficult to get you to understand if you don't first understand that all monitors are not created equal. The cheap model is cheap because it uses an inferior panel. The expensive models are expensive because they use a superior panel.

$899, and it will likely go for $859 at Amazon, and other retailers.

Not cheap, but not expensive either for what it is, which includes the camera and mic for video chats and conferencing which the others don't.

I can't find one. Has anybody? I do know they have LED TVs and they announced last year that they were coming out with LED LCD monitors, but they have yet to be introduced.

Try http://www.macworld.com/article/6119...wxm.html?t=218

Sorry, I didn't read the previous post.


This is much the same but an even less extreme example of what happened when Apple first switched to USB and Firewire.

In 1999 there were very few peripherals that directly supported USB or Firewire. That was a much bigger problem than a display port connection. I still had old parallel to USB adaptors from that time up until I got rid of them a couple of years ago.

It looks nice, but it's also a 20" display.

I wonder what it would cost as a 24" 1920 x 1200 model?

Possiblty $200 more. That would be $500 selling price.

How about adding LED backlighting?

Another $200 to 300? Easily.

What about the camera and mic, while changing the inputs to Displayport? About the same? Powered USB hub? Glass protective front? Aluminum case and support instead of plastic and sheet steel?

I think it would be about the same as Apple's.

Other than that Samsung I think this is the only one available. I can't stress enough how much better a LED backlight looks IMHO. LED lights you use in your home have that bright/blue/white tinge to them, which is a bit irritating and why they haven't really gone mainstream, but in a display they just look fantastic. The colours just have more pop.

Hi Mel

I think we have our paths crossed. I have no argument with Apple's new 24 LED LCD and its pricing structure. We were warned last year that LED displays were going to be expensive and disproportionately more as the size increased. Obviously, it wasn't all that easy as the lack of introductions has proven it.

Considering that the only companies that seem to be close to coming up with the new technology besides Apple, i.e., LaCie and Enzio, are equally or more expensive. As such it would appear that most of the negative comments are without justification.

However, my biasness may have proceeded me and to that I really dont' care.

As I mentioned before, the 24" LED LCD Cinema Display is significantly heavier than most units of its size. Certainly the camera can't account for all of it, although the glass. However, as one who still has an original Canon F1, I still maintain that the heavier product often seemed to reflect better quality. Certainly this is evidenced in today's pc's outings.

A 2560x1600 24" monitor would have a lower pixel density than Apple's 1920x1200 17" MacBook Pro.

allright, maybe i wasn't clear enough, so I'll state it in layman's terms :

we (= me, my boss and 3 colleagues) compared, face-to-monitor two setups :

a mac with a 24" ultrasharp Dell
the same mac with a 30" apple cinema display

we did both ordinary work and graphical & video work (having a 30", you could have expected me to be in the video or CAD business, not a secretary)

we did NOT play any games in case someone wants to bring that up.

conclusion : BOTH monitors performed equally, in terms of sharpness, brightness and update speed. The cinema display gave a slight inferior impression on full-screen HD video, but that might be the video card, or the 5 of us viewers standing to close.

ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : BOTH monitors were equal from any point of view.

now PLEASE don't come up with calibration stuff and color correction, because neither of these monitors are for pre-press purposes (our pre press dept uses BARCO monitors for that, and they are not flat el-cheapo panels !)

so, here is my conclusion, to which ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : there is NO agrument whatshowever that justifies the price tag of the apple display. The ultrasharp is as good, if not better, for a fraction of the price. Hell, we could buy THREE ultrasharps and still be cheaper than the 30" cinema !

Voila. Can I get any more clearer ?

The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users. And the other 1% will not buy an apple display, but a high priced CRT.




(now i expect someone to come up with a comment about the new LED display being new technology, to which I'll massively shrudder for missing the point completely, or (even worse) come tell me that i should not compare a 30" with a 24".... that's when I call fanboyism)

I can't say I have ever seen a better display than Apples new LED LCD monitor.

Note: As far a I know, there aren't any 24" LED monitors yet available for delivery. Non, even Apple's, has hit the shelves. And I don't know of any place other than the Apple store where one can even see a demo of one.

This was addressed in another post. The Apple Cinema Display was the best when it was first introduced in 2005. Since that time they have never been updated and the price has not been reduced by much.

While Dell has refreshed its monitors many times since 2005 and reduced the price.



Well this thread is about a 24" LED Apple monitor. Not the monitors Apple started selling three years ago.

The stupidest thing Apple has done with this monitor is to not include a mini displayport to DVI adapter.

I get you want to advance the technology but wouldn't it make sense to do so with the machines first and then with the accessories?

Why release an accessory with such a limited customer base? I'm wondering it perhaps Apple isn't able to make these new Cinema Displays widely available and are purposely limiting their usefulness to Macbook, Macbook Air and Macbook Pro owners. Are they worried they wouldn't be able to supply the demand if the mini displayport to DVI adapter was included and all the Mac Pro owners want one too?

I dunno, I just got a new Mac Pro a few months ago and there is no way I'm getting a new Cinema Display until an adapter is available. I am NOT going to get a new machine or even a new video card just to get the new display.

When Apple first switched to USB and Firewire they did not include a parallel to USB adaptor. At that point the vast majority of peripherals were made for parallel ports, their was very little for USB or Firewire.

Plus this ACD is primarily intended to be used with the new MacBooks.

Dell sells a 30" UltraSharp 3008WFP with a USB 2 hub for $1999. Comparable to Apple's 30" Cinema HD Display with the same USB 2 hub but with 2 FireWire ports as well.

Of course I have to agree with you somewhat that "…Apple Cinema Displays are "FUCKING" expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users."

Image the gall of Apple to charge a whopping $200 less than Dell's. That's right, an Apple 30" Cinema Display lists at $1799 vs Dell's at $1999.

Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.

Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!

Thanks for the info on perceived video quality. I trust the Mac's graphic card was capable of supporting the full 2560x1600 resolution of the 30" display.

Note to you, your boss, and your 3 colleagues: All other things being equal, a medium-pixel count 24" display is not equivalent to a high-pixel count 30" display. The larger silicon with more pixels is disproportionately more expensive to manufacture and the panel is more difficult to illuminate evenly.

However, if you're comparing a potentially lucky purchase of a decent-looking Dell 24" display to a high quality, but discontinued 23" Apple display, and they truly are comparable in image quality, then you've got something. Not much, but something.

I couldn't agree more. I have a new Mc Pro and a Mac Mini both connected via a switcher to a 23-inch Apple display. Works fine but the advent of a new slightly larger and at the same price point Mac display with a built-in iSight was tantalizing. Built-in speakers were not necessary and I might have been able to put up with a glossy screen. But what happens? Apple puts out a display which will not work with desktops nor older laptops. They include an iSight which ALL the newest laptops have anyway. And to boot, Apple is discontinuing the 23-inch display leaving what for desktop users? Smaller 20's and honkin' 30's. And still no iSight camera built-in. Apple can make a feather-light laptop but cannot seem to be able to add an isight to a display suitable for thousands of desktop users. It really is beyond comprehension.

I think we have to wait and see what Apple comes out with during MacWorld in mid January. That's two months away, 7 weeks actually, not too long.

What you're seeing here is just about what you said Apple has done in the past, except that here, Apple has also put out a peripheral at the same time they discontinued the older port. That allows the (few) MB users who want a monitor to buy one right away. I do think that while the monitor is not overpriced for what it is, it's a bit high for what a MB user might want to spend.

Possibly a 20" would have been better for that, as it would have been cheaper. It's not clear as to how much cheaper though.

Not necessarily. What use it is to have ports but no peripherals to plug them into. For the first couple of years we had to use adaptors until the rest of the computer industry began to widely use USB.


This is true because no other Mac ships with display port. That's pretty easy to figure out.

You only see this as being stupid because you don't realize that notebooks are far outselling desktops. The purpose of this monitor is to be able to use your notebook with the advantages of a desktop.

Its very likely Apple will introduce new Mac Pros and Cinema Displays at MacWorld in January.