that IMG brings up a problem with your original resolution speculation. they wouldnt make a smaller display with more pixles then their 22" display.... also I think it is too much for ADC bandwith...
Considering what exist in the LCDscreen market : there is too maximum resolution for 19 inch screen LCD : 1280 per 1024 or 1600 per 1200 (like the ilyama AU 4831D : which permit photoshop work).
The 22 inch LCD screen have 1600 per 1024 screen format at the contrary of their CRT counterparts. They are more designed for 16/9 display. 22 inch LCD are a special format like the tibook.
Last thing a 17,4 inch LCD display (like the Ilyama AS 4431D : a MVA screen able to perform well everything (25 ms, 220 cd/m2, contraste 400:1 and 160° view angle )) is the exact size of a 19 inch screen CRT.
I don't think anyone currently makes a 19" LCD, there are 18" LCDs though.
But anyway, for Apple to make a 19" someone will have to supply a panel. I don't think Apple will get one custom cut. Generally, laptop panels are available at higher pixel densities than desktop panels.
So, if they were to release a new 19" panel, the 22" would probably change a little too.
15" 1024x768 (XGA)
17" 1280x1024 (SXGA)
19" 1440x1080 or 1400x1050 (SXGA+)
23" 1920x1200
LG has a the above listed 23" panel available soon (press release) with the interesting blurb that it will fit in existing 22" enclosures. How many manufacturers besides apple are selling a 16:10 22" LCD ??? Not many.
Also it looks like DVI can handle more than 1600x1200. It carries at least HDTV resolution (1920 x 1080) uncompressed: HAVI is considering it over Firewire. From what I've read there are two Digital standards: An early standard, upon which DVI is based, maxxed out at 1280x1024. DVI uses the same signalling but doubles the channels from 3 to 6 (1 link to 2). The DVI plug has 2 links and the older P&D (plug and display) and DFP (digital flat panel) standards had 1.
Dumb math on my part says that means it should handle at least 2048x1280.
Smart math on the part of the <a href="http://www.ddwg.org/"; target="_blank">DDWG</a> (digital designs working group), the keepers of the spec, says qxga 2048x1536 is within reach of the spec.
See page 7 of their PDF . 1600x1200 is clearly NOT the limit for DVI. Actually, at up to 60hz, 1600x1200 is within reach of the older 3 channel systems. HDTV and UXGA (1600x1200)require about the same bandwidth and both will run within spec up to 85hz. QXGA (2048x1536) will run, within DVI spec, only up to 75hz.
After reading the spec, my suspicion is that panel manufacturers were, untill now, relucant to produce *very* high res panels for the simple reason that the scaling on an LCD isn't all that great. If your video card can't drive it well, then you're stuck for all but slow 2-d work. On a CRT that was never a problem as you could just lower the resolution without any weird effects. By the time Geforce4 defines the budget graphics segment this won't be a problem any more. I think we can look for a significant increase in LCD resolutions over the next 2 years.
the spec defines the bandwidth needed to drive CRT and LCD displays. QXGA is still within the DVI spec, but for some reason you need more bandwidth to supply the same res to a CRT. hmm... there was at least one 'DVI' CRT a while back, but I think it was abandoned. Could this be something to do with electrical requirements? Or converting the signal back to analogue on the CRT? Either way, DVI has plenty of bandwidth to spare as far as LCD panels are concerned.
<strong>I don't think anyone currently makes a 19" LCD, there are 18" LCDs though.
.</strong><hr></blockquote>
19 inch screen already exist : i a m in front of A PC revue : subject the LCD screen test .
i see 2 19 inch screen ;
the ViewSonic VG 191 : 19 inch, pitch 0,294 angle of vision in both axes : 170 °, luminosity 250 cd/m2 contrast ratio 500/1 , 16,67 millions of color. time of respons 25 ms, optimal resolution 1280 per 1024, DVI and VGA input, axe (rotation of the screen) prize 2000$
the Ilyama AU 4831D : 19 inch pithc 0,2415 angle of vision in both axes : 170°, time of respons 30 ms, optimal resolution : 1600 per 1200 at 75 hz, multimedia fonctions, contrast 300:1 luminosity 200 cd/m2, 16 millions of color, axe (rotation of the screen), hub USB, input D-sub andDVI prise 2500$.
so they are at least 2 panel in the market. The idea of leonis is not stupid;
I didn't think a 19" was a bad idea at all. It fills a significant jump from the 17 to the 22. But it won't happen so long as the available 19" choices offer either no improvment in res over the 17" (1280x1024), or alternatively offer more pixels than the 22" (1600x1200 for a 19" vs 1600x1024 for the 22").
To be honest, I find 1600x1200 on a 21" CRT (about 19.5 viewable) a little eye straining. But a nice -- sharp, high contrast, and flicker free -- LCD would probably be more readable at the same res.
hrmmm...
With 19" 1600x1200 available, but priced the same as Apple's 22", I just don't know. Personally, I think the 22" is the better deal. Even if it has slightly less pixels, it's just so big and readable. There's really no point in offering a 19" that costs as much as the 22". Likewise there's no reason to offer a 19" that hasn't more pixels than the 17" which is the only other option right now.
No, I think we'll only see a 19" when the Cinema display moves up to a 1920x1200 23" panel.
Then we'll probably get 1600x1200 in a 19". Or someone may decide that an SXGA+ (1400x1050 or 1440x1080) is the best comprimise between detail and readability at that size. I think so, but no one offers that yet.
Comments
If anything another 17" display that is widescreen and as tall as the 15" display. That would make more sense I think...
Actually that would be cool an actual 16:9 ratio on a display....
1600X768?
However if the 19" has the same aspect ratio to the cinema display then I would think 1600x1024 will make sense.
Otherwise it will require another 'special' (or proprietary) card to get a weird resolution. But I think it's very unlikely.
The 22 inch LCD screen have 1600 per 1024 screen format at the contrary of their CRT counterparts. They are more designed for 16/9 display. 22 inch LCD are a special format like the tibook.
Last thing a 17,4 inch LCD display (like the Ilyama AS 4431D : a MVA screen able to perform well everything (25 ms, 220 cd/m2, contraste 400:1 and 160° view angle )) is the exact size of a 19 inch screen CRT.
<strong>If there is a 19" LCD it will be taller then the current 22"... I don't think this will happen...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's the problem with that ? all 19 inch screen are taller than 22 inch screen but they are less large.
22 inch screen are better for DVD but 1600 per 1200 19 inch screen are better for photoshop (smaller pitch 0,2415 against 0,29 for the 22 inch)
But anyway, for Apple to make a 19" someone will have to supply a panel. I don't think Apple will get one custom cut. Generally, laptop panels are available at higher pixel densities than desktop panels.
So, if they were to release a new 19" panel, the 22" would probably change a little too.
15" 1024x768 (XGA)
17" 1280x1024 (SXGA)
19" 1440x1080 or 1400x1050 (SXGA+)
23" 1920x1200
LG has a the above listed 23" panel available soon (press release) with the interesting blurb that it will fit in existing 22" enclosures. How many manufacturers besides apple are selling a 16:10 22" LCD ??? Not many.
Also it looks like DVI can handle more than 1600x1200. It carries at least HDTV resolution (1920 x 1080) uncompressed: HAVI is considering it over Firewire. From what I've read there are two Digital standards: An early standard, upon which DVI is based, maxxed out at 1280x1024. DVI uses the same signalling but doubles the channels from 3 to 6 (1 link to 2). The DVI plug has 2 links and the older P&D (plug and display) and DFP (digital flat panel) standards had 1.
Dumb math on my part says that means it should handle at least 2048x1280.
Smart math on the part of the <a href="http://www.ddwg.org/"; target="_blank">DDWG</a> (digital designs working group), the keepers of the spec, says qxga 2048x1536 is within reach of the spec.
See page 7 of their PDF . 1600x1200 is clearly NOT the limit for DVI. Actually, at up to 60hz, 1600x1200 is within reach of the older 3 channel systems. HDTV and UXGA (1600x1200)require about the same bandwidth and both will run within spec up to 85hz. QXGA (2048x1536) will run, within DVI spec, only up to 75hz.
After reading the spec, my suspicion is that panel manufacturers were, untill now, relucant to produce *very* high res panels for the simple reason that the scaling on an LCD isn't all that great. If your video card can't drive it well, then you're stuck for all but slow 2-d work. On a CRT that was never a problem as you could just lower the resolution without any weird effects. By the time Geforce4 defines the budget graphics segment this won't be a problem any more. I think we can look for a significant increase in LCD resolutions over the next 2 years.
the spec defines the bandwidth needed to drive CRT and LCD displays. QXGA is still within the DVI spec, but for some reason you need more bandwidth to supply the same res to a CRT. hmm... there was at least one 'DVI' CRT a while back, but I think it was abandoned. Could this be something to do with electrical requirements? Or converting the signal back to analogue on the CRT? Either way, DVI has plenty of bandwidth to spare as far as LCD panels are concerned.
<strong>I don't think anyone currently makes a 19" LCD, there are 18" LCDs though.
.</strong><hr></blockquote>
19 inch screen already exist : i a m in front of A PC revue : subject the LCD screen test .
i see 2 19 inch screen ;
the ViewSonic VG 191 : 19 inch, pitch 0,294 angle of vision in both axes : 170 °, luminosity 250 cd/m2 contrast ratio 500/1 , 16,67 millions of color. time of respons 25 ms, optimal resolution 1280 per 1024, DVI and VGA input, axe (rotation of the screen) prize 2000$
the Ilyama AU 4831D : 19 inch pithc 0,2415 angle of vision in both axes : 170°, time of respons 30 ms, optimal resolution : 1600 per 1200 at 75 hz, multimedia fonctions, contrast 300:1 luminosity 200 cd/m2, 16 millions of color, axe (rotation of the screen), hub USB, input D-sub andDVI prise 2500$.
so they are at least 2 panel in the market. The idea of leonis is not stupid;
To be honest, I find 1600x1200 on a 21" CRT (about 19.5 viewable) a little eye straining. But a nice -- sharp, high contrast, and flicker free -- LCD would probably be more readable at the same res.
hrmmm...
With 19" 1600x1200 available, but priced the same as Apple's 22", I just don't know. Personally, I think the 22" is the better deal. Even if it has slightly less pixels, it's just so big and readable. There's really no point in offering a 19" that costs as much as the 22". Likewise there's no reason to offer a 19" that hasn't more pixels than the 17" which is the only other option right now.
No, I think we'll only see a 19" when the Cinema display moves up to a 1920x1200 23" panel.
Then we'll probably get 1600x1200 in a 19". Or someone may decide that an SXGA+ (1400x1050 or 1440x1080) is the best comprimise between detail and readability at that size. I think so, but no one offers that yet.
<strong>
When I see this, the obvious hole to me is the Widescreen version of the 15" display.
So it seems to me that 1280 X 768 would be reasonable.
I don't need a 22" display, but the 15" is too small for me (I know because it's what I use now).
I don't need tons of vertical res, just wider, and a 19" CD would be great.
Summary
19" Cinema Display 1280 x 768
If anything, all-widescreen displays.
17" 1440x960, 19" 1600x1024, 22" 2***x1***
<strong>er, that would have no market. A more expensive display that is smaller than the 17"?
If anything, all-widescreen displays.
17" 1440x960, 19" 1600x1024, 22" 2***x1***</strong><hr></blockquote>
And a 15.2" display - 1152x768. i.e. Use the PowerBook G4's screen in a Studio Display.