23" LCD

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
it seems like everyone is pretty much focusing on the imac price increase, the negative points, of the keynote.



what do people think of the new display?



it sounds like it would be good for professionals. for me, who has been drooling over the current ACD, it's a little high. definately a professional screen. the 22" has now be moved to the consumer/prosumer range of buyers. with considering the price, the 22" is very attractive for people to splurge on, to take out a loan.



on the other hand, the 23" seems it is for the professionals or companies who have thousands of dollars allocated for computers.



any thoughts?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I like it, but I don't like the price. A couple of hundred dollars cheaper would've been nice.
  • Reply 2 of 24
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    just for kicks i checked the numbers.



    the 23" monitor is 41% more screen real estate, for only 40% more money!



    that's like 1% for free.







    point is in my case, both are waaaay out of my price range.
  • Reply 3 of 24
    mjemje Posts: 91member
    alcimedes:



    Did the 22" go down in price at all? Its at 2499 now.
  • Reply 4 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by MJE:

    <strong>alcimedes:



    Did the 22" go down in price at all? Its at 2499 now.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Nope. Same price.
  • Reply 5 of 24
    This is the revision to the Cinema Display I've been waiting for. I'll be ordering one next month :-) Developer pricing is $2799, can't beat that
  • Reply 6 of 24
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    shit you bastard!!!!



    nice prices there. if i'd taken those into account my numbers might have only been waay out of my range, instead of waaaay out of my range.
  • Reply 7 of 24
    Anyone up for robbing a bank?





    Apple's prices going up, up, up and AWAY!!!!!!!!



    Listen closely, hear that? Ssssh, listen!~



    That is the sound of Apple's market share slipping away...
  • Reply 8 of 24
    [quote]Originally posted by EmAn:

    <strong>I like it, but I don't like the price. A couple of hundred dollars cheaper would've been nice.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Why? Could you afford it then?
  • Reply 9 of 24
    agent302agent302 Posts: 974member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Anyone up for robbing a bank?





    Apple's prices going up, up, up and AWAY!!!!!!!!



    Listen closely, hear that? Ssssh, listen!~



    That is the sound of Apple's market share slipping away...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The only prices that increased were on the iMac. 5 gig iPod is still the same price, 22 inch ACD is same price. Stop bitching.
  • Reply 10 of 24
    evil edevil ed Posts: 106member
    I think the 23" is being overlooked.



    If you read the tech specs it shares the same brightness and contrast ratio as the 17" which was previously the brightest display. Thus, the quality of the display is better than it's 22" predecessor as well as the fact that it's a higher resolution and physically larger in size.



    At £2599 +VAT I think it's worth the money. Our MD spent almost twice that last year on a 24" Samsung with a resolution equal to the new ACD.
  • Reply 11 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by CharlieBrownGirl:

    <strong>



    Why? Could you afford it then?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Of course not. I don't even have a Mac I could use it with (iBook). I just think the price is a drop too high.
  • Reply 12 of 24
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    I think this display is fitting into their Hollywood plans. They're calling it the Apple Cinema HD Display, and they're marketing it as able to edit high definition content.



    Now, if only the high-performance CPU leg of the strategy would come...
  • Reply 13 of 24
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by EmAn:

    <strong>I like it, but I don't like the price. A couple of hundred dollars cheaper would've been nice.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> damn! only 3300 to blow, why must you taunt me with your 3500 pricing!!!





    was there a change in tech? apple is marketing this as capable of color sensitive work! that is a helluva step up from the old acd, extra inch be damned.
  • Reply 14 of 24
    spotbugspotbug Posts: 361member
    Yeah, I'm not getting one 'cause I don't want to break one of my thousand dollar bills (you get all sorts of icky denominations).



    Now, at $4000 even, sure.
  • Reply 15 of 24
    falconfalcon Posts: 458member
    Well since your dont using those 1k bills (cough) why dont you send a couple my way, im a needy non-mac user!
  • Reply 16 of 24
    spotbugspotbug Posts: 361member
    [quote]Originally posted by Falcon:

    <strong>Well since your dont using those 1k bills (cough) why dont you send a couple my way, im a needy non-mac user! </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hmmm... this stack is getting a little tall. Looks like it's getting ready to fall over. I should probably get rid of some of these.



    Oh wait, I just took half the bills and made two stacks. Problem solved. Sorry.
  • Reply 17 of 24
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    I think it's being overlooked because it's attractive to people who don't have time to post to online discussion boards.



    Seriously, though, it sounds significantly better than the old Cinema Display, which is now in the bottom tier with the 15" for overall picture quality. I hope they fix that, to restore its near-perfect droolworthiness.



    I imagine there are a number of video professionals dancing on their desks right now. The individuals and companies that could use this monitor won't even blink at the price.
  • Reply 18 of 24
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    [quote]A couple of hundred dollars cheaper would've been nice.<hr></blockquote>



    So at $3299 you're all over this thing?







    It's too expensive for you. It might as well be $18 bajillion as far as you and I are concerned.
  • Reply 19 of 24
    spotbugspotbug Posts: 361member
    [quote]Originally posted by groverat:

    <strong>It might as well be $18 bajillion as far as you and I are concerned.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    $18 bajillion? Nuts! So close.



    Now, if it were only 17 bajillion, 999 zagillion, 999 panillion, 999 octillion, 999 septillion, 999 sextillion, 999 quintillion, 999 quadrillion, 999 trillion, 999 billion, 999 million, 999 thousand, 800 dollars, then I'd be interested.





    [ok, so I don't know how it goes after "octillion" - I made it up.]
  • Reply 20 of 24
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    [quote]Originally posted by Amorph:

    <strong>I think it's being overlooked because it's attractive to people who don't have time to post to online discussion boards.



    Seriously, though, it sounds significantly better than the old Cinema Display, which is now in the bottom tier with the 15" for overall picture quality. I hope they fix that, to restore its near-perfect droolworthiness.



    I imagine there are a number of video professionals dancing on their desks right now. The individuals and companies that could use this monitor won't even blink at the price.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    yep. For once is clearly on the right side of the price-performance curve. In fact, even with the 400 dollar adaptor needed to run this beast on a PC, it's still a better deal than any LCD's (and a few CRT's too) available for high-def video work.



    [ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.