Apple hit with another "millions of colors" lawsuit

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 133
    londorlondor Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    I'm not talking about the specs. page (where the only clue that the 20" is a TN-panel is that it has a lower viewing-angle than the 24"), I'm talking about the information provided here.



    Sorry but i fail to see why after reading that page you get to the conclusion that both screens have the same kind of panel. It is like reading THIS and getting to the conclusion that both models, 20" and 24", weigh the same.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post


    Apple products cost a premium.



    Apple needs to be held accountable. Macs are used by design professionals everyday. The screens, if attached, need to be usable for that type of work. When you're in the prepress business, color variations mean a lot.



    Apple machines used to be prohibitively expensive but they are not anymore. So expecting the same quality is not possible.



    And if you need to do professional work then buy a pro machine and not a consumer one.
  • Reply 82 of 133
    datamodeldatamodel Posts: 126member
    It looks like the choices were:



    Make the 17" even cheaper, retaining the 6-bit panel (although it doesn't sell so well)

    Make the 17" more expensive, with an 8-bit panel

    Make a 20" cheaper than the existing 17", retaining the 6-bit tech

    Make a 20" with an 8-bit panel, leaving nothing at the price point of the old 17"

    Make a 17" AND a 20" model



    And on the marketing front, how to talk up the 6-bit dithered display? It's shit but cheap? You won't notice the difference? Displays millions of colours, well, looks exactly like it does, but doesn't calibrate so well?



    There's a lot of (justified) moaning, but out of interest, if you were Apple, what would you have done at the time of the product transition?



    Cheers,



    Martin.
  • Reply 83 of 133
    datamodeldatamodel Posts: 126member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    Sorry but i fail to see why after reading that page you get to the conclusion that both screens have the same kind of panel. It is like reading THIS and getting to the conclusion that both models, 20" and 24", weigh the same.



    Um, yeah - the page shows different viewing angles, resolutions, brightness AND contrast...



    The only common claims are that they're TFT's with millions of colours.



    Cheers,



    Martin.
  • Reply 84 of 133
    ruel24ruel24 Posts: 432member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    Apple machines used to be prohibitively expensive but they are not anymore. So expecting the same quality is not possible.



    And if you need to do professional work then buy a pro machine and not a consumer one.



    No, Apple used to use completely proprietary technology like NuBus cards, ADB, etc. that caused such high prices. When they switched to USB, Firewire, and PCI, the cost of the technology came down considerably. Now, the use of the open x86 platform has further reduced cost, all thanks to mass production of such technologies.



    Even after the switch to more affordable technology, Apple still commands a premium. Price a nice 24" iMac and compare what you could get from Alienware for the same money. It's night and day. Now, I know the iMac is made from more expensive laptop components, and it's not an apples to Apple comparison, but you get the drift.



    As far as the pro work and pro machines, I got out of the prepress industry some time ago, but do you realize how expensive it is to use nothing but Mac Pros and Cinema Displays? Back when I was in, we had everything from top of the line Quadras to low line Performas at the shop, depending on the job you were doing. Because of Apple's former high standards in the hardware department, and the fact that you had a separate monitor, this was doable. Their claims of such high quality displays, no doubt, has caused many people to buy without realizing they've been duped.
  • Reply 85 of 133
    londorlondor Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post


    Even after the switch to more affordable technology, Apple still commands a premium. Price a nice 24" iMac and compare what you could get from Alienware for the same money. It's night and day. Now, I know the iMac is made from more expensive laptop components, and it's not an apples to Apple comparison, but you get the drift.



    The iMacs are very competitively priced being even cheaper than similar all-in-one offerings by Dell, Sony, etc.



    Quote:

    As far as the pro work and pro machines, I got out of the prepress industry some time ago, but do you realize how expensive it is to use nothing but Mac Pros and Cinema Displays?



    I know it is expensive but as I said if you want to do pro work you should not get a consumer model.
  • Reply 86 of 133
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    I'm not talking about the specs. page (where the only clue that the 20" is a TN-panel is that it has a lower viewing-angle than the 24"), I'm talking about the information provided here.



    Jeez, if you can reach the apple site you can also google "iMac 20" teardown" which by August 9th Kodawarisan had already done and let everyone know that the panel was a

    LG Philips LM201WE3...a TN panel and that info was all over the net on Apple and camera sites like DP Review. So there's a whole 2 day window from launch to widespread knowledge that the 20" had a 6 bit + A-FRC TN panel (spec'd by LG.Philips to 16.7M colors - so I guess A-FRC is the same as Hi-FRC) and the 24" had a S-IPS.



    Anyway, here's a powerpoint document describing how FRC and Hi-FRC works:



    http://prohardver.hu/dl/rev/2007-03/...ccz/hi-frc.pdf



    A little hard to follow in a few places but I think most folks here can figure it out.



    Either way...the 6 bit panels CAN do millions of colors. The downside is that they do so with some artifacting (banding/dithering in gradients/flicker/etc) visible on some images to some folks.
  • Reply 87 of 133
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by winterspan View Post


    This really pisses me off! Apple keeps making more and more money with their sales at astronomical levels, and yet they continue to get GREEDIER! Why can't they actually IMPROVE the quality of their products while getting more popular??



    They've always had the inferior panels in the cheapest iMac model. They have put better ones in the larger iMac. So it's not necessarily that the $2000 model necessarily has the TN panel.
  • Reply 88 of 133
    techboytechboy Posts: 183member
    Of all things in the world that is wrong RIGHT now, this lawsuit important in what ways?



    False advertsing isn't new people! Yes, Apple should be held accountable and have their "words" corrected. First settlement isn't enough, now we have more leechers trying to get a piece of Apple's piece? If you FEEL so victimized by Apple, for everyone's sake STOP buying their products.



    Our own government lied to us about Middle East war and what are we doing? Protests? Maybe we should start suing Bush and Congress to get some results in this country!
  • Reply 89 of 133
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    The iMacs are very competitively priced being even cheaper than similar all-in-one offerings by Dell, Sony, etc.



    I think that's framing the argument though. Apple choses to make the all-in-one type because it's the most expensive kind of consumer desktop.
  • Reply 90 of 133
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post


    As far as the pro work and pro machines, I got out of the prepress industry some time ago, but do you realize how expensive it is to use nothing but Mac Pros and Cinema Displays?



    So get a $1199 or $1499 20" iMac and add a S-IPS monitor of your choice except, alas, the 30". Then again the iMac only went to 24" anyway. I guess you could do the Dell 27" but it's S-PVA.
  • Reply 91 of 133
    datamodeldatamodel Posts: 126member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Anyway, here's a powerpoint document describing how FRC and Hi-FRC works:



    http://prohardver.hu/dl/rev/2007-03/...ccz/hi-frc.pdf



    A little hard to follow in a few places but I think most folks here can figure it out.



    I think the summary is that it when it gets 8 bit input, it shows 6, and uses the top two and a synthetically generated one to create an extra three.



    It displays the six, and uses the three extra to control the pixel brightness (on-off) over a four-frame time period, so the table from the PDF has:



    6 bit 8 bit

    0 0

    0.25 1

    0.50 2

    0.75 3

    1 4



    And the human eye blends the change in luminance over the four frames, in a similar way to how the sub-pixels blend into a single colour.



    We'll see what the court says I suppose, assuming Apple don't settle again.
  • Reply 92 of 133
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Jeez, if you can reach the apple site you can also google "iMac 20" teardown"



    How many computer purchasers are going to do that? How many are even going to think of doing that?





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    So there's a whole 2 day window from launch to widespread knowledge that the 20" had a 6 bit + A-FRC TN panel … and the 24" had a S-IPS.



    yeah "widespread" amongst all us Apple geeks here. Certainly not widespread amongst the rest of the world's computer-buying population. Indeed, there is plenty of evidence in this thread that even this story's "revelation" of the 20" being TN was news to some people, despite it quickly following previous stories about the iMac's LCD panels.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by datamodel View Post


    Um, yeah - the page shows different viewing angles, resolutions, brightness AND contrast...



    No, the specifications page show that. The information page clearly implies both screens deliver equal-quality images; they do not. It is simple - Apple's information page is misleading. Is anyone here brazen enough to try and argue it wouldn't be clearer if Apple just stated straight-up that one panel is TN and the other IPS?
  • Reply 93 of 133
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    yeah "widespread" amongst all us Apple geeks here. Certainly not widespread amongst the rest of the world's computer-buying population. Indeed, there is plenty of evidence in this thread that even this story's "revelation" of the 20" being TN was news to some people, despite it quickly following previous stories about the iMac's LCD panels.



    I dunno why pro users wouldn't do the proper research before a major purchase. They all should know they want high quality panels for their work so making sure that they have the monitor they need seems like one of the top purchasing criteria.



    Google IS widespread. iMac and panel is not a hard pair of keywords to think up either. Figuring out who the source for the panel would be high on my list of technical critera to find out and the limitations of TN panels is also widely known.



    Also, if you're looking at iMacs you might have noticed that the previous 17" iMac had a TN panel and the 20" is now sitting in its space.



    Digital camera forums also had the info and it wasn't hard to find if you looked.
  • Reply 94 of 133
    londorlondor Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    The information page clearly implies both screens deliver equal-quality images



    It does not.
  • Reply 95 of 133
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    It is simple - Apple's information page is misleading. Is anyone here brazen enough to try and argue it wouldn't be clearer if Apple just stated straight-up that one panel is TN and the other IPS?



    If they did provide that information at best it would be in the specs page and not the marketing information page.



    Yes, it would be clearer but really, few manufacturers do that. Care to tell me what kind of panel the Dell UltraSharp 2408WFP uses using only the Dell site?
  • Reply 96 of 133
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    It does not.



    Sure it does. It provides one lot of text to cover both the 20" and 24" iMac. It makes no reference (direct or indirect) to the fact that the two machines use different technology panels.
  • Reply 97 of 133
    londorlondor Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Sure it does. It provides one lot of text to cover both the 20" and 24" iMac. It makes no reference (direct or indirect) to the fact that the two machines use different technology panels.



    It does not say at any point that both panels use the same technology either. It just says that pictures on the iMac screen look stunning because of its glossy display which has nothing to do with the quality of the panel.
  • Reply 98 of 133
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    It does not say at any point that both panels use the same technology either. It just says that pictures on the iMac screen look stunning because of its glossy display not because of the quality of the panel.



    If you use exactly the same text to describe the picture quality of two different machines, that in my book implies the picture quality of the two machines is identical. Since the picture quality is not identical, the provided information is misleading.
  • Reply 99 of 133
    londorlondor Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    If you use exactly the same text to describe the picture quality of two different machines, that in my book implies the picture quality of the two machines is identical. Since the picture quality is not identical, the provided information is misleading.



    It does never talk about picture quality. It just states that pictures look stunning (rich, vivid colour) because of the glossy display.
  • Reply 100 of 133
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Londor View Post


    It does never talk about the picture quality. It just states that pictures look stunning (rich, vivid colour) because of the glossy display.



    Now that really does take the biscuit!



    Pray tell, how is that text not talking about the picture quality of the display?
Sign In or Register to comment.