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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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!
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.
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
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
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
The information page clearly implies both screens deliver equal-quality images
It does 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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?