New Apple Cinema Display?

1356710

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 193
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,351member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I'm hoping that Displayport beats out HDMI, but it's early to try to call. Anyway, I think we'll see 3200x2048 before we see 3840x2400.



    For computers HDMI is a non starter. It has license fees and a connecter that doesn't latch on firmaly. HDMI will be "the" format for Consumer Electronics but I see DisplayPort taking over and becoming the next thing for computers. UDI the competitor is all but dead.



    DisplayPort can do 2560x1600 rez with one small connector. DisplayPort 2.0 will double the bandwith enabling 3840x2400 rez. Despite claims it can carry audio and it also has a channel that can carry other types of signals.



    Expect to see DisplayPort take off next year as LCD manf start adding the ports to their product line and Intel delivers their ICH10 chip which supports HDMI/DisplayPort/DVDI and encryption.



    Another tidbit I've learned is that the DisplayPort spec defines an internal and external connection. There's a feature that basically allows LCD manf to receive a Displayport signal without the bulk of a tranceiver. It should enable thinner LCD designs is the take home point from VESA. We'll see.
  • Reply 42 of 193
    eroseros Posts: 23member
    Do you think apple would/need to wait for Displayport?
  • Reply 43 of 193
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eros View Post


    Do you think apple would/need to wait for Displayport?



    It would be odd for Apple to release new ACDs now without HDMI, DisplayPort, or both -- especially without Resolution Independence to drive ACD uptake.
  • Reply 44 of 193
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,351member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I'm hoping that Displayport beats out HDMI, but it's early to try to call. Anyway, I think we'll see 3200x2048 before we see 3840x2400.



    9.2 Megapixel monitors have been available for a while.



    Viewsonic VP2290b (AKA IBM T221)





    Definitely not for gaming with the slow refresh rate but it's a pixel eating beast.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Karelia


    Apple won't release a display with a resolution of 1920x1080, I am 100% certain of this. Why? Because that's a 16:9 aspect ratio, used only for LCD TV's. 1920x1200 is more realistic, since it's a 16:10 aspect ratio (the ratio that widescreen monitors use). Don't worry, like the 23" HD Cinema, I'm sure it will be 1080p-capable.



    Yes true my gaffe. The 20" will be 1920x1200 sometimes I cheat and just call them 1080 screens but they're not.





    Apple will probably wait until it's cheap to support the technology. Since DisplayPort is License Free it makes far more financial sense than HDMI. Intel has DisplayPort technology built right into the Eastlake chipset so I expect many vendors to begin taking advantage.
  • Reply 45 of 193
    samnuvasamnuva Posts: 225member
    Why would anyone need somthing bigger than a 30' Display- those things are way to huge as it is.

    Also, about the iSight, what was wrong with the external one? Make it again, Apple.
  • Reply 46 of 193
    lorrelorre Posts: 396member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samnuva View Post


    Why would anyone need somthing bigger than a 30' Display- those things are way to huge as it is.



    50 inch multi-touch screens FTW
  • Reply 47 of 193
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samnuva View Post


    Why would anyone need somthing bigger than a 30' Display- those things are way to huge as it is.



    I certainly don't want a monitor larger than 30 feet on my desktop. I would prefer a 20" monitor with 2560x1600 or greater resolution.
  • Reply 48 of 193
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samnuva View Post


    Why would anyone need somthing bigger than a 30' Display- those things are way to huge as it is.



    If you are a designer and work with After Effects, FCP, Photoshop, Illustrator. you will appreciate a larger screen. I have one 30" and one 23" I would not mind getting another 30" to replace my 23". Or maybe just have one large single display. Maybe 37"+.



    Sure will be expensive at first, but it would be amazing such display. I would say bring it on!
  • Reply 49 of 193
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Samnuva View Post


    Why would anyone need somthing bigger than a 30' Display- those things are way to huge as it is.



    I'd like to have a 37-40" computer display and I'd sell my 37" TV. I'd have no need for both if the computer display was comparable in size to the TV. It would save a lot of space in my small apartment, not having both.
  • Reply 50 of 193
    So has anyone heard any dates that realistic for a refresh? I'm hoping for LED in order to maintain brightness over time... my old Cinema Display is looking dim.



    I'm not sure if LED's will go that large... they don't even make a 17" MBP LED yet... Any news on LED backlights for these?
  • Reply 51 of 193
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Loungepop View Post


    So has anyone heard any dates that realistic for a refresh? I'm hoping for LED in order to maintain brightness over time... my old Cinema Display is looking dim.



    I'm not sure if LED's will go that large... they don't even make a 17" MBP LED yet... Any news on LED backlights for these?



    I would not expect the next ACDs to have LED backlighting. Someday, but not in 2007.
  • Reply 52 of 193
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,910member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I certainly don't want a monitor larger than 30 feet on my desktop. I would prefer a 20" monitor with 2560x1600 or greater resolution.



    I think you were the only one who caught the ' instead of " .
  • Reply 53 of 193
    royboyroyboy Posts: 452member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I would not expect the next ACDs to have LED backlighting. Someday, but not in 2007.





    Jan. 2008?
  • Reply 54 of 193
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Royboy View Post


    Jan. 2008?



    Nah, we haven't even seen a prevalence of small LED backlit displays yet. The 17" MBP doesn't have one yet. I think the big ones are still a year or two away.
  • Reply 55 of 193
    Hmm... so we're likely just looking at some aesthetic updates and isight? I care more for the screen quality... no updates expected with regard to the screen technology itself?
  • Reply 56 of 193
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Loungepop View Post


    Hmm... so we're likely just looking at some aesthetic updates and isight? I care more for the screen quality... no updates expected with regard to the screen technology itself?



    I expected new ADCs a year ago so who knows what and when we'll see new ones.



    Apple might wait until resolution independence is ready in OS X and then release tighter resolution displays. 100 ppi is kind of old but I don't think most people want any higher until menus, palettes and the like can be resized.
  • Reply 57 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I would not expect the next ACDs to have LED backlighting. Someday, but not in 2007.



    I don't see why. The TV guys are doing LCD with LED backlighting now, and those take a few more LEDs than a Cinema Display.



    It's not a technical issue, so it may still be a cost issue. I am willing to pay a bit of a premium (<50%) for LED, so I think the time draws near for some people anyway.
  • Reply 58 of 193
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Isomorphic View Post


    I am willing to pay a bit of a premium (<50%) for LED, so I think the time draws near for some people anyway.



    You would pay up to 50% more for a LED display? Why? To save a few watts?



    I understand energy conservation and all but are there any other real benefits? Longevity? Forgive my ignorance if there's a major difference I'm not aware of.



    Most people think (and I hope Apple knows) that Cinema Displays are already too pricey compared to the competition. To add more than about 5% to the price, just for an LED lit display, would be a mistake, IMO.
  • Reply 59 of 193
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iDave View Post


    You would pay up to 50% more for a LED display? Why? To save a few watts?



    Watts. Longevity. Color.
  • Reply 60 of 193
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Whilst the product design of the Cinema Display family hasn't changed since they were launched a few years ago, the actual panels employed have been revised several times. Does anybody know how the panels employed in the current line-up compare with the competition?



    I've been impressed with the 20" in the past, but the 23" always had a pink cast and seemed to suffer from a lot of pixel anomalies. I've yet to meet a 30" user who hasn't experienced the dancing pixels 'characteristic'.
Sign In or Register to comment.