Dell's 3008WFP is the first monitor with DisplayPort, but other 30-inch LCDs offer better performance and value.
$1999
Excerpt:
That's DELL's top of the line release for CES.
We shall see what Apple releases shortly.
Do you really think an excerpt from one article is supposed to somehow show that it is a terrible monitor? Especially one which is in no way a professional review. Especially when you are touting ACDs as being superior, presumably in terms of their professional qualities (SWOP certification, etc.) You could have at least found a professional review. I will bite though.
It is rated poorly in terms of photos. Was it calibrated? Probably not. In fact, I am sure it wasn't considering the negative rating in movies with the reds and pinks. While it should have decent calibration out of the box. Most of us know better. And since Mac OS has a decent calibration tool there is no excuse for not using it. Even if they weren't on a Mac, if you are going to review displays at the very least calibrate the thing. The lack of such action makes this review worthless in regards to professional quality. So their gripes were essentially with color, which can be fixed with calibration.
Now, if we are talking performance relative to price. This review is worthless and here is why.
They finally qualify performance relative to value at the bottom of the page, by comparing it to the Samsung 305T. Coming in at only $1179. Wow, amazing right? No. The Samsung uses an S-PVA panel. In case you didn't get the memo, panel tech goes like this from least to greatest: TN --> PVA --> IPS. They also don't seem to mention that the Samsung only have a Dual-link DVI. No scaler. No analog inputs. Just one input. Sounds a lot like the ACD. Wait, it actually sounds like it is even more comparable to the Dell 3007WFP, which was the older model of the Dell 30". In fact, it comes in at nearly the same price @ $1189. Oh, but there is more. The Dell 3007WFP has an S-IPS panel in it. The same one as the current 30" Apple display. Which the reviewer of course is completely oblivious to. As there was no mention of panel tech at all in the article. Again questioning its professional credibility. Which it is clear there is none of here.
Now, would the Dell have gotten a better review had it been calibrated? Would it have gotten a better review if the writer wasn't a cheap ass and actually gave a fair comparison? I don't know, but based on the way it was written I would have to say yes as those two things would account for the shoddy color and its high price tag relative to other panels.
I find it laughable that you would even link to a review that deems the 305T a better display than the Dell, especially when purporting that Apple makes better displays. Because if you would have payed attention you would know that the Dell uses the new LG Panel, which for graphics professionals (the market for ACDs) is the cream of the crop when it comes to panels.
And again, pay attention here. Apple will use the same panel as the new Dell if they update the panels. Just like they have in the past. As with the previous Dell and the ACD:
Next time don't run to google to find a bad review of a product. And again, this in no way presumes that any display Apple releases will be inferior since it uses the same panel, as I mentioned there is more to a display than its panel. However, don't let the "Dell is bad quality," garbage cloud your judgement and lead you to make asinine claims about their quality in regards to the panels they use. Because on that premise many of the beloved ACD would fall under the same classification of bad quality.
I have in my lab the old Dell 30" (I guess the '06 model...might be 05...dunno its the old one), the 3007 30" and the 30" ACD. The 3007 and ACD are pretty much the same although the ACD looks nicer to me style wise. I didn't have any uniformity problems with any of the Dells and the '06 model was just fine. I use a 30" ACD on my desktop since I choose the Mac Pro over the Dell Precision for my personal workstation.
There's nothing wrong with the Dells. Suneohair is right...they have the same panels and work pretty well. Dunno that I'd use PCWorld as a review site for my purchase decisions for high end monitors...
You have provided some useful insights on panel tech and its comparative merits. This will help me with my choices when, or if, Apple produces a replacement for the the ACDs.
I just went to Dell's website to check out the 3008 panel and was disappointed that the tech specs didn't mention any of what you were talking about. There were no references to the panel being S-IPS or what LUT was used. The only quality statement I could find was a 100% NTSC color gamut claim.
It would be nice to see vendors make these stats available to us so that we can compare tech.
You have provided some useful insights on panel tech and its comparative merits. This will help me with my choices when, or if, Apple produces a replacement for the the ACDs.
I just went to Dell's website to check out the 3008 panel and was disappointed that the tech specs didn't mention any of what you were talking about. There were no references to the panel being S-IPS or what LUT was used. The only quality statement I could find was a 100% NTSC color gamut claim.
It would be nice to see vendors make these stats available to us so that we can compare tech.
In terms of the panels used, I agree. Apple, Dell and man other companies should share their specs to a higher degree including the panel type. Much of what is figured out currently is through price and specs with a little detective work.
In terms of the 3008WFP, Dell has made the statement that it is an IPS panel. If you take a look at that CNET link, CNET said it was a PVA panel and Dell responded and told them it was an IPS. It is in read toward the top of the review section. Based on the specs it definitely matches that of the LG panel I mentioned, which includes the gamut coverage. Take a look here at the LM300WQ5: http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/homeCon...prd200_j_e.jsp
The Dell specs match that, the one difference which is a common one is the response time. Dell is obviously slower. This is because the parts they use (image processor, etc) cause the display to be slightly slower. Many companies underrate their panels this way.
If you look at the LM230WU3, which is the panel in the Apple 23", you will also notice how Apple rates it at 14ms, while the panel itself is 12ms.
Most likely we won't see them starting to tell us these things, so we will still have to do detective work. It makes us more informed consumers in my opinion. Because even if they told me what it was, I would still have to know what that means and how it impacts my buying decision.
If they update the displays, I will definitely try to pin down which panels they are. Here is some speculation though. If they move the 23" to a 24" it will most likely be the panel used in the new 24" iMac: LM240WU2, which is also used by NEC in their LCD2490WUXi. The move from 23" to 24" is very likely, as there just aren't any new 23" panels out there. As I said before, I imagine the 30" will use the same panel as the Dell, LM300WQ5. There is the LM300WQ3, but we will have to wait and see the specs to determine this for sure. The 20" could be the LM201WE2, which is used in the popular Nec 20" display and is an AS-IPS panel.
NEC is actually one of the companies that tells you a bit more about their displays. And they are generally some of the best pro displays out there. Take a look at their brochure for the 90 series: http://www.necdisplay.com/cms/docume...chure_0107.pdf
They mention the IPS panel and the 12-but LUT.
Hope that helps you more. I am looking forward to updated ACDs myself, finally going to get that 30"!
In terms of the panels used, I agree... Hope that helps you more. I am looking forward to updated ACDs myself, finally going to get that 30"!
Yes, thank you. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this just to see if the product is professional quality or not. You would think that Apple, especially in the higher-end displays, would be trumpeting this info to all who can hear. After all, it justifies their higher prices and sets the product off as "professional" quality, another marketing edge.
Oh well. So it goes.
Now, if only Apple would release new ACDs and, more importantly for me, a new Mac Pro, I would be very happy--albeit $5,000 poorer--but happy.
Yes, thank you. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this just to see if the product is professional quality or not. You would think that Apple, especially in the higher-end displays, would be trumpeting this info to all who can hear. After all, it justifies their higher prices and sets the product off as "professional" quality, another marketing edge.
Oh well. So it goes.
Now, if only Apple would release new ACDs and, more importantly for me, a new Mac Pro, I would be very happy--albeit $5,000 poorer--but happy.
You are exactly where I am. Waiting for a new Mac Pro and ACDs. I just hope MWSF doesn't disappoint....
BTW, I was reading the NEC link you provided (very nice monitors) and something occurred to me, and it may be stupid but...they mention the percentage of Adobe RGB gamut that is accurately reproduced, but they don't say if that is using the analog or digital capabilities. Does that matter?
I seem to remember reading a while ago that analog still offered a better color gamut than digital, but I may be remembering incorrectly or the source may have been off; or I was, both are a definite possibility.
BTW, I was reading the NEC link you provided (very nice monitors) and something occurred to me, and it may be stupid but...they mention the percentage of Adobe RGB gamut that is accurately reproduced, but they don't say if that is using the analog or digital capabilities. Does that matter?
I seem to remember reading a while ago that analog still offered a better color gamut than digital, but I may be remembering incorrectly or the source may have been off; or I was, both are a definite possibility.
There is enough bandwidth in both to display a higher gamut. So I don't think it would really matter which you were using but, I have always seen better color reproduction over digital connections than analog connections.
I don't know if your the source you read was correct. In theory VGA could push a lot of pixels and seemingly a lot of color as well. I am not entirely sure though so I will search around and see what I find.
If we start moving toward HDMI and Display Port though, the bandwidth provided there would make the consideration of VGAs theoretical capabilities a non-issue.
Hey how you doing!? I really hope MWSF doesn't let us down. It seems incredibly likely it won't, but who knows...
I'm doing aight. Between you and Multimedia, it just isn't the same over there, haha. I think it will show up at MacWorld. It has to. There would be a lot of "Boooo's" there if it wasn't updated. Next 9 days are gonna be really interesting.
There is enough bandwidth in both to display a higher gamut. So I don't think it would really matter which you were using but, I have always seen better color reproduction over digital connections than analog connections.
I don't know if your the source you read was correct. In theory VGA could push a lot of pixels and seemingly a lot of color as well. I am not entirely sure though so I will search around and see what I find.
If we start moving toward HDMI and Display Port though, the bandwidth provided there would make the consideration of VGAs theoretical capabilities a non-issue.
Thanks for the info. I may well have been remembering it incorrectly.
Comments
MacWorld 2008 Transcript Leaked?
Of course not, otherwise we would hear about victims by now.
Of course not, otherwise we would hear about victims by now.
Does the iMafia use waterboarding or do they have more insidious methods?
Does the iMafia use waterboarding or do they have more insidious methods?
Of course, the Steve-iBite.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010301753.html
Dell UltraSharp 3008WFP 30-Inch LCD Monitor
Dell's 3008WFP is the first monitor with DisplayPort, but other 30-inch LCDs offer better performance and value.
$1999
Excerpt:
That's DELL's top of the line release for CES.
We shall see what Apple releases shortly.
Do you really think an excerpt from one article is supposed to somehow show that it is a terrible monitor? Especially one which is in no way a professional review. Especially when you are touting ACDs as being superior, presumably in terms of their professional qualities (SWOP certification, etc.) You could have at least found a professional review. I will bite though.
It is rated poorly in terms of photos. Was it calibrated? Probably not. In fact, I am sure it wasn't considering the negative rating in movies with the reds and pinks. While it should have decent calibration out of the box. Most of us know better. And since Mac OS has a decent calibration tool there is no excuse for not using it. Even if they weren't on a Mac, if you are going to review displays at the very least calibrate the thing. The lack of such action makes this review worthless in regards to professional quality. So their gripes were essentially with color, which can be fixed with calibration.
Now, if we are talking performance relative to price. This review is worthless and here is why.
They finally qualify performance relative to value at the bottom of the page, by comparing it to the Samsung 305T. Coming in at only $1179. Wow, amazing right? No. The Samsung uses an S-PVA panel. In case you didn't get the memo, panel tech goes like this from least to greatest: TN --> PVA --> IPS. They also don't seem to mention that the Samsung only have a Dual-link DVI. No scaler. No analog inputs. Just one input. Sounds a lot like the ACD. Wait, it actually sounds like it is even more comparable to the Dell 3007WFP, which was the older model of the Dell 30". In fact, it comes in at nearly the same price @ $1189. Oh, but there is more. The Dell 3007WFP has an S-IPS panel in it. The same one as the current 30" Apple display. Which the reviewer of course is completely oblivious to. As there was no mention of panel tech at all in the article. Again questioning its professional credibility. Which it is clear there is none of here.
Now, would the Dell have gotten a better review had it been calibrated? Would it have gotten a better review if the writer wasn't a cheap ass and actually gave a fair comparison? I don't know, but based on the way it was written I would have to say yes as those two things would account for the shoddy color and its high price tag relative to other panels.
I find it laughable that you would even link to a review that deems the 305T a better display than the Dell, especially when purporting that Apple makes better displays. Because if you would have payed attention you would know that the Dell uses the new LG Panel, which for graphics professionals (the market for ACDs) is the cream of the crop when it comes to panels.
And again, pay attention here. Apple will use the same panel as the new Dell if they update the panels. Just like they have in the past. As with the previous Dell and the ACD:
30" ACD: 30" WS LG.Philips S-IPS (LM300W01)
30" Dell (3007WFP): 30" WS LG.Philips S-IPS (LM300W01)
source: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/panelsearch.htm
Dell 3008WFP (S-IPS): 30" LG
source: http://www.cnet.com.au/desktops/moni...9284554,00.htm
http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/homeCon...prd200_j_e.jsp
Most likely it is the LM300WQ5.
Next time don't run to google to find a bad review of a product. And again, this in no way presumes that any display Apple releases will be inferior since it uses the same panel, as I mentioned there is more to a display than its panel. However, don't let the "Dell is bad quality," garbage cloud your judgement and lead you to make asinine claims about their quality in regards to the panels they use. Because on that premise many of the beloved ACD would fall under the same classification of bad quality.
There's nothing wrong with the Dells. Suneohair is right...they have the same panels and work pretty well. Dunno that I'd use PCWorld as a review site for my purchase decisions for high end monitors...
You have provided some useful insights on panel tech and its comparative merits. This will help me with my choices when, or if, Apple produces a replacement for the the ACDs.
I just went to Dell's website to check out the 3008 panel and was disappointed that the tech specs didn't mention any of what you were talking about. There were no references to the panel being S-IPS or what LUT was used. The only quality statement I could find was a 100% NTSC color gamut claim.
It would be nice to see vendors make these stats available to us so that we can compare tech.
Suneohair,
You have provided some useful insights on panel tech and its comparative merits. This will help me with my choices when, or if, Apple produces a replacement for the the ACDs.
I just went to Dell's website to check out the 3008 panel and was disappointed that the tech specs didn't mention any of what you were talking about. There were no references to the panel being S-IPS or what LUT was used. The only quality statement I could find was a 100% NTSC color gamut claim.
It would be nice to see vendors make these stats available to us so that we can compare tech.
In terms of the panels used, I agree. Apple, Dell and man other companies should share their specs to a higher degree including the panel type. Much of what is figured out currently is through price and specs with a little detective work.
In terms of the 3008WFP, Dell has made the statement that it is an IPS panel. If you take a look at that CNET link, CNET said it was a PVA panel and Dell responded and told them it was an IPS. It is in read toward the top of the review section. Based on the specs it definitely matches that of the LG panel I mentioned, which includes the gamut coverage. Take a look here at the LM300WQ5: http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/homeCon...prd200_j_e.jsp
The Dell specs match that, the one difference which is a common one is the response time. Dell is obviously slower. This is because the parts they use (image processor, etc) cause the display to be slightly slower. Many companies underrate their panels this way.
If you look at the LM230WU3, which is the panel in the Apple 23", you will also notice how Apple rates it at 14ms, while the panel itself is 12ms.
Most likely we won't see them starting to tell us these things, so we will still have to do detective work. It makes us more informed consumers in my opinion. Because even if they told me what it was, I would still have to know what that means and how it impacts my buying decision.
If they update the displays, I will definitely try to pin down which panels they are. Here is some speculation though. If they move the 23" to a 24" it will most likely be the panel used in the new 24" iMac: LM240WU2, which is also used by NEC in their LCD2490WUXi. The move from 23" to 24" is very likely, as there just aren't any new 23" panels out there. As I said before, I imagine the 30" will use the same panel as the Dell, LM300WQ5. There is the LM300WQ3, but we will have to wait and see the specs to determine this for sure. The 20" could be the LM201WE2, which is used in the popular Nec 20" display and is an AS-IPS panel.
NEC is actually one of the companies that tells you a bit more about their displays. And they are generally some of the best pro displays out there. Take a look at their brochure for the 90 series: http://www.necdisplay.com/cms/docume...chure_0107.pdf
They mention the IPS panel and the 12-but LUT.
Hope that helps you more. I am looking forward to updated ACDs myself, finally going to get that 30"!
In terms of the panels used, I agree... Hope that helps you more. I am looking forward to updated ACDs myself, finally going to get that 30"!
Yes, thank you. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this just to see if the product is professional quality or not. You would think that Apple, especially in the higher-end displays, would be trumpeting this info to all who can hear. After all, it justifies their higher prices and sets the product off as "professional" quality, another marketing edge.
Oh well. So it goes.
Now, if only Apple would release new ACDs and, more importantly for me, a new Mac Pro, I would be very happy--albeit $5,000 poorer--but happy.
Who said money can't buy you happiness?
Yes, thank you. It is unfortunate that we have to do all this just to see if the product is professional quality or not. You would think that Apple, especially in the higher-end displays, would be trumpeting this info to all who can hear. After all, it justifies their higher prices and sets the product off as "professional" quality, another marketing edge.
Oh well. So it goes.
Now, if only Apple would release new ACDs and, more importantly for me, a new Mac Pro, I would be very happy--albeit $5,000 poorer--but happy.
Who said money can't buy you happiness?
http://hardforum.com (display section) and http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ are great places for display information.
You are exactly where I am. Waiting for a new Mac Pro and ACDs. I just hope MWSF doesn't disappoint....
http://hardforum.com (display section) and http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ are great places for display information.
You are exactly where I am. Waiting for a new Mac Pro and ACDs. I just hope MWSF doesn't disappoint....
BTW, I was reading the NEC link you provided (very nice monitors) and something occurred to me, and it may be stupid but...they mention the percentage of Adobe RGB gamut that is accurately reproduced, but they don't say if that is using the analog or digital capabilities. Does that matter?
I seem to remember reading a while ago that analog still offered a better color gamut than digital, but I may be remembering incorrectly or the source may have been off; or I was, both are a definite possibility.
You are exactly where I am. Waiting for a new Mac Pro and ACDs. I just hope MWSF doesn't disappoint....
You and I know MWSF will not disappoint us. If it were to disappoint, I am really just gonna buy whatever is out. I have to.
BTW, I was reading the NEC link you provided (very nice monitors) and something occurred to me, and it may be stupid but...they mention the percentage of Adobe RGB gamut that is accurately reproduced, but they don't say if that is using the analog or digital capabilities. Does that matter?
I seem to remember reading a while ago that analog still offered a better color gamut than digital, but I may be remembering incorrectly or the source may have been off; or I was, both are a definite possibility.
There is enough bandwidth in both to display a higher gamut. So I don't think it would really matter which you were using but, I have always seen better color reproduction over digital connections than analog connections.
I don't know if your the source you read was correct. In theory VGA could push a lot of pixels and seemingly a lot of color as well. I am not entirely sure though so I will search around and see what I find.
If we start moving toward HDMI and Display Port though, the bandwidth provided there would make the consideration of VGAs theoretical capabilities a non-issue.
You and I know MWSF will not disappoint us. If it were to disappoint, I am really just gonna buy whatever is out. I have to.
Hey how you doing!? I really hope MWSF doesn't let us down. It seems incredibly likely it won't, but who knows...
Hey how you doing!? I really hope MWSF doesn't let us down. It seems incredibly likely it won't, but who knows...
I'm doing aight. Between you and Multimedia, it just isn't the same over there, haha. I think it will show up at MacWorld. It has to. There would be a lot of "Boooo's" there if it wasn't updated. Next 9 days are gonna be really interesting.
There is enough bandwidth in both to display a higher gamut. So I don't think it would really matter which you were using but, I have always seen better color reproduction over digital connections than analog connections.
I don't know if your the source you read was correct. In theory VGA could push a lot of pixels and seemingly a lot of color as well. I am not entirely sure though so I will search around and see what I find.
If we start moving toward HDMI and Display Port though, the bandwidth provided there would make the consideration of VGAs theoretical capabilities a non-issue.
Thanks for the info. I may well have been remembering it incorrectly.