After having used this new MacBook for a few weeks, I really don't think I would buy another display that isn't LED backlit. I have an Ultrasharp next to it (and when it isn't crashing due to that MacBook external display bug), the LED just looks better, it is a nicer/crisper light.
Having said that - 999$ for the 24' (apple Canada) seems a bit crazy. Is Samsung the only other company that makes LED backlit displays? If so, the Apple 24' LED is a relative bargain, although it would be nice to have the option to use it as something other than just a monitor, the mini DP is a bit limiting if you want to use it as a non computer display, unless I am missing something.
$899, and it will likely go for $859 at Amazon, and other retailers.
Not cheap, but not expensive either for what it is, which includes the camera and mic for video chats and conferencing which the others don't.
After having used this new MacBook for a few weeks, I really don't think I would buy another display that isn't LED backlit. I have an Ultrasharp next to it (and when it isn't crashing due to that MacBook external display bug), the LED just looks better, it is a nicer/crisper light.
Having said that - 999$ for the 24' (apple Canada) seems a bit crazy. Is Samsung the only other company that makes LED backlit displays? If so, the Apple 24' LED is a relative bargain, although it would be nice to have the option to use it as something other than just a monitor, the mini DP is a bit limiting if you want to use it as a non computer display, unless I am missing something.
I can't find one. Has anybody? I do know they have LED TVs and they announced last year that they were coming out with LED LCD monitors, but they have yet to be introduced.
The downside? Mini-DisplayPort is presumably signal-compatible with standard DisplayPort, which ?is the future? but hasn?t really caught on yet. This will likely be a win in the long term, but it?s not signal-compatible with DVI or HMDI (nor VGA, for that matter).
This is much the same but an even less extreme example of what happened when Apple first switched to USB and Firewire.
In 1999 there were very few peripherals that directly supported USB or Firewire. That was a much bigger problem than a display port connection. I still had old parallel to USB adaptors from that time up until I got rid of them a couple of years ago.
I wonder what it would cost as a 24" 1920 x 1200 model?
Possiblty $200 more. That would be $500 selling price.
How about adding LED backlighting?
Another $200 to 300? Easily.
What about the camera and mic, while changing the inputs to Displayport? About the same? Powered USB hub? Glass protective front? Aluminum case and support instead of plastic and sheet steel?
I can't find one. Has anybody? I do know they have LED TVs and they announced last year that they were coming out with LED LCD monitors, but they have yet to be introduced.
Other than that Samsung I think this is the only one available. I can't stress enough how much better a LED backlight looks IMHO. LED lights you use in your home have that bright/blue/white tinge to them, which is a bit irritating and why they haven't really gone mainstream, but in a display they just look fantastic. The colours just have more pop.
I wonder what it would cost as a 24" 1920 x 1200 model?
Possiblty $200 more. That would be $500 selling price.
How about adding LED backlighting?
Another $200 to 300? Easily.
What about the camera and mic, while changing the inputs to Displayport? About the same? Powered USB hub? Glass protective front? Aluminum case and support instead of plastic and sheet steel?
I think it would be about the same as Apple's.
Hi Mel
I think we have our paths crossed. I have no argument with Apple's new 24 LED LCD and its pricing structure. We were warned last year that LED displays were going to be expensive and disproportionately more as the size increased. Obviously, it wasn't all that easy as the lack of introductions has proven it.
Considering that the only companies that seem to be close to coming up with the new technology besides Apple, i.e., LaCie and Enzio, are equally or more expensive. As such it would appear that most of the negative comments are without justification.
However, my biasness may have proceeded me and to that I really dont' care.
As I mentioned before, the 24" LED LCD Cinema Display is significantly heavier than most units of its size. Certainly the camera can't account for all of it, although the glass?. However, as one who still has an original Canon F1, I still maintain that the heavier product often seemed to reflect better quality. Certainly this is evidenced in today's pc's outings.
And how does video compare between the two? Instead of repeating yourself, you could have provided some new information such as this.
allright, maybe i wasn't clear enough, so I'll state it in layman's terms :
we (= me, my boss and 3 colleagues) compared, face-to-monitor two setups :
a mac with a 24" ultrasharp Dell
the same mac with a 30" apple cinema display
we did both ordinary work and graphical & video work (having a 30", you could have expected me to be in the video or CAD business, not a secretary)
we did NOT play any games in case someone wants to bring that up.
conclusion : BOTH monitors performed equally, in terms of sharpness, brightness and update speed. The cinema display gave a slight inferior impression on full-screen HD video, but that might be the video card, or the 5 of us viewers standing to close.
ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : BOTH monitors were equal from any point of view.
now PLEASE don't come up with calibration stuff and color correction, because neither of these monitors are for pre-press purposes (our pre press dept uses BARCO monitors for that, and they are not flat el-cheapo panels !)
so, here is my conclusion, to which ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : there is NO agrument whatshowever that justifies the price tag of the apple display. The ultrasharp is as good, if not better, for a fraction of the price. Hell, we could buy THREE ultrasharps and still be cheaper than the 30" cinema !
Voila. Can I get any more clearer ?
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users. And the other 1% will not buy an apple display, but a high priced CRT.
(now i expect someone to come up with a comment about the new LED display being new technology, to which I'll massively shrudder for missing the point completely, or (even worse) come tell me that i should not compare a 30" with a 24".... that's when I call fanboyism)
Other than that Samsung I think this is the only one available. I can't stress enough how much better a LED backlight looks IMHO. LED lights you use in your home have that bright/blue/white tinge to them, which is a bit irritating and why they haven't really gone mainstream, but in a display they just look fantastic. The colours just have more pop.
I can't say I have ever seen a better display than Apples new LED LCD monitor.
Note: As far a I know, there aren't any 24" LED monitors yet available for delivery. Non, even Apple's, has hit the shelves. And I don't know of any place other than the Apple store where one can even see a demo of one.
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide.
This was addressed in another post. The Apple Cinema Display was the best when it was first introduced in 2005. Since that time they have never been updated and the price has not been reduced by much.
While Dell has refreshed its monitors many times since 2005 and reduced the price.
Quote:
(now i expect someone to come up with a comment about the new LED display being new technology, to which I'll massively shrudder for missing the point completely)
Well this thread is about a 24" LED Apple monitor. Not the monitors Apple started selling three years ago.
The stupidest thing Apple has done with this monitor is to not include a mini displayport to DVI adapter.
I get you want to advance the technology but wouldn't it make sense to do so with the machines first and then with the accessories?
Why release an accessory with such a limited customer base? I'm wondering it perhaps Apple isn't able to make these new Cinema Displays widely available and are purposely limiting their usefulness to Macbook, Macbook Air and Macbook Pro owners. Are they worried they wouldn't be able to supply the demand if the mini displayport to DVI adapter was included and all the Mac Pro owners want one too?
I dunno, I just got a new Mac Pro a few months ago and there is no way I'm getting a new Cinema Display until an adapter is available. I am NOT going to get a new machine or even a new video card just to get the new display.
The stupidest thing Apple has done with this monitor is to not include a mini displayport to DVI adapter.
When Apple first switched to USB and Firewire they did not include a parallel to USB adaptor. At that point the vast majority of peripherals were made for parallel ports, their was very little for USB or Firewire.
Plus this ACD is primarily intended to be used with the new MacBooks.
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users. And the other 1% will not buy an apple display, but a high priced CRT.
Dell sells a 30" UltraSharp 3008WFP with a USB 2 hub for $1999. Comparable to Apple's 30" Cinema HD Display with the same USB 2 hub but with 2 FireWire ports as well.
Of course I have to agree with you somewhat that "…Apple Cinema Displays are "FUCKING" expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users."
Image the gall of Apple to charge a whopping $200 less than Dell's. That's right, an Apple 30" Cinema Display lists at $1799 vs Dell's at $1999.
Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
When Apple first switched to USB and Firewire they did not include a parallel to USB adaptor. At that point the vast majority of peripherals were made for parallel ports, their was very little for USB or Firewire.
Plus this ACD is primarily intended to be used with the new MacBooks.
allright, maybe i wasn't clear enough, so I'll state it in layman's terms :
we (= me, my boss and 3 colleagues) compared, face-to-monitor two setups :
a mac with a 24" ultrasharp Dell
the same mac with a 30" apple cinema display
Thanks for the info on perceived video quality. I trust the Mac's graphic card was capable of supporting the full 2560x1600 resolution of the 30" display.
Note to you, your boss, and your 3 colleagues: All other things being equal, a medium-pixel count 24" display is not equivalent to a high-pixel count 30" display. The larger silicon with more pixels is disproportionately more expensive to manufacture and the panel is more difficult to illuminate evenly.
However, if you're comparing a potentially lucky purchase of a decent-looking Dell 24" display to a high quality, but discontinued 23" Apple display, and they truly are comparable in image quality, then you've got something. Not much, but something.
I couldn't agree more. I have a new Mc Pro and a Mac Mini both connected via a switcher to a 23-inch Apple display. Works fine but the advent of a new slightly larger and at the same price point Mac display with a built-in iSight was tantalizing. Built-in speakers were not necessary and I might have been able to put up with a glossy screen. But what happens? Apple puts out a display which will not work with desktops nor older laptops. They include an iSight which ALL the newest laptops have anyway. And to boot, Apple is discontinuing the 23-inch display leaving what for desktop users? Smaller 20's and honkin' 30's. And still no iSight camera built-in. Apple can make a feather-light laptop but cannot seem to be able to add an isight to a display suitable for thousands of desktop users. It really is beyond comprehension.
Quote:
Originally Posted by passat2.1
All these comparisons are not relevant. None of the suggested alternatives quoted in this thread have mini displayport connections (unique to Apple?) and that for oh so many Apple owners (i.e. those without Mac Book Pros) is important. I have a Mac Pro I cannot use the 24" LED monitor because of this. If anyone says that there will be new Mac Pros with revised Video output or there will a new graphics card has totally missed the point. Why should I have to buy a new Mac Pro or a new graphics card (I have the x1900XT card) what does all that add to the cost of the monitor? Also if an adaptor was possible surely Apple would have offered one from the launch date.
Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
I think we have to wait and see what Apple comes out with during MacWorld in mid January. That's two months away, 7 weeks actually, not too long.
What you're seeing here is just about what you said Apple has done in the past, except that here, Apple has also put out a peripheral at the same time they discontinued the older port. That allows the (few) MB users who want a monitor to buy one right away. I do think that while the monitor is not overpriced for what it is, it's a bit high for what a MB user might want to spend.
Possibly a 20" would have been better for that, as it would have been cheaper. It's not clear as to how much cheaper though.
Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.
Not necessarily. What use it is to have ports but no peripherals to plug them into. For the first couple of years we had to use adaptors until the rest of the computer industry began to widely use USB.
Quote:
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
This is true because no other Mac ships with display port. That's pretty easy to figure out.
You only see this as being stupid because you don't realize that notebooks are far outselling desktops. The purpose of this monitor is to be able to use your notebook with the advantages of a desktop.
Its very likely Apple will introduce new Mac Pros and Cinema Displays at MacWorld in January.
What you're seeing here is just about what you said Apple has done in the past, except that here, Apple has also put out a peripheral at the same time they discontinued the older port. That allows the (few) MB users who want a monitor to buy one right away. I do think that while the monitor is not overpriced for what it is, it's a bit high for what a MB user might want to spend.
Don't forget Display Port can drive a DVI monitor just fine, so the new MB/Pro can still be used with most monitors, but the new Apple display should just work great.
Comments
After having used this new MacBook for a few weeks, I really don't think I would buy another display that isn't LED backlit. I have an Ultrasharp next to it (and when it isn't crashing due to that MacBook external display bug), the LED just looks better, it is a nicer/crisper light.
Having said that - 999$ for the 24' (apple Canada) seems a bit crazy. Is Samsung the only other company that makes LED backlit displays? If so, the Apple 24' LED is a relative bargain, although it would be nice to have the option to use it as something other than just a monitor, the mini DP is a bit limiting if you want to use it as a non computer display, unless I am missing something.
$899, and it will likely go for $859 at Amazon, and other retailers.
Not cheap, but not expensive either for what it is, which includes the camera and mic for video chats and conferencing which the others don't.
After having used this new MacBook for a few weeks, I really don't think I would buy another display that isn't LED backlit. I have an Ultrasharp next to it (and when it isn't crashing due to that MacBook external display bug), the LED just looks better, it is a nicer/crisper light.
Having said that - 999$ for the 24' (apple Canada) seems a bit crazy. Is Samsung the only other company that makes LED backlit displays? If so, the Apple 24' LED is a relative bargain, although it would be nice to have the option to use it as something other than just a monitor, the mini DP is a bit limiting if you want to use it as a non computer display, unless I am missing something.
I can't find one. Has anybody? I do know they have LED TVs and they announced last year that they were coming out with LED LCD monitors, but they have yet to be introduced.
Don't be so quick to pounce. You didn't read post #29.
Sorry, I didn't read the previous post.
This is where I saw the $29 cable. My error. It evidently refers to using a third party monitor: http://bitguru.wordpress.com/2008/10...i-displayport/
The downside? Mini-DisplayPort is presumably signal-compatible with standard DisplayPort, which ?is the future? but hasn?t really caught on yet. This will likely be a win in the long term, but it?s not signal-compatible with DVI or HMDI (nor VGA, for that matter).
This is much the same but an even less extreme example of what happened when Apple first switched to USB and Firewire.
In 1999 there were very few peripherals that directly supported USB or Firewire. That was a much bigger problem than a display port connection. I still had old parallel to USB adaptors from that time up until I got rid of them a couple of years ago.
Try http://www.macworld.com/article/6119...wxm.html?t=218
It looks nice, but it's also a 20" display.
I wonder what it would cost as a 24" 1920 x 1200 model?
Possiblty $200 more. That would be $500 selling price.
How about adding LED backlighting?
Another $200 to 300? Easily.
What about the camera and mic, while changing the inputs to Displayport? About the same? Powered USB hub? Glass protective front? Aluminum case and support instead of plastic and sheet steel?
I think it would be about the same as Apple's.
I can't find one. Has anybody? I do know they have LED TVs and they announced last year that they were coming out with LED LCD monitors, but they have yet to be introduced.
Other than that Samsung I think this is the only one available. I can't stress enough how much better a LED backlight looks IMHO. LED lights you use in your home have that bright/blue/white tinge to them, which is a bit irritating and why they haven't really gone mainstream, but in a display they just look fantastic. The colours just have more pop.
It looks nice, but it's also a 20" display.
I wonder what it would cost as a 24" 1920 x 1200 model?
Possiblty $200 more. That would be $500 selling price.
How about adding LED backlighting?
Another $200 to 300? Easily.
What about the camera and mic, while changing the inputs to Displayport? About the same? Powered USB hub? Glass protective front? Aluminum case and support instead of plastic and sheet steel?
I think it would be about the same as Apple's.
Hi Mel
I think we have our paths crossed. I have no argument with Apple's new 24 LED LCD and its pricing structure. We were warned last year that LED displays were going to be expensive and disproportionately more as the size increased. Obviously, it wasn't all that easy as the lack of introductions has proven it.
Considering that the only companies that seem to be close to coming up with the new technology besides Apple, i.e., LaCie and Enzio, are equally or more expensive. As such it would appear that most of the negative comments are without justification.
However, my biasness may have proceeded me and to that I really dont' care.
As I mentioned before, the 24" LED LCD Cinema Display is significantly heavier than most units of its size. Certainly the camera can't account for all of it, although the glass?. However, as one who still has an original Canon F1, I still maintain that the heavier product often seemed to reflect better quality. Certainly this is evidenced in today's pc's outings.
for a higher-end consumer display, I would think that we need RI before that becomes feasible.
A 2560x1600 24" monitor would have a lower pixel density than Apple's 1920x1200 17" MacBook Pro.
And how does video compare between the two? Instead of repeating yourself, you could have provided some new information such as this.
allright, maybe i wasn't clear enough, so I'll state it in layman's terms :
we (= me, my boss and 3 colleagues) compared, face-to-monitor two setups :
a mac with a 24" ultrasharp Dell
the same mac with a 30" apple cinema display
we did both ordinary work and graphical & video work (having a 30", you could have expected me to be in the video or CAD business, not a secretary)
we did NOT play any games in case someone wants to bring that up.
conclusion : BOTH monitors performed equally, in terms of sharpness, brightness and update speed. The cinema display gave a slight inferior impression on full-screen HD video, but that might be the video card, or the 5 of us viewers standing to close.
ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : BOTH monitors were equal from any point of view.
now PLEASE don't come up with calibration stuff and color correction, because neither of these monitors are for pre-press purposes (our pre press dept uses BARCO monitors for that, and they are not flat el-cheapo panels !)
so, here is my conclusion, to which ALL OF THE SPECTATORS agreed : there is NO agrument whatshowever that justifies the price tag of the apple display. The ultrasharp is as good, if not better, for a fraction of the price. Hell, we could buy THREE ultrasharps and still be cheaper than the 30" cinema !
Voila. Can I get any more clearer ?
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users. And the other 1% will not buy an apple display, but a high priced CRT.
(now i expect someone to come up with a comment about the new LED display being new technology, to which I'll massively shrudder for missing the point completely, or (even worse) come tell me that i should not compare a 30" with a 24".... that's when I call fanboyism)
Other than that Samsung I think this is the only one available. I can't stress enough how much better a LED backlight looks IMHO. LED lights you use in your home have that bright/blue/white tinge to them, which is a bit irritating and why they haven't really gone mainstream, but in a display they just look fantastic. The colours just have more pop.
I can't say I have ever seen a better display than Apples new LED LCD monitor.
Note: As far a I know, there aren't any 24" LED monitors yet available for delivery. Non, even Apple's, has hit the shelves. And I don't know of any place other than the Apple store where one can even see a demo of one.
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide.
This was addressed in another post. The Apple Cinema Display was the best when it was first introduced in 2005. Since that time they have never been updated and the price has not been reduced by much.
While Dell has refreshed its monitors many times since 2005 and reduced the price.
(now i expect someone to come up with a comment about the new LED display being new technology, to which I'll massively shrudder for missing the point completely)
Well this thread is about a 24" LED Apple monitor. Not the monitors Apple started selling three years ago.
I get you want to advance the technology but wouldn't it make sense to do so with the machines first and then with the accessories?
Why release an accessory with such a limited customer base? I'm wondering it perhaps Apple isn't able to make these new Cinema Displays widely available and are purposely limiting their usefulness to Macbook, Macbook Air and Macbook Pro owners. Are they worried they wouldn't be able to supply the demand if the mini displayport to DVI adapter was included and all the Mac Pro owners want one too?
I dunno, I just got a new Mac Pro a few months ago and there is no way I'm getting a new Cinema Display until an adapter is available. I am NOT going to get a new machine or even a new video card just to get the new display.
The stupidest thing Apple has done with this monitor is to not include a mini displayport to DVI adapter.
When Apple first switched to USB and Firewire they did not include a parallel to USB adaptor. At that point the vast majority of peripherals were made for parallel ports, their was very little for USB or Firewire.
Plus this ACD is primarily intended to be used with the new MacBooks.
The dell monitor had a 100% vote of 5 (reasonably fanatic) apple users, and we ALL agreed that apple cinema displays are FUCKING expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users. And the other 1% will not buy an apple display, but a high priced CRT.
Dell sells a 30" UltraSharp 3008WFP with a USB 2 hub for $1999. Comparable to Apple's 30" Cinema HD Display with the same USB 2 hub but with 2 FireWire ports as well.
Of course I have to agree with you somewhat that "…Apple Cinema Displays are "FUCKING" expensive for what they provide for 99% of the users."
Image the gall of Apple to charge a whopping $200 less than Dell's. That's right, an Apple 30" Cinema Display lists at $1799 vs Dell's at $1999.
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
When Apple first switched to USB and Firewire they did not include a parallel to USB adaptor. At that point the vast majority of peripherals were made for parallel ports, their was very little for USB or Firewire.
Plus this ACD is primarily intended to be used with the new MacBooks.
allright, maybe i wasn't clear enough, so I'll state it in layman's terms :
we (= me, my boss and 3 colleagues) compared, face-to-monitor two setups :
a mac with a 24" ultrasharp Dell
the same mac with a 30" apple cinema display
Thanks for the info on perceived video quality. I trust the Mac's graphic card was capable of supporting the full 2560x1600 resolution of the 30" display.
Note to you, your boss, and your 3 colleagues: All other things being equal, a medium-pixel count 24" display is not equivalent to a high-pixel count 30" display. The larger silicon with more pixels is disproportionately more expensive to manufacture and the panel is more difficult to illuminate evenly.
However, if you're comparing a potentially lucky purchase of a decent-looking Dell 24" display to a high quality, but discontinued 23" Apple display, and they truly are comparable in image quality, then you've got something. Not much, but something.
All these comparisons are not relevant. None of the suggested alternatives quoted in this thread have mini displayport connections (unique to Apple?) and that for oh so many Apple owners (i.e. those without Mac Book Pros) is important. I have a Mac Pro I cannot use the 24" LED monitor because of this. If anyone says that there will be new Mac Pros with revised Video output or there will a new graphics card has totally missed the point. Why should I have to buy a new Mac Pro or a new graphics card (I have the x1900XT card) what does all that add to the cost of the monitor? Also if an adaptor was possible surely Apple would have offered one from the launch date.
Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
I think we have to wait and see what Apple comes out with during MacWorld in mid January. That's two months away, 7 weeks actually, not too long.
What you're seeing here is just about what you said Apple has done in the past, except that here, Apple has also put out a peripheral at the same time they discontinued the older port. That allows the (few) MB users who want a monitor to buy one right away. I do think that while the monitor is not overpriced for what it is, it's a bit high for what a MB user might want to spend.
Possibly a 20" would have been better for that, as it would have been cheaper. It's not clear as to how much cheaper though.
Yes, but they removed these from the computers first and then migrated the peripherals, which makes sense. The way they're doing it now does not.
Not necessarily. What use it is to have ports but no peripherals to plug them into. For the first couple of years we had to use adaptors until the rest of the computer industry began to widely use USB.
Just because Apple currently markets the ACD for the new MacBooks doesn't mean they're primarily intended for this. If this is actually true, then that would be another stupid thing for Apple to do. Let's release a monitor for computers with monitors but ignore our desktops which don't have any monitors at all... or is Apple intending to release new desktops that tap directly into your senses. That would be cool!
This is true because no other Mac ships with display port. That's pretty easy to figure out.
You only see this as being stupid because you don't realize that notebooks are far outselling desktops. The purpose of this monitor is to be able to use your notebook with the advantages of a desktop.
Its very likely Apple will introduce new Mac Pros and Cinema Displays at MacWorld in January.
What you're seeing here is just about what you said Apple has done in the past, except that here, Apple has also put out a peripheral at the same time they discontinued the older port. That allows the (few) MB users who want a monitor to buy one right away. I do think that while the monitor is not overpriced for what it is, it's a bit high for what a MB user might want to spend.
Don't forget Display Port can drive a DVI monitor just fine, so the new MB/Pro can still be used with most monitors, but the new Apple display should just work great.