There is no way in hell that a single size monitor is going to cover everyone's needs. I use a 26" monitor AND a 19" on one comp. The second screen is just for graphics apps pallets. A 22" on another computer, and a 19" on another.
Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24". There have been several times when I went shopping for a IPS screen, I was beating the bushes for the smallest I could find. Not the biggest.
Apple monitors and iMacs are not height adjustable. They are way too tall, forcing the user to crane the neck backwards. A pain in the neck. Literally. Everyone else who makes monitors seems to understand this is important. Someone at Apple does not. No the tilt does not make up for it.
Over 20" off the desk? You must me kidding me. Someone's idea of style over function. Every ergonomic guideline has the top of the screen should below eye level with the screen tilted up so you are looking down at it. There is a reason for it.
That spells the difference between a trip to the chiro and a days work. I use a 26" Planar and the top is a bare 16" off the desk.
Glossy screens? There is extra expense in producing matt glass. People have been using matt antiglare glass for decades, For a reason. That reason did not go away because someone at Apple decided that gloss is cooler looking.
There are a total of 8 monitors on location. Counting the laptops, 10. When Apple makes a height adjustable matt glass screen, I might consider one of theirs the next time I look at purchasing a monitor.
Desktops are dead? Laptops are like anything else which is portable, they sacrifice a lot to achieve that portability. When laptops are designed to run all day at heavy work loads, have equally fast processors and memory, run cool enough and have matt glass IPS screens, they might replace a desktop as a second screen unit for people who use a computer for work.
Strangely, this is a question my local genius have been unable to answer the same way each time I pose the question. I would enjoy your take, or anyone else's...
At home I often plug my latest model 17 MBP into a current mac 24 inch monitor. For home use, the size, performance and convenience of the apple 24 is great.....
BUT
when I do dual screen, and try to turn down the lights in my study, by MBP screen dims, but no way I can make the apple respond to ambient light. is it SUPPOSED to ? If so any idea how i might achieve it? Not to be condescending, but i find more genii on this forum than my local store
You cannot see a dimmed 17MBP next to such a bright 24 inch display.
You can turn off ambient light sensing in display settings by unchecking the box "automatcially adjust brightness as ambient light changes"
i suspect the new monitor will have the same option.
Many people need a 30 inch monitor. They will simply have to look elsewhere.
No, they don't.
It's a tiny niche market of graphics/video professionals and those with the budget to purchase very expensive toys who want a 30" desktop monitor. The 27" is perfect as a high end desktop monitor for the majority of people who want something a little larger, many of whom will want to watch video on it, making 16:9 the perfect ratio. I note it's also cheaper and slightly better spec'd than Dell's 27" offering.
There is no way in hell that a single size monitor is going to cover everyone's needs. I use a 26" monitor AND a 19" on one comp. The second screen is just for graphics apps pallets. A 22" on another computer, and a 19" on another.
Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24". There have been several times when I went shopping for a IPS screen, I was beating the bushes for the smallest I could find. Not the biggest.
Apple monitors and iMacs are not height adjustable. They are way too tall, forcing the user to crane the neck backwards. A pain in the neck. Literally. Everyone else who makes monitors seems to understand this is important. Someone at Apple does not. No the tilt does not make up for it.
Over 20" off the desk? You must me kidding me. Someone's idea of style over function. Every ergonomic guideline has the top of the screen should below eye level with the screen tilted up so you are looking down at it. There is a reason for it.
That spells the difference between a trip to the chiro and a days work. I use a 26" Planar and the top is a bare 16" off the desk.
Glossy screens? There is extra expense in producing matt glass. People have been using matt antiglare glass for decades, For a reason. That reason did not go away because someone at Apple decided that gloss is cooler looking.
It's funny, i'm sat with my 27" iMac, the top of the monitor is in line roughly with my eye level, i've not adjusted it's height. But it's amazing what you can do with a decent office chair and a decent work desk. The iMac rotates, it tilts, the height seems to be perfect when put on an office desk with swivel chair, my neck isn't craned and my back is nicely comfortable. Maybe someone at Apple who designed this took a look at these issues and had a vague idea what they were doing?
Also I'm a (fairly successful) graphics professional and LOVE my glossy screen. Which doesn't glare, which isn't a mirror. Seriously some people need to look at how they lay out their workspace and use a little common sense.
"Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24"
No, I guess that's why "everyone" won't be buying one of these.
One monitor is not going to suit the whole world's needs , one company will not provide solutions for every user - that's why there are alternatives. Apple aren't here to cater for everyone, they're here to cater for those people that their devices are aimed towards - one company does not fit all. Surely you can see, with four different monitors in your work flow that you're not exactly Joe Average. I don't understand how you can complain that Apple don't cater to every specific need with every range they produce - it's simply not a realistic expectation.
"They are making what they think is going to sell"
Yes, that's what businesses do, surely you're not intending that as a criticism?
i preferred the having a 30" "pro" model and a consumer model.
i can see dropping from a 30 to a 27" with the same resolution, and i'm sure the ambient light adjustment can be disabled in settings > displays, same as the macbook pro.
i think apple should offer a 20" or 21" model as well - who's going to buy a mini and then spend more on the monitor than on the computer? they'll get a $160 23" monitor from cdw, where apple could have a $250 - $300 version and make more revenue.
I'm pretty sure there'll be a 21" version on the way very soon to match the smaller iMac. I also have a feeling a 40/42" widescreen hi-def beast with a built-in apple tv is due in the next 24 months.
I love when new posters are helpful and specific. Welcome to the forum.
yes, welcome indeed, but you see the problem i have is trying to turn ON auto brightness on a led 24 mac monitor. My apple store staff have been even less helpful.
it seems like there is NO auto brightness display setting for led 24 display, but so hard to get confirmation on. Maybe it would be nice if there were an option to DISABLE (turn off) auto brightness on the built in lcd when you have an external monitor....
For those thin-skinned enough to find my earlier post egregious, allow my retort.
I've looked at Mac computer screens since I did professional publishing on a Mac Plus. I've hung nearly every brand of monitor made off their video ports, even 19" grayscale portrait monitors that had to be clipped to an accelerator board hanging off the mobo of a Mac SE. I lived with my office lights dimmed and a view of the skyline blocked because of the glare off a Mitsubishi 21 incher was intolerable.
I can't see how anyone can think that the elimination of a professional graphics monitor and its replacement with a consumer model is anything but an abandonment of a market Apple has endlessly courted since the dawning days of desktop publishing and computer illustration. But now instead of offering the "perfect display working in coordination with your printed output via ColorSync" (as they did in the not-so-distant past), they tout the inclusion of speakers worse than ones you can get from BestBuy for $10.
Several snarked about introducing politics in the forum, but there was no political reference in my post. Al Gore's primary accomplishment as a board member of Apple, Inc. was to convince the company that they needed to appease the growing list of "environmentalists" who were taking them to task. This has resulted in a near endless campaign of how much greener a company they are, despite the fact they make stuff that devours energy almost constantly. As for Mr. Gore's own environmentalist beliefs, his recent move to $9MM mega-sq. ft. bachelor mansion situated on the very coast he said will rise by 25 feet should be an indication of how much faith he has in his own work. The photo of him in his Washington office seated in front of THREE 30" Apple monitors, plus a fax machine, a big laser printer and a wall-mounted 40+" plasma TV all running should indicate his concern for how much energy products like that consume. In my opinion, he's become a fraud and a huckster, and that has nothing to do with his past political service to his country.
I cannot fault Apple for their decisions to chase the burgeoning consumer electronics market rather than the professional computer graphics and video development teams -- these are sound business decisions, and are hardly new to any business. Sophisticated technology designed to effectively and efficiently meet professionals' needs ALWAYS costs extra money, and is often a niche market. The problem is that Apple always claimed to be on the side of these people, and in years past worked in concert with them to develop products that met their needs. Now they are run by steely-eyed businessmen with sharpened pencils who know that a $250 share price is better than accolades by a group of professionals.
As to you dolts who believe that a $999 display is overpriced for what it delivers in a business situation, and that expensive tools are nothing but toys for the rich -- there is no argument that would placate your ignorance. My Mac Pro and 24" EIZO display are among the least expensive of my tools. Perhaps it's time you started finding out why a TV show like "Jersey Shore" --that only paid the 8 cast members $25,000 to split between them -- has a production budget close to a half-million dollars. These aren't toys, and they cost money if you want the end result to look right.
yes, welcome indeed, but you see the problem i have is trying to turn ON auto brightness on a led 24 mac monitor. My apple store staff have been even less helpful.
it seems like there is NO auto brightness display setting for led 24 display, but so hard to get confirmation on. Maybe it would be nice if there were an option to DISABLE (turn off) auto brightness on the built in lcd when you have an external monitor....
I looked for a Terminal command and PLIST setting for that. Nothing.
This all depends on how often you switch between displays, but the best option I can offer is to use Automator to create a simple app to turn this on or off or to auto adjust brightness with a single click.
PS: Aren?t you pretty much using the 24? ACD in a control environment so you don?t need the auto-adjust feature (which i don?t think has ever worked well to begin with)? I?m guessing it?s night/day issue. How about a simple Menu Bar item to adjust the brightness?
It's funny, i'm sat with my 27" iMac, the top of the monitor is in line roughly with my eye level, i've not adjusted it's height. But it's amazing what you can do with a decent office chair and a decent work desk. The iMac rotates, it tilts, the height seems to be perfect when put on an office desk with swivel chair, my neck isn't craned and my back is nicely comfortable. Maybe someone at Apple who designed this took a look at these issues and had a vague idea what they were doing?
Also I'm a (fairly successful) graphics professional and LOVE my glossy screen. Which doesn't glare, which isn't a mirror. Seriously some people need to look at how they lay out their workspace and use a little common sense.
I do building design including furniture. That includes desk heights and chair heights, distances between the two to accommodate a humans legs, and torso heights.
Regarding my title? All businesses make tradeoffs between what's good and what sells. A range of size monitors such as when they made a 20, 23 and a 30 covers a broad spectrum of user/customer needs, a single size cuts costs and forces potential customers to look elsewhere. They are focusing on profit at the expense of losing customers to other vendors. Its representative of a mindset and I think its anecdotal worth mentioning.
Would love to buy Apple screens but they just don't make them like they used to. A shame.
As a graphics professional working in print based media I totally agree. Apple's abandonment of the matte screen goes along with their indifference to the Pro line generally it seems.
In my opinion the glossy screen is the visual equivalent of building a high-end sound system with a perpetual built-in buzzing sound. The glossy screen imac I use downstairs is a constant P.I.T.A. to use, since I have windows. I spend half the time fiddling with the drapes and blinds just to be able to see it.
I suppose if one's computing is done mostly in a cubicle or consists of video games in a basement, glossy really rocks.
I luv the Unix based OS... but I'm holding onto my matte screen cinema display. Many forums have concluded that the matte screen gives more accurate color display for proofing prints.
For those thin-skinned enough to find my earlier post egregious, allow my retort.
I've looked at Mac computer screens since I did professional publishing on a Mac Plus. I've hung nearly every brand of monitor made off their video ports, even 19" grayscale portrait monitors that had to be clipped to an accelerator board hanging off the mobo of a Mac SE. I lived with my office lights dimmed and a view of the skyline blocked because of the glare off a Mitsubishi 21 incher was intolerable.
I can't see how anyone can think that the elimination of a professional graphics monitor and its replacement with a consumer model is anything but an abandonment of a market Apple has endlessly courted since the dawning days of desktop publishing and computer illustration. But now instead of offering the "perfect display working in coordination with your printed output via ColorSync" (as they did in the not-so-distant past), they tout the inclusion of speakers worse than ones you can get from BestBuy for $10.
Several snarked about introducing politics in the forum, but there was no political reference in my post. Al Gore's primary accomplishment as a board member of Apple, Inc. was to convince the company that they needed to appease the growing list of "environmentalists" who were taking them to task. This has resulted in a near endless campaign of how much greener a company they are, despite the fact they make stuff that devours energy almost constantly. As for Mr. Gore's own environmentalist beliefs, his recent move to $9MM mega-sq. ft. bachelor mansion situated on the very coast he said will rise by 25 feet should be an indication of how much faith he has in his own work. The photo of him in his Washington office seated in front of THREE 30" Apple monitors, plus a fax machine, a big laser printer and a wall-mounted 40+" plasma TV all running should indicate his concern for how much energy products like that consume. In my opinion, he's become a fraud and a huckster, and that has nothing to do with his past political service to his country.
I cannot fault Apple for their decisions to chase the burgeoning consumer electronics market rather than the professional computer graphics and video development teams -- these are sound business decisions, and are hardly new to any business. Sophisticated technology designed to effectively and efficiently meet professionals' needs ALWAYS costs extra money, and is often a niche market. The problem is that Apple always claimed to be on the side of these people, and in years past worked in concert with them to develop products that met their needs. Now they are run by steely-eyed businessmen with sharpened pencils who know that a $250 share price is better than accolades by a group of professionals.
As to you dolts who believe that a $999 display is overpriced for what it delivers in a business situation, and that expensive tools are nothing but toys for the rich -- there is no argument that would placate your ignorance. My Mac Pro and 24" EIZO display are among the least expensive of my tools. Perhaps it's time you started finding out why a TV show like "Jersey Shore" --that only paid the 8 cast members $25,000 to split between them -- has a production budget close to a half-million dollars. These aren't toys, and they cost money if you want the end result to look right.
Oh, the thin skin of the thin-skin-accuser!
What you call the elimination of a pro level display is no such thing to me. As I have said, for my uses the glossy displays are just as good, perhaps better than the matter displays. Of course, your mileage may vary. I am using my iMac 27" to do graphics work as we speak (okay, well I was doing work until I started reading this post again...). Everything is fine. I am upstairs in a room with 2 windows in it and it is a sunny day. No problems here! This is a great display as far as I'm concerned. Much nicer than many much more expensive displays that were considered pro graphics models a few ears ago.
Perhaps you are upset that as technology progresses the difference between PRO and CONSUMER begins to blur. I would have laughed at the idea of using an iMac for Pro work a few years ago, for good reason. Now there is plenty of horsepower in an iMac for my purposes. Same is happening with displays now. LCD tech has come a long way. This weird (non)issue with glossy screens is just a symptom of your need to feel superior, in my not-so humble opinion. How can you feel validated if you don't need some kind of rare-earth uber-monitor to do your PRO work on? Fact is, for most pros, the 27" glossy will get the job done just fine. If you really are a pro, you will figure it out. You figured it out with grayscale monitors in the past...
As for politics, your claim of no-politics is ridiculous. After you claim the Al Gore comment was apolitical you launch into quite the Gore hypocrite tirade. Environmentalist is a political issue no matter how deep you bury your head in the sand, thus the comments ARE political. Don't get me wrong, I understand and appreciate the criticism. Al Gore, even if his mind is in the right place, is a deeply flawed individual who is certainly not 'walking the walk'. All that aside, the comment was and is political and there is really no call for it. The glossy glass was not Al Gore's call. Perhaps the Aluminum bodies, perhaps the innards made without VOCs & such. if you notice, the 30" ACD has not protective panel of any kind over the LCD panel. In the case of the glossy displays, there is the LCD panel underneath and then a glossy glass protective panel over that. That uses MORE resources to manufacture and so I think Al Gore would have suggested against that particular design choice if he had any opinion at all.
If there is one thing we agree on it is this: our Macs & displays are the cheaper of the tools used for our work. There are people where I work who use millions dollar proofing devices to do their color work. With that kind of hardware at their disposal to dial in color I am more than happy to leave the high-end color work to them since no display apple could sell me would put me in their league.
Perhaps you are upset that as technology progresses the difference between PRO and CONSUMER begins to blur. I would have laughed at the idea of using an iMac for Pro work a few years ago, for good reason. Now there is plenty of horsepower in an iMac for my purposes. Same is happening with displays now. LCD tech has come a long way. This weird (non)issue with glossy screens is just a symptom of your need to feel superior, in my not-so humble opinion. How can you feel validated if you don't need some kind of rare-earth uber-monitor to do your PRO work on? Fact is, for most pros, the 27" glossy will get the job done just fine. If you really are a pro, you will figure it out. You figured it out with grayscale monitors in the past...
Well that is a good point. I have to say that when comparing the glossy 27" iMac next to a 30" ACD I can't help but wanting the non-glossy screen. I love photography, but am certainly no professional. Heck, if I were I wouldn't even look at flat screens since professionals use CRT's. Just take a look around Hollywood. Still, as a hobbyist I just give preference to the non-glossy screen. If Apple doesn't come out with a non-glossy screen soon I 'need' to look further. Either Eizo, perhaps Samsung. I need to see them in person before deciding. Obviously.
Quote:
(...)if you notice, the 30" ACD has not protective panel of any kind over the LCD panel. In the case of the glossy displays, there is the LCD panel underneath and then a glossy glass protective panel over that (...)
Does that mean one can theoretically remove the glossy screen from the glossy screen and retain a 27" non-glossy screen? Then you'll have a tat smaller screen for 8 benjamins less.
You know, it's funny. I've yet to meet a fellow graphics professional in the real world, who is happy with the glossy screens. But these boards seem to be swarming with graphics professionals who have no problems using the glossy screens.
All the people I meet loathe the glossy screens with a venom previously reserved for Microsoft Office and traffic wardens. It's a universal hatred, and a frequent topic in all the studios I visit.
I was just speaking to a colleague last night that has taken to wearing black clothes to work. Seriously.
So I'm constantly surprised by the other professionals on these forums that have no problems with the glossy screens.
Well that is a good point. I have to say that when comparing the glossy 27" iMac next to a 30" ACD I can't help but wanting the non-glossy screen. I love photography, but am certainly no professional. Heck, if I were I wouldn't even look at flat screens since professionals use CRT's. Just take a look around Hollywood. Still, as a hobbyist I just give preference to the non-glossy screen. If Apple doesn't come out with a non-glossy screen soon I 'need' to look further. Either Eizo, perhaps Samsung. I need to see them in person before deciding. Obviously.
Does that mean one can theoretically remove the glossy screen from the glossy screen and retain a 27" non-glossy screen? Then you'll have a tat smaller screen for 8 benjamins less.
Its not just theoretically possible, go to iFixit.com. They demonstrate exactly how it is done. Of course, their instructions only show how to temporarily remove the display to get at the innards of the machine for upgrade/repair purposes.
It almost makes me think I should design a drop-in replacement panels for iMacs. The peeps whining about this seem hell-bent on spending big money to avoid gloss...This might be a great market to get into...
You know, it's funny. I've yet to meet a fellow graphics professional in the real world, who is happy with the glossy screens. But these boards seem to be swarming with graphics professionals who have no problems using the glossy screens.
All the people I meet loathe the glossy screens with a venom previously reserved for Microsoft Office and traffic wardens. It's a universal hatred, and a frequent topic in all the studios I visit.
I was just speaking to a colleague last night that has taken to wearing black clothes to work. Seriously.
So I'm constantly surprised by the other professionals on these forums that have no problems with the glossy screens.
There are professionals on these forums???
I put an antiglare film on my MacBook Aluminium 2ghz about a month or two ago. Loving it. I was ready to smash the screen with my fists. The gloss didn't bother me for a year, but a few months ago I had to spend more time at the retail outlets I visit sometimes (I work for an Apple *reseller* chain), and all the tons of bright lighting was killing me.
It's Sept. 9. Nothing on the Apple Store. Nothing on the web except notes from the end of July. When will it really ship?
I think at the end of THE month. If you take a look at buyersguide.macrumors.com I see that Macs usually get released at the end of the month. iPods at the beginning and laptops halfway through the month.
Comments
Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24". There have been several times when I went shopping for a IPS screen, I was beating the bushes for the smallest I could find. Not the biggest.
Apple monitors and iMacs are not height adjustable. They are way too tall, forcing the user to crane the neck backwards. A pain in the neck. Literally. Everyone else who makes monitors seems to understand this is important. Someone at Apple does not. No the tilt does not make up for it.
Over 20" off the desk? You must me kidding me. Someone's idea of style over function. Every ergonomic guideline has the top of the screen should below eye level with the screen tilted up so you are looking down at it. There is a reason for it.
That spells the difference between a trip to the chiro and a days work. I use a 26" Planar and the top is a bare 16" off the desk.
Glossy screens? There is extra expense in producing matt glass. People have been using matt antiglare glass for decades, For a reason. That reason did not go away because someone at Apple decided that gloss is cooler looking.
There are a total of 8 monitors on location. Counting the laptops, 10. When Apple makes a height adjustable matt glass screen, I might consider one of theirs the next time I look at purchasing a monitor.
Desktops are dead? Laptops are like anything else which is portable, they sacrifice a lot to achieve that portability. When laptops are designed to run all day at heavy work loads, have equally fast processors and memory, run cool enough and have matt glass IPS screens, they might replace a desktop as a second screen unit for people who use a computer for work.
Strangely, this is a question my local genius have been unable to answer the same way each time I pose the question. I would enjoy your take, or anyone else's...
At home I often plug my latest model 17 MBP into a current mac 24 inch monitor. For home use, the size, performance and convenience of the apple 24 is great.....
BUT
when I do dual screen, and try to turn down the lights in my study, by MBP screen dims, but no way I can make the apple respond to ambient light. is it SUPPOSED to ? If so any idea how i might achieve it? Not to be condescending, but i find more genii on this forum than my local store
You cannot see a dimmed 17MBP next to such a bright 24 inch display.
You can turn off ambient light sensing in display settings by unchecking the box "automatcially adjust brightness as ambient light changes"
i suspect the new monitor will have the same option.
You can turn off ambient light sensing in display settings by unchecking the box "automatcially adjust brightness as ambient light changes"
i suspect the new monitor will have the same option.
I love when new posters are helpful and specific. Welcome to the forum.
Many people need a 30 inch monitor. They will simply have to look elsewhere.
No, they don't.
It's a tiny niche market of graphics/video professionals and those with the budget to purchase very expensive toys who want a 30" desktop monitor. The 27" is perfect as a high end desktop monitor for the majority of people who want something a little larger, many of whom will want to watch video on it, making 16:9 the perfect ratio. I note it's also cheaper and slightly better spec'd than Dell's 27" offering.
There is no way in hell that a single size monitor is going to cover everyone's needs. I use a 26" monitor AND a 19" on one comp. The second screen is just for graphics apps pallets. A 22" on another computer, and a 19" on another.
Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24". There have been several times when I went shopping for a IPS screen, I was beating the bushes for the smallest I could find. Not the biggest.
Apple monitors and iMacs are not height adjustable. They are way too tall, forcing the user to crane the neck backwards. A pain in the neck. Literally. Everyone else who makes monitors seems to understand this is important. Someone at Apple does not. No the tilt does not make up for it.
Over 20" off the desk? You must me kidding me. Someone's idea of style over function. Every ergonomic guideline has the top of the screen should below eye level with the screen tilted up so you are looking down at it. There is a reason for it.
That spells the difference between a trip to the chiro and a days work. I use a 26" Planar and the top is a bare 16" off the desk.
Glossy screens? There is extra expense in producing matt glass. People have been using matt antiglare glass for decades, For a reason. That reason did not go away because someone at Apple decided that gloss is cooler looking.
It's funny, i'm sat with my 27" iMac, the top of the monitor is in line roughly with my eye level, i've not adjusted it's height. But it's amazing what you can do with a decent office chair and a decent work desk. The iMac rotates, it tilts, the height seems to be perfect when put on an office desk with swivel chair, my neck isn't craned and my back is nicely comfortable. Maybe someone at Apple who designed this took a look at these issues and had a vague idea what they were doing?
Also I'm a (fairly successful) graphics professional and LOVE my glossy screen. Which doesn't glare, which isn't a mirror. Seriously some people need to look at how they lay out their workspace and use a little common sense.
"Not everyone wants, needs or has the desk space space for a screen over 24"
No, I guess that's why "everyone" won't be buying one of these.
One monitor is not going to suit the whole world's needs , one company will not provide solutions for every user - that's why there are alternatives. Apple aren't here to cater for everyone, they're here to cater for those people that their devices are aimed towards - one company does not fit all. Surely you can see, with four different monitors in your work flow that you're not exactly Joe Average. I don't understand how you can complain that Apple don't cater to every specific need with every range they produce - it's simply not a realistic expectation.
"They are making what they think is going to sell"
Yes, that's what businesses do, surely you're not intending that as a criticism?
i preferred the having a 30" "pro" model and a consumer model.
i can see dropping from a 30 to a 27" with the same resolution, and i'm sure the ambient light adjustment can be disabled in settings > displays, same as the macbook pro.
i think apple should offer a 20" or 21" model as well - who's going to buy a mini and then spend more on the monitor than on the computer? they'll get a $160 23" monitor from cdw, where apple could have a $250 - $300 version and make more revenue.
I'm pretty sure there'll be a 21" version on the way very soon to match the smaller iMac. I also have a feeling a 40/42" widescreen hi-def beast with a built-in apple tv is due in the next 24 months.
I love when new posters are helpful and specific. Welcome to the forum.
yes, welcome indeed, but you see the problem i have is trying to turn ON auto brightness on a led 24 mac monitor. My apple store staff have been even less helpful.
it seems like there is NO auto brightness display setting for led 24 display, but so hard to get confirmation on. Maybe it would be nice if there were an option to DISABLE (turn off) auto brightness on the built in lcd when you have an external monitor....
I've looked at Mac computer screens since I did professional publishing on a Mac Plus. I've hung nearly every brand of monitor made off their video ports, even 19" grayscale portrait monitors that had to be clipped to an accelerator board hanging off the mobo of a Mac SE. I lived with my office lights dimmed and a view of the skyline blocked because of the glare off a Mitsubishi 21 incher was intolerable.
I can't see how anyone can think that the elimination of a professional graphics monitor and its replacement with a consumer model is anything but an abandonment of a market Apple has endlessly courted since the dawning days of desktop publishing and computer illustration. But now instead of offering the "perfect display working in coordination with your printed output via ColorSync" (as they did in the not-so-distant past), they tout the inclusion of speakers worse than ones you can get from BestBuy for $10.
Several snarked about introducing politics in the forum, but there was no political reference in my post. Al Gore's primary accomplishment as a board member of Apple, Inc. was to convince the company that they needed to appease the growing list of "environmentalists" who were taking them to task. This has resulted in a near endless campaign of how much greener a company they are, despite the fact they make stuff that devours energy almost constantly. As for Mr. Gore's own environmentalist beliefs, his recent move to $9MM mega-sq. ft. bachelor mansion situated on the very coast he said will rise by 25 feet should be an indication of how much faith he has in his own work. The photo of him in his Washington office seated in front of THREE 30" Apple monitors, plus a fax machine, a big laser printer and a wall-mounted 40+" plasma TV all running should indicate his concern for how much energy products like that consume. In my opinion, he's become a fraud and a huckster, and that has nothing to do with his past political service to his country.
I cannot fault Apple for their decisions to chase the burgeoning consumer electronics market rather than the professional computer graphics and video development teams -- these are sound business decisions, and are hardly new to any business. Sophisticated technology designed to effectively and efficiently meet professionals' needs ALWAYS costs extra money, and is often a niche market. The problem is that Apple always claimed to be on the side of these people, and in years past worked in concert with them to develop products that met their needs. Now they are run by steely-eyed businessmen with sharpened pencils who know that a $250 share price is better than accolades by a group of professionals.
As to you dolts who believe that a $999 display is overpriced for what it delivers in a business situation, and that expensive tools are nothing but toys for the rich -- there is no argument that would placate your ignorance. My Mac Pro and 24" EIZO display are among the least expensive of my tools. Perhaps it's time you started finding out why a TV show like "Jersey Shore" --that only paid the 8 cast members $25,000 to split between them -- has a production budget close to a half-million dollars. These aren't toys, and they cost money if you want the end result to look right.
yes, welcome indeed, but you see the problem i have is trying to turn ON auto brightness on a led 24 mac monitor. My apple store staff have been even less helpful.
it seems like there is NO auto brightness display setting for led 24 display, but so hard to get confirmation on. Maybe it would be nice if there were an option to DISABLE (turn off) auto brightness on the built in lcd when you have an external monitor....
I looked for a Terminal command and PLIST setting for that. Nothing.
This all depends on how often you switch between displays, but the best option I can offer is to use Automator to create a simple app to turn this on or off or to auto adjust brightness with a single click.
PS: Aren?t you pretty much using the 24? ACD in a control environment so you don?t need the auto-adjust feature (which i don?t think has ever worked well to begin with)? I?m guessing it?s night/day issue. How about a simple Menu Bar item to adjust the brightness?
It's funny, i'm sat with my 27" iMac, the top of the monitor is in line roughly with my eye level, i've not adjusted it's height. But it's amazing what you can do with a decent office chair and a decent work desk. The iMac rotates, it tilts, the height seems to be perfect when put on an office desk with swivel chair, my neck isn't craned and my back is nicely comfortable. Maybe someone at Apple who designed this took a look at these issues and had a vague idea what they were doing?
Also I'm a (fairly successful) graphics professional and LOVE my glossy screen. Which doesn't glare, which isn't a mirror. Seriously some people need to look at how they lay out their workspace and use a little common sense.
I do building design including furniture. That includes desk heights and chair heights, distances between the two to accommodate a humans legs, and torso heights.
20+ inches is too tall unless you are over 6'
This is more to the point: http://www.office-ergo.com/setting.htm
Regarding my title? All businesses make tradeoffs between what's good and what sells. A range of size monitors such as when they made a 20, 23 and a 30 covers a broad spectrum of user/customer needs, a single size cuts costs and forces potential customers to look elsewhere. They are focusing on profit at the expense of losing customers to other vendors. Its representative of a mindset and I think its anecdotal worth mentioning.
Would love to buy Apple screens but they just don't make them like they used to. A shame.
As a graphics professional working in print based media I totally agree. Apple's abandonment of the matte screen goes along with their indifference to the Pro line generally it seems.
In my opinion the glossy screen is the visual equivalent of building a high-end sound system with a perpetual built-in buzzing sound. The glossy screen imac I use downstairs is a constant P.I.T.A. to use, since I have windows. I spend half the time fiddling with the drapes and blinds just to be able to see it.
I suppose if one's computing is done mostly in a cubicle or consists of video games in a basement, glossy really rocks.
I luv the Unix based OS... but I'm holding onto my matte screen cinema display. Many forums have concluded that the matte screen gives more accurate color display for proofing prints.
For those thin-skinned enough to find my earlier post egregious, allow my retort.
I've looked at Mac computer screens since I did professional publishing on a Mac Plus. I've hung nearly every brand of monitor made off their video ports, even 19" grayscale portrait monitors that had to be clipped to an accelerator board hanging off the mobo of a Mac SE. I lived with my office lights dimmed and a view of the skyline blocked because of the glare off a Mitsubishi 21 incher was intolerable.
I can't see how anyone can think that the elimination of a professional graphics monitor and its replacement with a consumer model is anything but an abandonment of a market Apple has endlessly courted since the dawning days of desktop publishing and computer illustration. But now instead of offering the "perfect display working in coordination with your printed output via ColorSync" (as they did in the not-so-distant past), they tout the inclusion of speakers worse than ones you can get from BestBuy for $10.
Several snarked about introducing politics in the forum, but there was no political reference in my post. Al Gore's primary accomplishment as a board member of Apple, Inc. was to convince the company that they needed to appease the growing list of "environmentalists" who were taking them to task. This has resulted in a near endless campaign of how much greener a company they are, despite the fact they make stuff that devours energy almost constantly. As for Mr. Gore's own environmentalist beliefs, his recent move to $9MM mega-sq. ft. bachelor mansion situated on the very coast he said will rise by 25 feet should be an indication of how much faith he has in his own work. The photo of him in his Washington office seated in front of THREE 30" Apple monitors, plus a fax machine, a big laser printer and a wall-mounted 40+" plasma TV all running should indicate his concern for how much energy products like that consume. In my opinion, he's become a fraud and a huckster, and that has nothing to do with his past political service to his country.
I cannot fault Apple for their decisions to chase the burgeoning consumer electronics market rather than the professional computer graphics and video development teams -- these are sound business decisions, and are hardly new to any business. Sophisticated technology designed to effectively and efficiently meet professionals' needs ALWAYS costs extra money, and is often a niche market. The problem is that Apple always claimed to be on the side of these people, and in years past worked in concert with them to develop products that met their needs. Now they are run by steely-eyed businessmen with sharpened pencils who know that a $250 share price is better than accolades by a group of professionals.
As to you dolts who believe that a $999 display is overpriced for what it delivers in a business situation, and that expensive tools are nothing but toys for the rich -- there is no argument that would placate your ignorance. My Mac Pro and 24" EIZO display are among the least expensive of my tools. Perhaps it's time you started finding out why a TV show like "Jersey Shore" --that only paid the 8 cast members $25,000 to split between them -- has a production budget close to a half-million dollars. These aren't toys, and they cost money if you want the end result to look right.
Oh, the thin skin of the thin-skin-accuser!
What you call the elimination of a pro level display is no such thing to me. As I have said, for my uses the glossy displays are just as good, perhaps better than the matter displays. Of course, your mileage may vary. I am using my iMac 27" to do graphics work as we speak (okay, well I was doing work until I started reading this post again...). Everything is fine. I am upstairs in a room with 2 windows in it and it is a sunny day. No problems here! This is a great display as far as I'm concerned. Much nicer than many much more expensive displays that were considered pro graphics models a few ears ago.
Perhaps you are upset that as technology progresses the difference between PRO and CONSUMER begins to blur. I would have laughed at the idea of using an iMac for Pro work a few years ago, for good reason. Now there is plenty of horsepower in an iMac for my purposes. Same is happening with displays now. LCD tech has come a long way. This weird (non)issue with glossy screens is just a symptom of your need to feel superior, in my not-so humble opinion. How can you feel validated if you don't need some kind of rare-earth uber-monitor to do your PRO work on? Fact is, for most pros, the 27" glossy will get the job done just fine. If you really are a pro, you will figure it out. You figured it out with grayscale monitors in the past...
As for politics, your claim of no-politics is ridiculous. After you claim the Al Gore comment was apolitical you launch into quite the Gore hypocrite tirade. Environmentalist is a political issue no matter how deep you bury your head in the sand, thus the comments ARE political. Don't get me wrong, I understand and appreciate the criticism. Al Gore, even if his mind is in the right place, is a deeply flawed individual who is certainly not 'walking the walk'. All that aside, the comment was and is political and there is really no call for it. The glossy glass was not Al Gore's call. Perhaps the Aluminum bodies, perhaps the innards made without VOCs & such. if you notice, the 30" ACD has not protective panel of any kind over the LCD panel. In the case of the glossy displays, there is the LCD panel underneath and then a glossy glass protective panel over that. That uses MORE resources to manufacture and so I think Al Gore would have suggested against that particular design choice if he had any opinion at all.
If there is one thing we agree on it is this: our Macs & displays are the cheaper of the tools used for our work. There are people where I work who use millions dollar proofing devices to do their color work. With that kind of hardware at their disposal to dial in color I am more than happy to leave the high-end color work to them since no display apple could sell me would put me in their league.
Oh, the thin skin of the thin-skin-accuser!
Perhaps you are upset that as technology progresses the difference between PRO and CONSUMER begins to blur. I would have laughed at the idea of using an iMac for Pro work a few years ago, for good reason. Now there is plenty of horsepower in an iMac for my purposes. Same is happening with displays now. LCD tech has come a long way. This weird (non)issue with glossy screens is just a symptom of your need to feel superior, in my not-so humble opinion. How can you feel validated if you don't need some kind of rare-earth uber-monitor to do your PRO work on? Fact is, for most pros, the 27" glossy will get the job done just fine. If you really are a pro, you will figure it out. You figured it out with grayscale monitors in the past...
Well that is a good point. I have to say that when comparing the glossy 27" iMac next to a 30" ACD I can't help but wanting the non-glossy screen. I love photography, but am certainly no professional. Heck, if I were I wouldn't even look at flat screens since professionals use CRT's. Just take a look around Hollywood. Still, as a hobbyist I just give preference to the non-glossy screen. If Apple doesn't come out with a non-glossy screen soon I 'need' to look further. Either Eizo, perhaps Samsung. I need to see them in person before deciding. Obviously.
(...)if you notice, the 30" ACD has not protective panel of any kind over the LCD panel. In the case of the glossy displays, there is the LCD panel underneath and then a glossy glass protective panel over that (...)
Does that mean one can theoretically remove the glossy screen from the glossy screen and retain a 27" non-glossy screen? Then you'll have a tat smaller screen for 8 benjamins less.
All the people I meet loathe the glossy screens with a venom previously reserved for Microsoft Office and traffic wardens. It's a universal hatred, and a frequent topic in all the studios I visit.
I was just speaking to a colleague last night that has taken to wearing black clothes to work. Seriously.
So I'm constantly surprised by the other professionals on these forums that have no problems with the glossy screens.
Well that is a good point. I have to say that when comparing the glossy 27" iMac next to a 30" ACD I can't help but wanting the non-glossy screen. I love photography, but am certainly no professional. Heck, if I were I wouldn't even look at flat screens since professionals use CRT's. Just take a look around Hollywood. Still, as a hobbyist I just give preference to the non-glossy screen. If Apple doesn't come out with a non-glossy screen soon I 'need' to look further. Either Eizo, perhaps Samsung. I need to see them in person before deciding. Obviously.
Does that mean one can theoretically remove the glossy screen from the glossy screen and retain a 27" non-glossy screen? Then you'll have a tat smaller screen for 8 benjamins less.
Its not just theoretically possible, go to iFixit.com. They demonstrate exactly how it is done. Of course, their instructions only show how to temporarily remove the display to get at the innards of the machine for upgrade/repair purposes.
It almost makes me think I should design a drop-in replacement panels for iMacs. The peeps whining about this seem hell-bent on spending big money to avoid gloss...This might be a great market to get into...
I'm really looking for a non gloss, 30+ inch. Somewhere around 40" with the colour gamut of Adobe 98 would be amazing.
You know, it's funny. I've yet to meet a fellow graphics professional in the real world, who is happy with the glossy screens. But these boards seem to be swarming with graphics professionals who have no problems using the glossy screens.
All the people I meet loathe the glossy screens with a venom previously reserved for Microsoft Office and traffic wardens. It's a universal hatred, and a frequent topic in all the studios I visit.
I was just speaking to a colleague last night that has taken to wearing black clothes to work. Seriously.
So I'm constantly surprised by the other professionals on these forums that have no problems with the glossy screens.
There are professionals on these forums???
I put an antiglare film on my MacBook Aluminium 2ghz about a month or two ago. Loving it. I was ready to smash the screen with my fists. The gloss didn't bother me for a year, but a few months ago I had to spend more time at the retail outlets I visit sometimes (I work for an Apple *reseller* chain), and all the tons of bright lighting was killing me.
Announced on Tuesday, the new 27-inch LED Cinema Display will begin shipping from Apple in September.
It's Sept. 9. Nothing on the Apple Store. Nothing on the web except notes from the end of July. When will it really ship?
I think at the end of THE month. If you take a look at buyersguide.macrumors.com I see that Macs usually get released at the end of the month. iPods at the beginning and laptops halfway through the month.
Or so it seems.