Value of Apple LCDs?

mmmpie · November 3, 2004 3:56AM

I was browsing Dells store today, and saw that their 20" Ultrasharp is now on special for $599.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/P...tegory_id=4009

This is a nice monitor ( Im very happy with my 17" Ultrasharp ), and has ganered good reviews in recent press. The killer is that Dell are currently offering it at a $200 discount, plus free shipping. It has a lot of nice features that go beyond what Apple offers - dual inputs, video inputs, pivot.

It isnt widescreen, and it isnt as pretty as a Cinema display. Im sure that the panel itself isnt as good, but its heaps better than my cheap CRTs.

Opinions?

I get the feeling that Apples monitors seem over priced, except for a limited, demanding professional market. Is their pickiness in panels really worth a 100% premium?

mynameis · November 3, 2004 11:06AM

I have a Dell 2001FP, it is an excellent monitor. Don't assume the panel itself isn't as good, it is made by the same people that make some of the panels for Apple, LG Philips. Just think, you can get 2 Dell 2001FPs for the price of a 20in Apple Cinema.

Think of it in terms of how many pixels can be displayed by each monitor(I rounded a bit) vs the cost:

20in Apple Cinema 1.76mil - $1299

20in Dell 20in 1.92mil - $600

2x 20in Dell 20in 3.84mil - $1200

23in Apple Cinema 2.3mil - $2000

30in Apple Cinema 4.1mil - $3299

So for $1200 worth of dell monitors you can have close to the same screen real estate as a 30in Cinema Display.

of course you don't get the style with the Dell and 1 large monitor is arguably better than having 2 smaller ones.

ipodandimac · November 3, 2004 11:15AM

the fact that apple LCD's are widescreen puts them way ahead of everyone else for me. i need the horizontal space for video editing. I know you can hook up two cheap dell monitors, but the line in the middle gets annoying (i've used that setup before.) so basically, while apple lcd's are expensive, i think they're worth it.

mehdi · November 3, 2004 11:20AM

The problem with most other LCD panels is that they are all 4x3 aspect ratio. This is a major annoyance if you want do any 16x9 aspect ratio videos.

I do agree that Apple displays are a bit overpriced, and I don't anticipate any price drops until more companies adopt and produce other aspect ratios for their panels.

mynameis · November 3, 2004 5:23PM

If you want to save a bit of money but still want a widescreen:

Sony has a 23in widescreen similar in specs to Apple's 23in Cinema

HP also has one that is similar to the 23in Cinema, this one is just as expensive as Apple's though, it can sometimes be found on sale.

I haven't seen any 20in widescreens by anyone else yet though.

dbamber · November 3, 2004 7:55PM

Having bought, and returned more than my share of technology products, I have found that my 18 month old 20" cinema has saved my eyes more than its cost over other similarly sized monitors. Both on a pc, and Mac.

gon · November 3, 2004 9:02PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ipodandimac

the fact that apple LCD's are widescreen puts them way ahead of everyone else for me. i need the horizontal space for video editing. I know you can hook up two cheap dell monitors, but the line in the middle gets annoying (i've used that setup before.) so basically, while apple lcd's are expensive, i think they're worth it.

I'd like to ask two quick questions, because I don't do video editing. How is the workspace divided between controls and video (preview/playback/whatever)? Is the UI designed to make good use of multiple screens?

mcq · November 5, 2004 2:23AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mynameis

If you want to save a bit of money but still want a widescreen:

Sony has a 23in widescreen similar in specs to Apple's 23in Cinema

HP also has one that is similar to the 23in Cinema, this one is just as expensive as Apple's though, it can sometimes be found on sale.

I haven't seen any 20in widescreens by anyone else yet though.

Neither had I. Until now. Dell 2005FPW:

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topi...en&s=bsd&cs=04

Granted, it looks like ass, but if the speakers can be detached, and the display quality is good (not Apple quality necessarily, but good enough), then it's an awesome deal.

Big picture:

http://www.dell.com/downloads/global...2005fp_300.jpg

feverishaaron · November 5, 2004 2:27AM

that dell monitor is a fantastic monitor. The only reason, in my opinion, to get an Apple LCD is if you are doing color work, because of the built-in colorcync circuitry. The 100 dpi resolution is nice, too, but other than that, I can't see the justification.

Get 2 of those monitors, and it is less than my 23" display, but them's the breaks.

mynameis · November 5, 2004 3:40PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MCQ

Neither had I. Until now. Dell 2005FPW:

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topi...en&s=bsd&cs=04

12ms response time is nice.

edit: Also don't assume the quality of the dell display inferior to the Apple, I know Apple may win on style but the actual panels are made by the same company.

slughead · November 5, 2004 5:52PM

ugh for the price of an apple 30", why not just get a 52" plasma television at 1980p and hook your computer up to it?

or are those that cheap yet...

mcq · November 5, 2004 9:55PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mynameis

12ms response time is nice.

edit: Also don't assume the quality of the dell display inferior to the Apple, I know Apple may win on style but the actual panels are made by the same company.

I didn't really make any assumptions, I just wasn't sure who made the panels. Since their panels are coming from the same company (which appears to be LG from threads I've seen elsewhere), all the better.

Just have to wait for them to be available in their peripherals store. They're currently only available as an add-on to systems.

slughead · November 5, 2004 11:35PM

btw guys you're all forgetting one of the most important LCD purchasing guidelines:

CONTRAST RATIO

800:1 is standard, 600:1 is minimum, 400:1 is unacceptable

now take a look at <a href="http://www.apple.com/displays/specs.html">Apple's</a>;

I'm not going to repeat the numbers, you'll have to see them for yourself.

mcq · November 6, 2004 12:45AM

Don't get too caught up in the numbers game... I honestly haven't the slightest clue how some manufacturers are getting those numbers so high now.

Heck, my Samsung 170T from 3 years ago is "only" 400:1 contrast ratio, and it's a great flat panel.

And, by that standard you're saying that the 2001fp, which has received many solid reviews, to be unacceptable? (It only has 400:1 contrast)

gon · November 6, 2004 7:38AM

Quote:

Originally posted by slughead

btw guys you're all forgetting one of the most important LCD purchasing guidelines:

CONTRAST RATIO

800:1 is standard, 600:1 is minimum, 400:1 is unacceptable.

Bullshit.

slughead · November 6, 2004 12:29PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gon

Bullshit.

Even according to that article, higher contrast ratios mean higher possible brightness.

While contrast ratio is deceptive in that it doesn't express contrast, it certainly does describe the brightness.

airsluf · November 6, 2004 3:38PM

Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.

Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.

Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.

mynameis · November 6, 2004 4:18PM

Quote:

Originally posted by slughead

800:1 is standard, 600:1 is minimum, 400:1 is unacceptable

Where can you find an LCD that is 800:1? The highest I have ever owned was 600:1.

slughead · November 6, 2004 6:46PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mynameis

Where can you find an LCD that is 800:1? The highest I have ever owned was 600:1.

http://castle.pricewatch.com/search/search.idq?qc="800:1"*&cr=800:1

Value of Apple LCDs?

Comments