

Apple releases new 27″ LED Cinema Display – comes with a free Mac - hemancuso
http://blog.expandrive.com/2009/10/20/apples-releases-new-27-led-cinema-display-comes-with-a-free-mac/

======
dcurtis
Amazingly, the new iMacs have s-IPS screens, too! So not only are you getting
a free Mac, but you're getting a tremendously higher quality display as well.
(Actually, I don't think any other LED-backlit IPS screens exist for sale.)

~~~
pmjordan
Too bad it looks like they still use the glossy finish. Especially on a screen
that size, it's got to be tricky to find a geometric configuration in which
you get no reflections throughout the day.

~~~
randallsquared
I have the 24" glossy iMac, and after putting blackout curtains on the windows
of the room it's in, I've had no issues. I guess that's not an ideal
solution...

~~~
jacquesm
That's not a 'not ideal solution' that's not a solution. If you have to
remodel your house because the manufacturer of the screen put a mirror on it
in stead of a piece of anti-glare glass why bother with it.

These 'glossy' screens are the biggest set-back in display technology in years
and I really don't get why people put up with them.

Even with 'no issues' try looking at a screen that is partially black and
partially high intensity (like a terminal screen), you'll still see yourself
sitting in it.

~~~
randallsquared
Perhaps I should have included a smiley.

I agree that I would prefer a screen with no glare. However, I prefer the
glossy screens with their high brightness and contrast (at least, so it seems
to me) over matte screens with lower brightness and contrast. I find that even
though I can see the reflections when they're pointed out, in practice I don't
notice them any more, partially because they're at a different depth than the
data on the screen.

~~~
jacquesm
The depth cue is a good one.

The interesting thing is that you mention the high brightness and contrast,
I'm writing this on a cheapie LG 24" and I have the brightness turned down
considerably from the default settings, and in low light I turn it down even
further. I noticed that since I started doing that my eyes are a lot less
'tired' after sitting behind the machine for a whole day.

It used to be so bad that it simply hurt to work in longer stretches.

------
mdemare
That's a pretty compelling argument actually - especially since all monitors I
can find with comparable resolutions (2560x1440) are over $1000.

~~~
borism
What's so compelling?

So Apple got a good deal from LCD panel supplier. Wait a month or two and
you'll get the same deal for a display without embedded Mac.

Unless you were planning to buy iMac anyway, I don't see what's so exciting
about this "deal".

------
codyrobbins
But when are they going to finally release actual new Cinema Displays, sans
iMac? The Dell 3008WFP is such an ugly piece of plastic crap, in my opinion.

~~~
barredo
It's not crap. It's expensive. But it's not crap.

~~~
zefhous
I'm sure he's talking about the design and aesthetic, not the actual display
quality.

~~~
codyrobbins
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. I can't comment on the actual display
itself, but the thought of spending $1,300 on something that comes in such a
poorly designed faux-futuristic plastic housing is an instant deal-breaker for
me. I don't mean to knock anyone who has one. I know the function is what
matters, but I can't help caring about the form too. It's just not something I
could be happy with on my desk.

~~~
elq
Yes. I have a 3008 and I'm constantly distracted by the horrible plastic. I
can't imagine how I use it daily...

Now without the sarcasm - The monitor is fantastic. It's been fantastic for
over a year. I really couldn't care less how the non-glowing part of the
display looks.

~~~
codyrobbins
Let me guess, you use one of those pressboard corner computer hutches with
fifteen hundred shelves and hidden compartments, complete with printer cart on
casters and CD rack, as your desk; and a folding chair you picked up at a
rummage sale to sit on? Sorry, I couldn’t resist ;)

Snarkiness aside, I do care about what the non-glowing part looks like. The
aesthetics of the space I’m in materially effect my general mood and
productivity level, and having control over that environment is one of the
reasons I’m self-employed, because I can’t stand being surrounded by plastic,
linoleum, and carpeted cubicle walls.

Objectively, it looks no different than any other piece of consumer
electronics. But that’s the general problem I’m lamenting. If I’m spending
$1,300, can’t they spend some money on the product design and make it look
sleek, sexy, and expensive? For $1,300 I want to be proud to have it on my
desk! Of course, since most people don’t care what the housing looks like,
that’s exactly why they don’t, so I don’t blame them.

~~~
sjs
Dell is starting to get that aesthetics matter quite a bit to some people.
Their designs are coming around, slowly. For a product like the 3008wfp a
refresh will take some time. They probably skipped 3009wfp to avoid another
debacle like the 3008wfp launch.

------
dkasper
The Mac Pro looks like a horrible deal now, hopefully that means more good
upgrades are coming.

------
pwbailey
I am waiting with baited breath for a 27-inch stand-alone LED display based on
the new iMac's display. As my eyes age, I appreciate more and more large-
format displays. I am using a Dell 2709WFP on a 13" Macbook Pro 2.53. The very
beautiful (both aesthetically and technically) Apple 24" LED-backlit display
is somehow too small after seeing a 27" with the same content. (How're you
gonna keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen Paree?")

I am actually one of those liberal, Obama-voting hybrid Mac users who has used
Macintoshes since the first Bloom-County classic Mac in 1984. I also have
always had to use both platforms, because as much as I would like it to be
otherwise, business runs on Windows, very probably because of the misguided
belief that cheap hardware makes their IT solutions cost-effective. Every
single day of my life I have had some unwelcomed anomaly happen on my Windows
computer. This is great for those in IT who make a living chasing Windows
bugs, but is false economy for business in general. Even to this day,
Microsoft Word runs better under Windows that it does on OSX. Too bad.

------
neovive
Did they specify the dot pitch on the 27" screen? I recall testing the 17" MBP
@ 1920X1200, but the text felt a bit small. Considering the old 24" was only
1920 pixels wide, packing 2560 pixels across into 27" seems tight.

~~~
blackguardx
Smaller dot pitch is better. If the text is too small, increase the font size.

~~~
zokier
You shouldn't need to increase font size. If there is 12pt text, it should be
12pt on screen, regardless of the resolution you are running.

Actually if you set larger font to compensate screen resolution, it could
wreck the hinting/scaling system in fonts, as the designer assumes that the
characters are certain size. The letters are usually differently shaped at
different sizes, and with highres screen you actually want those small-size
shapes because they are optimized for small sizes.

edit: just to say, yes I fully agree that higher pixel pitch is definitely a
good thing. I feel like displays are one of the most slowly advancing part of
computers. Yes, they are getting bigger and bigger, but we are stuck on the
same <100 PPI pixel pitch for large part of desktop LCD monitor history. At
the same time mobile devices are having 300 PPI displays, and even laptops
have higher pitched screens than desktops. Its just not fair!

~~~
zargon
I refuse to buy a desktop LCD until I can get an even mildly decent PPI. At
least 125. 300 would be fantastic. Till then, I have 3 backup FW900s.

------
mrshoe
This is an interesting perspective, but a 30" display still has about 25% more
screen area than a 27" display.

Not that absolute screen surface area is the most important metric.

~~~
bonaldi
It also has it where it counts: depth. Almost everything I work on is helped
by better depth: writing, coding, browsing. After a while, even the 1600
pixels of the 30" seem shallow. The iMac sure is wide, but it only has 1440
pixels in depth.

I know why they're doing it -- 16:9 widescreen panels are cheaper because of
the demand for TV panels (it's almost impossible to get 4:3 panels these days)
-- but I think it's a pity.

~~~
zokier
I seriously doubt that 16:9 panels would be cheaper because of TVs. First of
all, TVs are usually somewhat larger. Secondly TVs have a lot worse
resolution. Because of these factors, I don't believe that manufacturing
panels for TVs affects the manufacture of computer display panels directly.

On a unrelated note, most people refer the other dimension as height, not
depth.

~~~
bonaldi
Neither of those factors play a role: there are plenty of 27" televisions, and
it's not the resolution that matters, it's cutting the glass. The official
Lenovo blog talks more about this:
<http://lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=220>

Apols for the depth thing, don't know where that came from. Possibly reading
about bit-depth, another traditional area of Apple cost-cutting.

~~~
jrwoodruff
Actually, if you read the Lenovo post, TVs are precisely why the 16:9 ratio is
being pushed by screen manufacturers: there's more TVs made (at 16:9),
therefore, if they maintain the same aspect ratio for all screens they
manufacture, there's less waste in the glass cutting process, which means 16:9
screens will be cheaper than custom-ratio screens like 16:10..

~~~
mediaman
You are agreeing with bonaldi, though your statement appears as though it
doesn't intend to.

------
PStamatiou
just as i was getting happy with the 1920x1200 on my 17-inch MBP (i'm huge fan
of high pixel pitch)...

~~~
jac_no_k
Now if only Apple would get around to putting in a non-glossy 1920x1200 panel
in a 15 inch MBP, I would have even less reason to not move on from my aging
Dell 8600.

~~~
weaksauce
[http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MB986LL/A?mco=MTA4MTgyNj...](http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MB986LL/A?mco=MTA4MTgyNjQ)

It's time to move to the other side....

They added the anti glare as an option in the refresh a while back.

~~~
Oompa
It's not 1900x1200 though.

~~~
joe_adk
Anyone know if it is at least 8 bit now?

~~~
GHFigs
Certainly not, as the major LCD manufacturers have stopped producing 8-bit
panels in portable sizes.

------
amichail
Anyone find it irritating when a company advertises the environmental benefits
of a product (e.g., LED displays)?

It's sort of like putting words into your mouth, making assumptions about your
worldview.

~~~
azim
Displays with an LED backlight are also capable of displaying a wider color
gamut than those with a CCFL.

~~~
amichail
The sales pitch should only mention the performance benefits of a technology,
leaving any environmental benefit to perhaps a subtle sticker on the product
that one can easily remove.

~~~
pavs
The fact the Apple is _not_ the only company that prominently highlights the
effect of its product on environment only proves that they are significant
number of people out there who actually cares about the environmental impact
of the product they are purchasing.

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be "irritated" by this.

I am interested to know which "position of your worldview" was violated by
apple's promotion of environmentally friendly product.

