[Eyenovation]

I am hearing rumors of a 30" Cinema Display to be released w/ the G5. Supposedly it's not clear anymore either.

Fact or Fiction?


Remember who you heard it from.

[Link]

I call fiction.. while it'd be nice to have a 30" at maybe the same DPI as the 22" was (for people like me lol.. I might be 16 but my vision sucks)..

Fiction because NEC makes a 30" monitor.. they advertise it as LCD but I believe it's a plasma.. since it has half the pixels that a cinema 22" does.

[Axo1ot1]

I heard this from a dude that works at Apple...he didn't work there when he said this to me, and I don't trust him...but interesting to see someone else talk about it.

[Eyenovation]

Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
I heard this from a dude that works at Apple...he didn't work there when he said this to me, and I don't trust him...but interesting to see someone else talk about it.

... I'd put money on its validity in some form. And I only bet when I know I'll win.

[AssassyN]

This rumor has actually been around for months, primarily on SpyMac.com. I kind of doubt's it's validity for physical reasons; Gateway made some huge 42" computer LCD, but it had one major downfall: because it's so big, the res. hadta be 800x600. It was perfect for business presentation rooms, but terrible for gaming/DVD watching of any wealthy computer owner. The 30" Cinema would be bordering on "too far", and I think Apple has a small enough niche market as is; adding some far-out expensive 30" display wouldn't exactly be cost efficient.

[Eyenovation]

I won't say anything except remember where you heard it (again, if it was already on SpyMac) when it comes out.

[AssassyN]

Originally posted by Eyenovation:
I won't say anything except remember where you heard it (again, if it was already on SpyMac) when it comes out.

I'll hold you accountable for making me excited for nothing *if* it's not released. I'll thank you if it is.

[Eyenovation]

I'd venture to say we could see something announced perhaps by the next big conference. I'd imagine they'd want to ship a new monitor ASAP w/ the G5's shipping very soon.

[AssassyN]

Makes reasonable sense...when/what *is* the next conference?

[::maroma::]

Well, it's expected that Apple will give us matching Displays for the G5, since the current ones don't really "go" with it. So Apple replacing the 23" HD with a 30" HD (and maybe offering it at the same price as the 23") wouldn't be a big surprise. Having a 17", 20" and a 30" as their lineup would be pretty sweet.

[Eyenovation]

I can't see them dropping the 23", but that's my opinion. I could see them adding the 30" however, to the best monitor go w/ the best computer.

[AssassyN]

Hmm...I just remember though, the 20" Cinema was only added a few months back; that assures us the whole display line WON'T be re-vamped, however one may be added to match the G5.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally posted by AssassyN:
Hmm...I just remember though, the 20" Cinema was only added a few months back; that assures us the whole display line WON'T be re-vamped, however one may be added to match the G5.

i don't see how that assures anything. the 20" Cinema Display was announced on January 28th -- the 17" PowerBooks didn't even start shipping till well after that, and everyone expects an update to those. As for a 30" display, i don't know... if there was one, i really doubt they could (or would) make a $2000 price point. and replacing the 23" would be a stupid move, in my opinion, since some people may want the extra room (and the better-than-HD resolution) that the 23" has to offer, but think that 30" is just too big. my guess would be to keep the 4:3 17" and the 16:10 20", and add a mid-20s (25" or something) display to appease those people, as well as the 30 (if they make that at all.)

edit: as for a redesign, it's true that the 'brushed metal' tower and 'aqua' display don't quite match, but Apple seems to be making it a point to have them coexist in their Operating System, so who knows. (maybe since the tower is the 'utility' part of the computer, it gets brushed metal )

[Eyenovation]

Originally posted by AssassyN:
Hmm...I just remember though, the 20" Cinema was only added a few months back; that assures us the whole display line WON'T be re-vamped, however one may be added to match the G5.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[Powaqqatsi]

Is there anyone who manufactures 30 inch LCDs ?

[Eyenovation]

Confirmation?

Remember where you heard it!

[todrain]

$3500 retail for a 30" LCD? i doubt it.

[Eyenovation]

Originally posted by todrain:
$3500 retail for a 30" LCD? i doubt it.

Not debating the price at all. Let's just first see the thing.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally posted by todrain:
$3500 retail for a 30" LCD? i doubt it.

a Sharp Aquos 30" LCD TV with all of the TV fixings (tuner, speakers, etc.) can be had for under 3 grand, though, admittedly, it only has 1280x768 resolution. I think somewhere between $3500 and $4000 might be possible

[Peter753]

I think they'll revamp the whole line if they do anything; remember they did discontinue production of the G4, so they dont really go with anything anymore.

[Maflynn]

Also look at the date of this thread

it looks like the rumor didn't pan out - at least for 2003

[rm199]

Philips recently announced a 30inch 2560x1600 display, however all the press releases are in Japanese.

[TailsToo]

Ok the rumor is back at AppleInsider again.

I hope they are wrong - Displays starting at $999? This would turn even more people off to the Mac. Lowest price for a complete system would be $2999!! Worse then the Cube days!

We need a low cost box, like a headless iMac, and a 17" LCDdisplay at a reasonable price. If Apple could do both for say $1400 retail, they would sell a ton, and get some market share back.

[Eyenovation]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
If Apple could do both for say $1400 retail, they would sell a ton, and get some market share back.

It's quite a difficult situation Apple is in. In many respects I don't think they aim to attract mass market share. I almost suspect keeping the products somewhat exclusive in nature helps their prestige. One could argue your philosophy for just about any luxury good, but the flip side to that is that one big facet of being considered luxury is 'highly sought' with 'limited availability'. It's a difficult situation I'm sure. It's purely a case of psychological pricing. People think, because it costs more it must be better.

[Talk2Angus]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
Ok the rumor is back at AppleInsider again.

I hope they are wrong - Displays starting at $999? This would turn even more people off to the Mac. Lowest price for a complete system would be $2999!! Worse then the Cube days!

We need a low cost box, like a headless iMac, and a 17" LCDdisplay at a reasonable price. If Apple could do both for say $1400 retail, they would sell a ton, and get some market share back.

Xactly what i think, they are pricing themselfs out the market again!!
And what about a cheaper 17"???

[Link]

IMHO apple should have never dropped the 15" display without at least keeeping a CRT model handy.

New and competetive would be:

15" 1024x768 as always -- after all it's what everyone else sells (good grief) - $299

17" 1280x1204 - low refresh rate (use numbers this time) - $499

20" 1620x1050 - same great display in a new case - $999

23" 1920x1200 - HD without breaking the bank - $1599

30" 2500xwhatever - The ultimate LCD display - $2499-$2999?

That and make them all DVI with a single cable that has a pod at the end for connections.. the 15" version marketed towards (but not limited to) the imac buyers... as well as 17" and 20" optionally.

Then the imacs could be simple pretty boxes. Bundle them with 512mb ram and a radeon 9600 from the start, yes it'd be better than what the low end powermac comes with but the low end powermac is made for people who *Don't want OR need* the better cards.

I'm just speculating here...

*1.8ghz G5 (900mhz bus)
*DDR400 in dual channel config with 2 slots -2gb max for now (4gb later?)
*1 sata drive
*combo or super drive
*easily accessible airport and bluetooth slots
$799

UGH that'd still price it $200 out of range for a lot of home buyers and WITHOUT monitor, but it'd be alright to fill in the emac/imac spec.

In essence though it'd be a mini g5.. perhaps with the colors of the mini ipod.. same idea.

I'm sure the whole price/specs thing can be speculated but heck it's all speculation.

[daydreamer]

What I always wonder about is that Apple never details the pixel response time for their displays, thats one hell of an important factor.. The PDF just says "high, fast response". So are Apple's displays something like 16ms? or is it more?

[Talk2Angus]

Originally posted by Link:
IMHO apple should have never dropped the 15" display without at least keeeping a CRT model handy.

New and competetive would be:

15" 1024x768 as always -- after all it's what everyone else sells (good grief) - $299

17" 1280x1204 - low refresh rate (use numbers this time) - $499

20" 1620x1050 - same great display in a new case - $999

23" 1920x1200 - HD without breaking the bank - $1599

30" 2500xwhatever - The ultimate LCD display - $2499-$2999?

That and make them all DVI with a single cable that has a pod at the end for connections.. the 15" version marketed towards (but not limited to) the imac buyers... as well as 17" and 20" optionally.

Then the imacs could be simple pretty boxes. Bundle them with 512mb ram and a radeon 9600 from the start, yes it'd be better than what the low end powermac comes with but the low end powermac is made for people who *Don't want OR need* the better cards.

I'm just speculating here...

*1.8ghz G5 (900mhz bus)
*DDR400 in dual channel config with 2 slots -2gb max for now (4gb later?)
*1 sata drive
*combo or super drive
*easily accessible airport and bluetooth slots
$799

UGH that'd still price it $200 out of range for a lot of home buyers and WITHOUT monitor, but it'd be alright to fill in the emac/imac spe

In essence though it'd be a mini g5.. perhaps with the colors of the mini ipod.. same idea.

I'm sure the whole price/specs thing can be speculated but heck it's all speculation.

I agree with u link they are chasing themselfs out the market!!

[TailsToo]

Originally posted by Eyenovation:
It's quite a difficult situation Apple is in. In many respects I don't think they aim to attract mass market share. I almost suspect keeping the products somewhat exclusive in nature helps their prestige. One could argue your philosophy for just about any luxury good, but the flip side to that is that one big facet of being considered luxury is 'highly sought' with 'limited availability'. It's a difficult situation I'm sure. It's purely a case of psychological pricing. People think, because it costs more it must be better.

The computer that really saved Apple was the iMac - because it was affordable, and brought people to the platform - many of whom are the ones moving up to more expensive machines today. Without that attractive low end piece, there will be little new blood in the fold, and conversely developers will stop making products for the Mac because their return will diminish.

Just my 2 cents on Apple's pricing philosophy. - They need their Civic so that they can move people up to the Accords and Accuras in the years to come.

[macaddict0001]

apple should bring back a mac LC sort of computer good for basic things such as web browsing and word processing. The computer would be an all in one.


specs:
G3 yes g3 450
dvd rom
ati rage 128 8 meg vram
15 inch display 1024x768
price 249.00

[Simon]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
apple should bring back a mac LC sort of computer good for basic things such as web browsing and word processing. The computer would be an all in one.


specs:
G3 yes g3 450
dvd rom
ati rage 128 8 meg vram
15 inch display 1024x768
price 249.00

What you did is make the specs so low that the price falls to an unbelievably low level.

With those specs people won't be able to play games, everything (Finder, Office, iTunes, Safari, Mail, etc.) will lag and in the end people will hate their Macs and the Mac will be stigmatized for being cheap and slow. That is 180 degrees away from where Apple wants itself to be positioned.

Is this necessary? No, Apple doesn't need to be cheaper than no-name PCs, they just need to be competitive, i.e. price things what they are worth (like the current eMac) and not what a geek community is ready to pay (like the current iMac).

That said, they need a LC-type Mac with the eMac board sporting a removable AGP GPU. Put it at $599 w/o screen, 256MB RAM, 40GH HD, Combo, and a 9200 GPU. And just for this model, I'd keep the 17" SD around for another while.

[Brian McHale]

I guess I'm a bit confused as to where this discussion has been heading. Apple has two entry level machines in the eMac and iMac. When people want to move up from there, they can get a low end Power Mac and an affordable third party monitor. When they want to move up further, they get a nicer Power Mac and can consider springing for one of the Apple LCDs.

Just because Apple may delete the 17" LCD from their lineup doesn't mean they're pricing themseleves out of the lowend market. (And don't forget that none of this has been officially announced yet.) There are plenty of reasonably priced ways to get a Mac. They just choose not to try to compete at the lowest levels, because you can't make money doing that.

[macaddict0001]

Yeah those specs are really low but some computer users only check their e-mail, lightly browse the web, use word processers and print all of which can be done with a performa 5200 cd most of which can be run on a lisa

[iDaver]

eBay.

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by iDaver:
eBay.

yeah but some people like the security of buying a new computer wiht a warrenty

[galarneau]

The original (22") Cinema Display was $4000, and had a resolution of 1600x1024.

It seemed to sell well enough for the time.

A 30" display at 2560x1600 for $3000 seems to be a reasonable price for the people who actually NEED it.

[Link]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
apple should bring back a mac LC sort of computer good for basic things such as web browsing and word processing. The computer would be an all in one.


specs:
G3 yes g3 450
dvd rom
ati rage 128 8 meg vram
15 inch display 1024x768
price 249.00

Now let me explain why this would not work... at all.

As someone once described to me as why apple doesn't extend their ibook/imac line lower to have cheaper prices, there's a cutoff point where using slower processors/cards doesn't save money.. at all.

If apple decided to release a 700mhz emac right now, they wouldn't be making any more profit on it than they would on a 1ghz emac. Why? There's a small difference in price between the two processors since they've been around so long.

What you're really looking at thhat jacks up the prices is how many things are non standard. A special power supply has to be made, tested, fixed, tested again, etc too many times. A special board has to be debugged and a special case has to be tested for good cooling.

The only way Apple would save money is to use a simple case design or a cheap case design, where the CD drive isn't 'cloaked' and the ventillation is very common.

If they did something like that, you'd essentially have a cheap PC box with an apple logo stamped on it and a PPC board inside. THAT would save money, not using slower/older components.

In fact, using older components can actually raise production costs since most things that old have been put out of production and thus apple would run into availability issues.

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by galarneau:
The original (22") Cinema Display was $4000, and had a resolution of 1600x1024.

It seemed to sell well enough for the time.

A 30" display at 2560x1600 for $3000 seems to be a reasonable price for the people who actually NEED it.

Seems like a reasonable price for those of us who just really want one!

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by Link:
Now let me explain why this would not work... at all.

As someone once described to me as why apple doesn't extend their ibook/imac line lower to have cheaper prices, there's a cutoff point where using slower processors/cards doesn't save money.. at all.

If apple decided to release a 700mhz emac right now, they wouldn't be making any more profit on it than they would on a 1ghz emac. Why? There's a small difference in price between the two processors since they've been around so long.

What you're really looking at thhat jacks up the prices is how many things are non standard. A special power supply has to be made, tested, fixed, tested again, etc too many times. A special board has to be debugged and a special case has to be tested for good cooling.

The only way Apple would save money is to use a simple case design or a cheap case design, where the CD drive isn't 'cloaked' and the ventillation is very common.

If they did something like that, you'd essentially have a cheap PC box with an apple logo stamped on it and a PPC board inside. THAT would save money, not using slower/older components.

In fact, using older components can actually raise production costs since most things that old have been put out of production and thus apple would run into availability issues.

at first I thought of that but then I thought that they must have extra stock because they always seem to have to much or too little stock depending on their pricing pc manafacturers can give you last year model for a bargain because they have extra stock and they must have extra stock they threw the lisas in a landfill but they might not have extra stock because for some odd reason whenever they anounece they have extra stock their stock goes down which is why they have short supplies of some things.

[Lancer409]

my first mac .. i'm a switcher, is this rev c powerbook12. i found it price competitive and aesthetically pleasing hardware and soft. the fact that osx doesnt crash factored slightly in my decision. all in one and for that price .. wasnt bad.

as for the imacs .. yeah .. kinda like a dvd/vhs player .. once one dies .. ur screwed. i understand the sentiment about cheaper comps but u have to realize... when pc companies sell loads of cpu's at a cheap price, they make a little on each when lots of people buy it. there isnt a big enough mac base to profit off of such a undertaking imho. but what do i know, i'm just assuming people wont flock to low low LOW end macs .. compared to pc's at that price that i'd call just south of midrange ..

i cant figure out what to do either.

[Kyosho88]

Originally posted by Eyenovation:
I am hearing rumors of a 30" Cinema Display to be released w/ the G5. Supposedly it's not clear anymore either.

Fact or Fiction?


Remember who you heard it from.

WWDC will have a new Apple 30" Display and I got from the Apple representative. This person travel around to all Apple Authorized Dealers. Also look for a new Apple 23" Display too. The new 23" will be better and cheaper than the one that's out right now.

[slugslugslug]

From the live WWDC keynote coverage on the macrumors.com IRC channel: It costs $3299, will only work with a G5. They had to come up w/a new video card to drive it, said card costing $599. Two DVI connections running in parallel..

[workerbee]

From the Apple-X IRC:
so this thing is 2560x1600
4.1 million pixels 77% larger

And you can have two attached to the fancy nVidia card you need for it.

[nate_02]

[Eyenovation]

The 20" and 23" look almost... puny.

[Krypton]

30 inches is bigger than my TV...

[SouthPaW1227]

Originally posted by Krypton:
30 inches is bigger than my TV...

For ~$4200 ($3300 display + $600 card + tax) I'm MUCH rather buy a normal LCD computer monitor + a Plasma to watch TV/DVDs on.

[velodev]

Still has a terrible warranty.

But a lovely resolution.

[JLFanboy]

Just made this and posted it in another thread. Still blows me away.

[mdc]

wow