[AppleGirl1990]

Now that a dozen or so companies are making excellent quality monitors/screens at amazingly cheap prices, i wonder if Apple going to leave that market. Not sure how much money apple makes off of monitors, but it's so competitive now and they are all 'universal'. Do you think apple will update their monitors/screens anymore?

[angelmb]

Yes and I even hope they launch a TV set someday. Try to find a nice looking TV nowadays, besides the nice & expensive Philips Aurea (4000 €) what's left?, cheap, soulless and unimaginative dark plastic designs.

[Aegis]

Sure, they will update (it's certainly due). Apple isn't worried about making bargain monitors. They pump up the profit margin, give it a unique styling and sell what they can. People either love the style or they like the idea of going to one place (or company) and getting everything.

[anselm]

Hello AppleGirl1990,

You should be aware that there are 2 quality classes for TFT displays:

The cheap ones are mainly TN-panels which cannot deliver the same picture quality as PVA for example. I think MVa is also higher quality and I`m not sure if I recall the name correctly but I assume it was IPS that is also better than TN.

TN panels are quicker and therefore better for gaming.

The only TN panel I would take into consideration is Samsung`s 245B.

For best quality I would check out the Eizo S2431W.

[anselm]

I forgot:

Apple uses a TN panel in the 20" iMac and a higher quality panel in the 24" iMac ( unless I`m fooled by my memory )

[AppleGirl1990]

I started this thread a long time ago, but the question still remains. Will Apple ever release a new standalone monitor/screen?

[Wiskedjak]

Apple has never been quick about updating their monitor designs.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Apple has never been quick about updating their monitor designs.

But they've never been that slow either, have they? I've been holding off buying a new monitor for quite some time now. I hope it's not overly optimistic to assume there'll be an update this year.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Faust 

But they've never been that slow either, have they? I've been holding off buying a new monitor for quite some time now. I hope it's not overly optimistic to assume there'll be an update this year.

From my observation, Apple usually seems to update their monitors within a year of a pro desktop redesign.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

From my observation, Apple usually seems to update their monitors within a year of a pro desktop redesign.

Well, that can be a long time then ...

I am not at all interested in a new (visual) design. I'm really interested in better specs. Oh well, and the waiting goes on and on and on and on ...

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by Faust 

But they've never been that slow either, have they?

There was a long time span between the prior generation ACD and the now current ACD. That being the case I suspect that you may be in for a long wait.

[Luca Rescigno]

Apple's very, very slow to update their monitors. It's been over a year since they got a price cut (and even a year ago when the price was cut they were still overpriced at the time), and over two years since they had their specifications improved.

Now, if you look at them from the perspective of being IPS displays, they have a little bit more leeway than if they were selling TN monitors. TN panels are everywhere and while they're okay for basic home use as well as gaming, I wouldn't use one for work that requires serious color accuracy. However, even if you compare them only to other high quality IPS, PVA, and MVA displays, they're still overpriced. There are many 24" LCDs out there now that use quality panels, have a large number of inputs for all different uses, all come with a 3-year warranty standard, and cost hundreds less than the Apple display. Most PVA/MVA 24" monitors are around $700, so only a couple hundred cheaper than the Apple version, but they also come with a 3 year warranty (Apple is, as far as I know, the only decent company that doesn't give you a 3 year warranty on monitors). And of course you get the extra inputs. If you get an Apple display, you have exactly one input - an attached DVI cable. Other companies give you lots of options. Some have TV inputs like component and composite. Others have dual DVI or HDMI. And all of them have VGA, which is always useful if not the perfect solution for image quality from a monitor.

So uh... yeah. If you buy an Apple display, you are paying hundreds of dollars for a pretty aluminum case.

[Tarkio]

I also wonder if Apple is giving up on the display market. Business is much different today. New large pro monitors are coming to market almost everyday, with better specs and performance than Apple displays.

The reason I think Apple doesn't care any more is that they've been willing to let the most loyal Apple-equipped design studios finally give up and try other options. We have a 16-person studio where I work, and they always gladly paid too much to keep Apple displays on all of their Macs. Now that they finally gave up on updates and have tried NEC and Dell solutions they've discovered there's really no need for Apple displays. So this not only hurts Apple sales now, but later as the Apple lock is broken in many user's mind, and they will probably never be back since they are very happy with the other display options now that they finally tried them.

If Apple continues to lose the pro market, there will be little incentive to crank out state of the art displays for the few consumers who want Apple logos on all of their computer gear.

[besson3c]

It always bothers me when Joe six pack who doesn't know the difference or benefit from the difference of MVA or TN buys an Apple monitor just cause they think that they have to, for some reason, when this same person would be just as happy with a much cheaper display.

[angelmb]

What is needed are new high density displays, 1920*1200 for a 23 <--> 28 inches displays is a joke. So you need a 30 inches display to surpass the MacBook Pro 17 inches HD display which has the same resolution than your big 23", 26"… inches display. What a joke.

Sure a design-studio would ponder about getting a NEC or Eizo display over an Apple Display but those are even more $$$ than Apple displays cause they are trusty pro devices, maybe current Apple displays are less pro and more main street but with a pro tag price… e.g. the Apple 23 inches is not get certified by ugra (Ugra) which would push certain people to look for alternatives (mostly Eizo or NEC), but of course not everyone needs such an ugra certificate. Maybe Apple would have to offer more than one panel choice per display size which IMHO it is not going to happen.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by Luca Rescigno 

Apple's very, very slow to update their monitors. It's been over a year since they got a price cut (and even a year ago when the price was cut they were still overpriced at the time), and over two years since they had their specifications improved.

Now, if you look at them from the perspective of being IPS displays, they have a little bit more leeway than if they were selling TN monitors. TN panels are everywhere and while they're okay for basic home use as well as gaming, I wouldn't use one for work that requires serious color accuracy. However, even if you compare them only to other high quality IPS, PVA, and MVA displays, they're still overpriced. There are many 24" LCDs out there now that use quality panels, have a large number of inputs for all different uses, all come with a 3-year warranty standard, and cost hundreds less than the Apple display. Most PVA/MVA 24" monitors are around $700, so only a couple hundred cheaper than the Apple version, but they also come with a 3 year warranty (Apple is, as far as I know, the only decent company that doesn't give you a 3 year warranty on monitors). And of course you get the extra inputs. If you get an Apple display, you have exactly one input - an attached DVI cable. Other companies give you lots of options. Some have TV inputs like component and composite. Others have dual DVI or HDMI. And all of them have VGA, which is always useful if not the perfect solution for image quality from a monitor.

So uh... yeah. If you buy an Apple display, you are paying hundreds of dollars for a pretty aluminum case.

I realise I am paying a premium for ACDs. I currently have an ACD, though it's the 23" model and I'm looking into getting a 30". I don't mind paying the extra premium as long as a device is both, exceptionally high quality AND aesthetically top notch. There may be many alternatives that are cheaper but ugly, there are monitors that are better and more expensive but also ugly, or there are devices that are nicer but quality-wise not as good. The current ACDs have proven to be just down my alley in both regards.

[besson3c]

Faust: if aesthetics where hypothetically speaking all that the ACD had going for it, how much of a premium would you be willing to pay for this?

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by Faust 

I realise I am paying a premium for ACDs. I currently have an ACD, though it's the 23" model and I'm looking into getting a 30". I don't mind paying the extra premium as long as a device is both, exceptionally high quality AND aesthetically top notch. There may be many alternatives that are cheaper but ugly, there are monitors that are better and more expensive but also ugly, or there are devices that are nicer but quality-wise not as good. The current ACDs have proven to be just down my alley in both regards.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on good style. Sure, there area lot of ugly monitors out there, but there are also some good looking ones. You should at least look around a little bit before automatically deeming every non-Apple monitor ugly.

However, it is up to you how you spend your money. It won't change my opinion that Apple's monitors are too expensive and have a gimped warranty, but you have to decide for yourself how much you're willing to give up. I'm glad you at least realize the shortcomings, but it confuses me that so many people are so dead-set on buying Apple monitors even when they know that they are bad deals. Unlike Macs, which may be kind of expensive but give you OS X compatibility, they don't really offer anything you can't get elsewhere.

[angelmb]

Any device is more than performance, but when you actually have to offer a product to a 'best bang for the buck' market, not any maker is willing to:

- have an in-house industrial design team
- outsource such function (the design) to a respectable not average studio, even Apple hired a company to give the "PowerBook" well, the "PowerBook" name.

which -like it or not- reflects when you pay for it. All in all nobody shall blame Apple cause their displays don't follow the 'one size fits all' marketing wordy.

As for how much a good design is worth… well, I would say around 150€, but actually what is just inexcusable is the warranty Apple provides with the ACD… you look at other premium makers and they offer up to five years, when a display is a key player for your job, that maker is sadly in a stronger position than Apple…

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

As for how much a good design is worth… well, I would say around 150€, but actually what is just inexcusable is the warranty Apple provides with the ACD… you look at other premium makers and they offer up to five years, when a display is a key player for your job, that maker is sadly in a stronger position than Apple…

Good point. I agree that good design is worth a premium. Instead of saying a set amount, though, a percentage is probably more accurate. Say 20% extra or so. I'm just throwing a number out there and it'll vary, but I do acknowledge that design is worth something.

My main complaint with Apple displays isn't even the price, which is higher than their competitors but not that much higher if you only look at quality non-Apple displays (not TN monitors). It's the features. Like you said, a one year warranty is crazy, and it's $100 extra to bump that up to 3 years. The other problem is the lack of features. If you don't use extra inputs I guess it doesn't matter, but multiple inputs are so handy.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Faust: if aesthetics where hypothetically speaking all that the ACD had going for it, how much of a premium would you be willing to pay for this?

besson3c: If aesthetics were the only pleasing factor, I'd not even consider buying it. There are many really great looking devices by Apple, such as the iPod, iPod Touch, iPhone, new keyboard etc. that I don't use because they're not to my liking in terms of functionality and I find other products better, eventhough they are far less pleasing to the eye, so it's not just "looks" I'm going for.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on good style. Sure, there area lot of ugly monitors out there, but there are also some good looking ones. You should at least look around a little bit before automatically deeming every non-Apple monitor ugly.

I never said they had a monopoly on pleasing aesthetics. I'm not a fangirl and don't need, nor ever had Apple-only devices.

I also never claimed to not having looked around for monitors. I have. From the monitors I have seen, there is no 30" monitor that is siginificantly cheaper and as aesthetically welcoming as the ACD is, to my knowledge which may not be exhaustive. I work around 12 hours a day on the computer. I need to look at it day-in, day-out. I like having my environment comfortable and to my liking, given the amount of time I spend in it. Other people buy expensive cars, classic motorcycles, a top notch stereo system, music instruments, a cinematic-like media centre, high quality food, certain brand clothing et cetera and don't mind paying a premium for their brand(s) xy of choice. I take great pleasure in functional and aesthetically pleasing electronic devices and don't mind paying a premium for it. For desktops and monitors, it's mostly Apple I've gone with for the past two years and I've been quite content with that choice.

I completely agree with you that Apple monitors are too expensive which is why I haven't bought the 30" model yet.

[stwf]

Its no surprise Apple monitors are now outdated, when the Apple Cinema Display was first unveiled it was the best monitor on the market in its price range (as I remember) it was the definition of droolworthy. What was that, 7 years ago?

Now as an Apple customer I'm used to paying extra for high quality and design, but I have never paid for low quality/high design and won't start now.
What is keeping me from buying a 3rd party monitor is not the name, or the aesthetics. Its the fear Apple will once again reset the bar even higher, probably the day after I buy my monitor (or can no longer return it).

So at this point the delay in Apple releasing a new monitor is so long it's comical. The only logical explanation is that something truly awesome is in the works.

Of course corporations (even Apple) and individuals (even me) often act illogically. So in the end I have no advice for you here. But if they were really getting out of the market I think they would announce it, just like they did with printers.

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by stwf 

So at this point the delay in Apple releasing a new monitor is so long it's comical. The only logical explanation is that something truly awesome is in the works.

Either that, or they have no intention of trying to make their displays competitive again and won't really bother updating them. I think they figure that anyone who's willing to keep buying these displays despite their high price, limited features, and poor warranty will continue to do so regardless of how expensive or outdated they get.

[@pplejaxkz]

At work we don't really sell that many Cinema Displays. To be totally honest, if I was planning on getting a bigger display my first thought wouldn't be Apple.

[AppleGirl1990]

I fear that Apple will never sell a stand alone monitors again. I believe the only monitors apple will sell in the futre will be the ones built into their iMacs and Portables.

Sad....but true.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

What is needed are new high density displays, 1920*1200 for a 23 <--> 28 inches displays is a joke. So you need a 30 inches display to surpass the MacBook Pro 17 inches HD display which has the same resolution than your big 23", 26"… inches display. What a joke.

Viewing distance, resolving power of the human eye, and typical content quality are considerations here. But if you really want a higher resolution monitor, they're out there; 3840x2400 @ 22" has been on the market for years.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Faust 

Well, that can be a long time then ...

I am not at all interested in a new (visual) design. I'm really interested in better specs. Oh well, and the waiting goes on and on and on and on ...

Apple is almost always well behind the curve in terms of display specs. If you are more concerned about specs than visual design, get a Dell, Samsung or LG.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by Faust 

Other people buy expensive cars, classic motorcycles, a top notch stereo system, music instruments, a cinematic-like media centre, high quality food, certain brand clothing et cetera and don't mind paying a premium for their brand(s) xy of choice.

Let me put an image to back your words…

Viewing distance, resolving power of the human eye, and typical content quality are considerations here. But if you really want a higher resolution monitor, they're out there; 3840x2400 @ 22" has been on the market for years.

Yes, I recall a post from you about an amazing IBM display, but that's just too much for a 22 incher… such pixels orgy belongs to a 30 inches panel… I just want a monitor with the pixel count of the 30" display in a 24-25" size.

[stwf]

Personally I don't see any real proof that Apple is getting out of the display market, as we've noted they are in it by default, with laptops and iMacs, so they need to keep developing the tech.

Also as noted here people will overpay for Apple gear, so exiting the most lucrative portion of a market they are in by default seems silly. I think the delay maybe more a product of the glut of new products and platforms they've released in the last year.

My optimistic viewpoint is that new monitors are waiting on a PowerMac redesign, which is stuck behind iPhones, iPods, AppleTV and each products storeffront in getting through the release queue.

[oyseka]

While the ACD is indeed a nice looking monitor, paying an additional R5000 (€400) over a HP 30" which gives just as good in display terms just does not make sense when you have to earn a return on your equipment

[Macadvo]

Personally I wouldn't use any other display with my MP and I'm currently using both a 30inch and a 23inch ACD with it and am considering another 23inch ACD.

While I agree that the 23inch ACD seems prohibitively expensive when compared to other manufacturers monitors of the equivalent size the quality of the panels Apple uses coupled with the great industrial design make the choice easy for me

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Macadvo 

Personally I wouldn't use any other display with my MP and I'm currently using both a 30inch and a 23inch ACD with it and am considering another 23inch ACD.

While I agree that the 23inch ACD seems prohibitively expensive when compared to other manufacturers monitors of the equivalent size the quality of the panels Apple uses coupled with the great industrial design make the choice easy for me

You do know that other, cheaper, LCD displays use the exact same panels as Apple? Thus, the industrial design is the *only* reason for choosing an Apple display and paying a massive premium. If Apple displays of are such a high quality, why don't they back that up with a 3 year warranty, as other manufacturers do?

[Luca Rescigno]

Wiskedjak, the problem with your argument is that Apple's displays all use S-IPS panels, which have become pretty rare. Dell used to use them on some of their models but they've moved on to PVA or TN in most cases. Most S-IPS panels are sold by companies like Eizo that make high end professional level monitors that cost even more than Apple's displays.

On the other hand, Apple's in kind of a weird position there. They use S-IPS, which many people regard as a big advantage, but they don't market their displays as being any better than the PVA or TN displays of their competitors. Their displays are SWOP certified. Sure, most people have no clue what that means, but those who do might recognize the value in an Apple display. They're sort of in the middle, between the low end and the high end stuff, but not really catering to either one. They're not at all price competitive with low end and midrange LCDs, but they don't offer the same level of support as the high end companies do. And their marketing seems to be aimed more at a naive audience than at a professional one. It's confusing.

Basically, it seems as though Apple has some advantages over their competitors that might be attractive to certain customers, and while they do have all that information on their website, it's not organized in such a way that it promotes the specific advantages of Apple displays over their cheaper counterparts. Regardless, for basic uses, PVA and even TN monitors are pretty much just fine, but for people who need more accurate color, an Apple display is sort of a halfway point between PVA and one of those high-end S-IPS monitors that costs even more than an Apple LCD. It's too bad about the warranty.

[angelmb]

^^ Luca, you hit the nail right on the head.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Luca Rescigno 

Wiskedjak, the problem with your argument is that Apple's displays all use S-IPS panels, which have become pretty rare. Dell used to use them on some of their models but they've moved on to PVA or TN in most cases. Most S-IPS panels are sold by companies like Eizo that make high end professional level monitors that cost even more than Apple's displays.

I dunno ... it looks like there are several manufacturers using S-IPS in 30" displays that are cheaper than Apple (and come with 3 year warranties), with the exception of one. And that one display, Dell's 3008WFP for $200 more, is really a tunerless LCD TV with DVI, VGA, HDMI, Component, Composite and s-video inputs.
Comprehensive List of S-IPS Based LCD Monitors

[Luca Rescigno]

Interestingly enough, even though Apple offers a 20" S-IPS display (something almost no other company does), it costs almost as much as competing 24" S-IPS displays (exactly the same if you include the $100 AppleCare warranty, which is included at no extra cost by all the others). So the 20" is clearly Apple's worst deal.

The 23" at $900 isn't as outlandish, but it's still too high. Looks to be about $200 more on average, $300 including the warranty. And like you said, among 30" displays, S-IPS is much more common among competitors so there's little reason to get the Apple.

Also note that some of the displays listed there are older models that may no longer be available.

[angelmb]

Making it worse, here in Europe, Apple Cinema Displays price usually gets a flat $1->1€ ratio which sucks, so you have:

Apple US Store:
ACD 23: $ 899
ACD 30: $ 1799

Apple Spain/German/Italian… Store:
ACD 23: $ 1400
ACD 30: $ 2800

Funny as hell.

[Luca Rescigno]

Does that include VAT? How high is that in Spain, Germany, and Italy? I know it's 17.5% in the UK so the base price of an $899 Cinema Display in the UK store is going to be at least $1056 (about 535 pounds). Meanwhile, they do charge sales tax in the U.S. but since it varies from state to state and even from city to city, they don't add that until after.

EDIT: Found some VATs:

Spain: 16% ($1043)
Germany: 19% ($1070)
Italy: 20% ($1079)

These prices also don't include import duties. Not sure if those are assessed in addition to VAT or separately depending on the item. So maybe they're still ripping you off but it's not by as much as you claim.

[angelmb]

Yes, it is 16% here in Spain, but it is yet included, base price is 775€ then you add 124€ as taxes, so you have to pay the aforementioned 899€ ($1400). My guess is if an european buy it in the USA, it is going to save some good bucks… a friend did this with a Mac mini (he bought it in NY 5th Av. Apple Store past xmas), albeit the Cinema Display package is not 'mini'

[mduell]

[QUOTE=Luca Rescigno;3680277]Wiskedjak, the problem with your argument is that Apple's displays all use S-IPS panels, which have become pretty rare. Dell used to use them on some of their models but they've moved on to PVA or TN in most cases. Most S-IPS panels are sold by companies like Eizo that make high end professional level monitors that cost even more than Apple's displays.

On the other hand, Apple's in kind of a weird position there. They use S-IPS, which many people regard as a big advantage, but they don't market their displays as being any better than the PVA or TN displays of their competitors. Their displays are SWOP certified. Sure, most people have no clue what that means, but those who do might recognize the value in an Apple display. They're sort of in the middle, between the low end and the high end stuff, but not really catering to either one. They're not at all price competitive with low end and midrange LCDs, but they don't offer the same level of support as the high end companies do. And their marketing seems to be aimed more at a naive audience than at a professional one. It's confusing.

Basically, it seems as though Apple has some advantages over their competitors that might be attractive to certain customers, and while they do have all that information on their website, it's not organized in such a way that it promotes the specific advantages of Apple displays over their cheaper counterparts. Regardless, for basic uses, PVA and even TN monitors are pretty much just fine, but for people who need more accurate color, an Apple display is sort of a halfway point between PVA and one of those high-end S-IPS monitors that costs even more than an Apple LCD. It's too bad about the warranty./QUOTE]

The professional/photography LCDs are usually A-TW-IPS or similar, a significant difference from a random S-IPS panel. For still (not video) photography work on a budget, one of the PVA derivatives may be better than an IPS panel at the same price range; less backlight bleed, no purple hue, less noise/glitter on the surface.

[angelmb]

Mark, your signature asks for a Cinema Display update estimate

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by mduell 

The professional/photography LCDs are usually A-TW-IPS or similar, a significant difference from a random S-IPS panel. For still (not video) photography work on a budget, one of the PVA derivatives may be better than an IPS panel at the same price range; less backlight bleed, no purple hue, less noise/glitter on the surface.

Ah, good to know.

So really, it looks like most people are best off either going for a true high-end monitor or for a more consumer-oriented brand that offers a better deal than Apple.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

Mark, your signature asks for a Cinema Display update estimate

Cinema Displays and iPods are too hard to predict; they don't follow a public roadmap.

Originally Posted by Luca Rescigno 

Ah, good to know.

So really, it looks like most people are best off either going for a true high-end monitor or for a more consumer-oriented brand that offers a better deal than Apple.

Prosumer/semi-pro video editing is one place I would recommend S-IPS/H-IPS.

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Prosumer/semi-pro video editing is one place I would recommend S-IPS/H-IPS.

But is it good enough to justify Apple's $200-$400 price premium over S-PVA and P-MVA displays from other companies?

[mduell]

Depends how "serious" you are and how much that $300 matters to you.

[Tarkio]

Cost is not such a big issue in my case. I get a couple of hundred dollars off the price of a new 30" ACD through my company discount. And, I'm buying a new Mac Pro with Apple Care anyway, so I will get a 3 year warranty on the ACD for no extra cost.

I'm more concerned about the aging technology in the ACD. I would probably get by well enough for my photography/printing to Epson 3800 needs with the ACD, but I'm fully aware that for a few hundred more I can get a wide gamut NEC 3090 with 12-bit LUT, fantastic unliimited scaling, pivot to portrait format, etc. It might be worth the extra $$ now even though the NEC is indeed ugly.

I just hate buying something new that might be outdated any day, even if it has much nicer industrial design.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Tarkio 

I can get a wide gamut NEC 3090 with 12-bit LUT, fantastic unliimited scaling, pivot to portrait format, etc. It might be worth the extra $$ now even though the NEC is indeed ugly.

What's so ugly about it? It's just a black bezel vs. Apple's aluminum bezel.

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

What's so ugly about it? It's just a black bezel vs. Apple's aluminum bezel.

DUH, don't you know? It's ugly because it isn't made by Apple!

[besson3c]

Do you guys that buy Apple gear because its good looks inspires you also buy really good looking clothes and drive a really good looking car?

Just wondering...

[Tarkio]

I do wear really good looking clothes and drive a really good car, but I'm probably going o buy the NEC 3090. I haven't heard any complaints about the display here other than price.