Apple 24-inch Cinema Display hands-on
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted October 14th 2008 2:23PM
posted October 14th 2008 2:23PM
Sure it may not look like much, but we're confident there's more than a few cats and kittens out there who want to get their hands on Apple's new 24-inch superstar. As usual, the screen looks painfully crisp. Check the gallery below for a number of views!
So who is gonna be the first site to find out who actually makes the LCD panel and innards?
Eventually LCD manufacturers will begin to realize that customers care about the types of panels in their displays, and they'll wise up, much like the old "passive" versus "active" distinction made on laptops during the 80's and 90's. Apple has used S-IPS panels for most of their displays, and they could use that information to their advantage if they'd just advertise that fact; otherwise many people don't understand the price difference, and they end up getting a cheap TN display without knowing what they're missing.
As for other companies that mix and match their panels (I'm looking at you, Dell, for swapping IPS and PVA panels willy nilly), this can only hurt sales. If you advertise a distinction between the two panel types, you can charge less for the PVAs and still sell the IPSs to people who care about the distinction; otherwise you have to charge more to cover the IPS panels, while losing the customers who actually want them but can't guarantee they'll get one.
All I have to say is
W.
T.
F.
They better have an adapter for dvi so i can use it on my "old" MBP I refuse to pay $20 because apple hates the dedicated apple fanboys that cant afford to buy another $3k 17" Macbook Pro because it has a new video adapter. This pisses me off big time.
I think the compatibility only works in the other direction. That is, a DisplayPort on your Mac can drive a DVI display (by sending a DVI signal through the display port), but the DVI port cannot output video that is compatible with DisplayPort. I think you're SOL both ways. No adapter, get a new Mac.
Ye, Display port is a stupid technology. Just stick DVI on the thing and be done with it.
If display port can output DVI, it should theoretically be able to take it as an input.
Its still the most beautiful display....Thou art the noblest of them all !!!
But its a bit expensive.... But again its Apple, so....
No HDMI? Worthless
Steve addressed this. HDMI doesn't have the bandwidth to support the hardware they want to make going forward, so its "HDMI? Too Limited!"
bobartig...a couple things
1. HDMI is no more bandwidth limited than whatever RDF Jobs is creating on his own
from wikipedia
"DisplayPort currently supports a maximum of 8.64 Gbit/s data rate and WQXGA (2560×1600) resolution over a 3 metre cable.[1]"
"HDMI 1.3 Increases single-link bandwidth to 340 MHz (10.2 Gbit/s)"
I fail to see the lack of bandwidth unless wikipedia is wrong...and they could be but 1.3 has been around over a year so I think someone would have caught that by now. Granted DisplayPort CURRENTLY supports mentioned resolution, which leads me to believe it will scale beyond, but who needs that right now? Not until 30" displays become affordable for the vox populi will DisplayPorts supposed benefits even begin to become important.
2. at least on the macbook (maybe not high end laptops) a lot of people would rather have that HDMI because its less mess to pass audio/video on to their LCD/Plasma/DLP/Whatever TV. If people are downloading HD itunes stuff they sure as hell want to watch it on their big screen, not their 13-17" MacBook.
3. Blu-Ray is not dead, nor a bag of hurt. I know many people with them actually. I myself have stopped purchasing DVDs in favor of BDs. As in many places (if you shop smart) the price premium is now down to 5-8 dollars. As others have said, Jobs is afraid it will cannibalize iTunes sales and he should be. The blu ray is something physical that people can retain and not having to worry about filling up their HDD with movies (some people believe it or not do not own 1 TB drives or even 500 GB ones).
I am an apple fan (I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro while listening to my iPod touch in its speaker dock) but some of the BS Jobs spewed today is just plain dumb and I can't believe everyone is eating it up. Do I think DisplayPort has a future? Yes it does, but most people are living in the present currently. HDMI is currently king of all things HD as far as connecting peripherals and its omission reason is laughable at best. Also, while Iagree Blu-Ray is isn't DVD mainstream yet, we all know that isn't why he's omitting it.
I like the new look but at £650 it's £50 more expensive than the 23". I was hoping the price would come down.
Besides looking like a gutted iMac, the new display shares a similar look to the HP w2007 20-inch widescreen monitor. http://www.russellheimlich.com/blog/the-new-apple-cinema-display-sure-looks-familiar/
i'd be curious to see if the hp copied the imac first. it seems this is more likely than apple copying hp.
also, to all of those that b*tch about the glossy screens....get over it! when i first moved to glossy with my mbp (that's mac book pro for all 90% of you apple haters in this post, about apple. d**chebags) i was apprehensive about the glare factor in multiple locations. so far, not an issue. i have never been in an environment where i found it overly distracting. btw, i've had my mbp for about a year and a half and have traveled the globe with it. hell, a week after i bought it, it was stolen from me, dropped out of the back of a moving truck onto asphalt at 20mph in the rain and it still works like a charm.
That was what I was thinking too! (looking at a HP w2207 right now...)
brian, your an idiot.
What exactly do you do on your Macbook Pro? (or MBP since you wish to actively advertise the fact you have been brainwashed by the lord christ). Seriously, its terrible. Colours do look brighter but for graphics designers, you need a big colour gamut and coluor accuracy. Now the only way to really get that 100% is to go to ebay and buy something like an iiyama or mitsibushi diamond CRT but LCD's are catching up. Artifically exagerrated colours is not what these guys need. I persoally like my laptop display. Its a dell, non-glossy, matte screen (and FYI, its running ubuntu) and its fantastic. Equally so is my 19" sony LCD and 19" iiyama CRT. Ive had a good play about with an imac. The panel is fantastic and colour is great but that gloss just kills me. Same with HP laptops and so on. It annoys me that apple have went with this.
Now there latest round of updates are done, could you apple fanboys take a step back and reflect on what the lord christ has given you:
a stupid, thin, overpriced laptop... als known as the macbook air (or MBA for your brian :) )
gay pride ipod nano's which don't do anything the previous ones didn't but cost more
the new ipod, now with 40GB less storage
and now:
a raped macbook pro with less ports, no HDMI (or DVI), which is heavier than the previous model
and a stupid glossy monitor that has just lost apple 99.9% of its market base for the previous cinema displays.
Please, reconsider. OSX is a fantastic OS but is it really worth all the hassle apple is putting you through? I mean I use windows (and now more recently ubuntu on my laptop) so if i have an issue with say, Dell, i can buy an HP, lenovo or something else laptop when i get a new one. And I built my main PC so i can fix and change ANYTHING on that i feel free to. You are stuck with the same crappy hardware platform.
Thats my opinion on apple: OSX is fantastic, everything else is rubbish. Although im happy with windows/linux anyway so thanks but no thanks :) All you mac fanboys should be pushing for apple to release OSX for normal PC installs. You are already ahead of the game considering its 64bit.
Wow, look like a PC screen... wtf apple?? and glossy... all graphic designer will be fucked up. I want aluminium back!!!!
Goodbye classy screens...
Will there be anyway to add two of these monitors to a laptop?
HDCP?????
Why are the old displays named "HD" and these aren't?
Bag of hurt.
Holy shit!
9 Apple related articles in a row. And I skipped past them all, cause they're always boring.
Agreed, what a load of crap. Think I'm going to take Engadget off my bookmarks again...
If by "skip by them" you mean "took the time to log in and post," then yes, you skipped by them.
good call esoterica, and i count 33 articles posted today, 11 are about the apple event. yes, that's a lot, but not out of line on the same day that apple releases a major update. it's called reporting. engadget doesn't make the news, they report on it. perhaps you should take engadget away and find something more entertaining to read.
Glossy=amateur.
no HDMI=foooool!
come on...
Dell 2407 ultra-sharp for the Pros!!!
Remember guys, glossy displays allow more color to come through the screen resulting in a higher reproducible color gamut. Should be fine in a darkened room.
Wow a world of difference while logging into hotmail.com or reading engadget.com. I never understood this. Just like the guy who goes on yahoo chat a couple of years ago bragging about how he has a pricey G5 Mac to chat online and pretend to play games on it. Apple products are like placebos and people believe they're magic like magic beans. No offense to anyone as I too am an Apple user with an iMac which I only bought because it was all in one solution as I'm tired of seeing the mess of cables my PC had, as I'm into the minimalist thing.
HD= Anything that can reproduce the gamet of the HD resolution spectrum, ie 1280x720 to 1920x1080. This has been done since early 2000s.
HDCP is not HD it's a protection feature that has been tied to HD and uses HDMI. Infact HDCP is nothing more than the CSS of today, and HDMI is componet cables on steroids. Nothing to do with HD at all or HD resolution, as it represents means of DRMing it and transferring it.
hmmmm... that's funny. the screen doesn't look any crisper than the resolution on my current screen. way to go, Apple.
If you have any other LED screen, then I would agree with you. Most LED manufacturers screens are pretty comparable. You won't see dramatic difference.
If you are using an LCD screen, however, then you have to see this Apple monitor (or another LED) in action. The difference is night and day...basically negates all the flaws of an LCD screen (colors, blacks, motion blur, etc...)
hey ho, gonzos,
At the moment I have 2 X 18" monitors with each having a resolution of 1280 X 1024, giving me 2560 x 1024.
The 24" monitors almost all have a max rez of 1920 X 1200. Vertical rez is not that important, what matters to me is width.
What's your suggestion to improve my overall resolution without asking for financial help from the government, like all the poor and pitiful banks and other greedy bastards of this miserable world are doing right about now? Is my only option to go for a 30"? Or maybe 2 X 20" monitors? Difficult question??
thank you
Alien
how about two widescreens, if your really looking for horizontal.
I picked up a decentish 20inch widescreen from Acer for £110, its no professional monitor but it does the job.
These are nice products, beautifully made, practical to maintain, pushing the bleeding edge on graphics, and yet . . . .
There's a real sense to me with this update of "Our way, or the highway" from Apple. Deleting FireWire from the MacBook is simply cruel. Deleting the matte option from the MacBook Pro, ditto. Shrinking the battery on the MBP, pointless and sneaky. The more I use chiclet keyboards, the less I like them (even though they do make the case stronger), and the more I prefer the vastly improved keyboard on the last of the previous generation MacBook Pro. And why, in an obviously professional quality 24 inch display, does Apple not even offer matte as an option?
Overall, I'm very glad I updated in the last generation. The Penryn MBP is still pretty darned good and really very close to the current model in performance, and I like my matte NEC monitor better than the new Apple display. Here's hoping I get a good three or four years from this rig, and that it can still serve backup duty when I next update with what will hopefully be Apple products that are more respectful of how different people use computers in different ways.
Having said that, I think most MacBook customers, at least those who are all LAN and USB for connectivity, are going to be drooling over the new machine at $1,299, what with finally having a good quality case and decent graphics. But again -- why delete FireWire and why not offer matte? I just don't get it.
People are complaining about the price, but when have you seen a 24" (or even a 22") LED screen MSRP for less than $800? That's not even to mention the looks of the monitor itself. Also, most people can use their company or student discounts to buy this monitor, so the price is even less.
Pretty beautiful.
Probably the least exciting of the announcements today, an overpriced monitor with a bunch of extra useless crap add-ons. You pay extra cause it's pretty. Great for the superficial types.
Although I suppose it will help push the prices of other monitors down, which is always a good thing.
oof. how's that glare in the demo pic?
glossy=fail
This is really nice, I paid 2500 euro, which is 3434 dollar, for a 2500 dollar equal machine. That is over 900 dollar difference. So basically you pay for two, but you get one. I rather use the 1000 dollar to fly to the US, pick one up from their apple store, and fly back. The price difference is just too TOO big and unrealistic for me to consider upgrading my powerbook and 20" monitor.
I dunno....
I looked at all those screen shots and they don't look one bit better than the 2001 VGA monitor I'm using to look at them on.
There are a couple of reasons to purchase LED over standard displays, and here are the reasons:
1. Enviromentally friendly as LED is a cleaner product to produce.
2. Brighter contrasts and colours, something that current panels can do but cost more because the pixelbits need to be higher 10bit I think is the current.
3. Less power consumption, which is good for green-minded computing, but not really that important since people now a days want more powerful computing which takes up more energy then one LED saves.
4. Lasts longer and no dead pixels, well at least yet so this could be a thing of the future.
uhm, it has an LED-backlight right? That hasn't anything to do with dead pixels... it's still an LCD. Only the light behind it is different...
How noticeably actually is the different between CCFL and LED light?
Who cares about the price - It's too bad these are not SWOP certified
Apple is losing the professional market for color proofing to Eizo (http://www.eizo.com/)
They need to introduce new displays for Mac Pros that are SWOP certified
Green initiatives dictate the use of virtual proofs in the pre-press/packaging industry
check http://direct2time.timeinc.com/common/virtual_proofing_guide.html
Apple should realize that SWOP certification is as important as EPEAT Gold for the environment
A nice price for LED, for sure.
It is an excellent price if it is an IPS panel.
I am sorry, but all those "comparable" monitors people have been posting links are PVA panels, and (while better than TN) they colour shift horribly.
A 24" LED IPS monitor for less than $1000 is a nice price. I would buy it if was not limited to the display port!
still no height adjust ? for that money ???!!!
Why design it so that it doesn't work with older Macbooks/Pros/Airs or other notebooks. People are going to buy other displays to work with their notebook not new notebooks just to use this display.
i was hoping these would replace the cinema displays, so i could pick one up on ebay for a sane price... Unfortunately not. Sorry little mac Mini, looks like your sticking with crummy-unstylish monitors for now...
I dont like all the cables spewing out the back, the cinema display is brilliantly simple, but this is just getting too complicated. It looks little bit messy, abit old school mac.
i think apples design for this display was that it is meant for the laptop user so that he or she can put their shiny new mbp or mb on the big screen quickly and easily. I think its a great idea but for 800 dollars thats a little pricey. I wish i was a bit cheaper then truley a mpb could become a desktop for me
Did anyone else notice that they removed any possibility of using a Visa Mount, via the new internal hinge mechanism.
Well, I think I'm pretty sure now this is not a good display for me.
Considering I do loads of graphics and video.
But, can anyone recommend me another one, in a similar or slightly higher price range?
Any advice would be most welcome.
I called apple today to try and understand why this display does not work with either the Mac Pro desktop or the imac. Literaly he indicated as does the apple page that this only works with the new note books. I am dumbfounded by this!... Sereiously I use my 24" imac with a second monitor to do my photography and movie editing. I have considered using third party displays as I do not want to bu the old cinima displays as they are matte screens and long in the tooth interms of capability and size. Not to mention they do not share the design of my new aluminum imac. The guy at apple told me that the new monitor uses a new technology that is not compatible with my new imac!?! What the !?! So here is a monitor that looks just like my computer and would expand the capabilities of my computer yet will not work with my computer.
I am contiualy confused at some of apples design choices and am really starting to hate the arogant customer service expereinces their folks provide on the phone. Apple guys recomendation is for me to get a new note book if I want the dispaly so badly... hint Steve Jobs thats the wrong answer. I pay a premuium for apple products and one would think that would get me some respect...
apple is bringing lot of new thing simply apple is rocking
http://www.zahipedia.com/2008/11/04/led-cinema-display-by-apple-oled-prototype-by-samsung/
After reading all of the comments I can safely say I am no longer deceived by the mass markets appeal to the price tag. Yes you can buy a 28" for less than $400. If that makes you happy go for it. The truth is however you are buying a display that is built to a inferior display technology (TN). As Ethan said (and he hit the nail on the head) the type of display you are buying is the key component that everyone is missing and until that is advertised you all will be easily fooled.
In the past I could never figure out why an Apple display with inferior specifications was priced 2-3x higher then a monitor at say Best Buy with better specs. However for some reason at the same time I could not explain why it looked so much better... I as some of you thought that was Apple just inflating things because they were Apple...
I have now found, without a doubt that this is due to the hidden specs. The 1st thing you should ask is what TYPE of display are you buying? They never advertise this and you have to comb the net to find out.
Those who are still being deceived and chalk all of this up to Apple fanboy flaming need to read this and stop being deceived by marketing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD#IPS
The new ACD is very nice and I hope to have one sitting in my house someday. Yes it hurts that I can't use it with my old Mac Mini via DVI but you guys need to wake up and see that DVI is going to be dead and Apple is paving the way. They have to pull the plug sometime. DVI has half the bandwidth of DisplayPort and HDMI is a home theater standard that has bled into the PC market. HDMI is for A/V home theater and DisplayPort is for the PC. DVI is at it's max already with these big displays, look at the 30" ACD you need (2) DVI's just to run it! And the smaller displays are starting to jam more pixels in the same size, take a look around.
None the less, I have seen OLED displays in person and I can say that the difference experienced going from SD to HD on a TV is just as if not more dramatic when you witness the contrast of an OLED display. Few things have made my jaw drop but the colors from an OLED display did.