@HawkSkater0: You might be waiting well into first quarter or even second quarter of 09. There are tons of very good monitors out now that you could buy in the mean time.

Joseph

thank god I didnt buy an apple cinema display yesterday when i bought my new mac pro, (not that i was going to... $600 for a 20inch screen? No thank you)

HawkSkater0

LOL i've been waiting for Apple to refresh their cinema displays since 2006. I'm not holding my breath. You can also probably spend less money buying some LG monitors since LG makes their panels anyways.

According to macrumors, there hasn't been a Monitor update since 2004

Joseph

For what I've read, there is a difference but it only really makes sense if you are working at a pro level.
Having said that, I own a e248wfp, and besides viewing angles I dont notice any problem with the colors, of course, i'm not a pro at all (I'm planning to upgrade to a 2408wfp because of the viewing angles thought, too bad we dont get many 24-inch displays in argentina)

Macdelaney

And they're gonna charge what for a 20"? 700? 800?

Their screens are already double the price of most screens on the market. 600$ for a 20".. really? Are you serious? Wow.. it must the the uber screen of screens then. What? You mean it doesn't even beat some of the cheapo brand out there? Wow, thanks again Apple!

I mean come on.. only a 700:1 contrast, 300 cd/m2 and a 16ms response time??!! For that price you're not only getting robbed you're getting ass raped by everyone the robber knows at the same time.

I came into this article because I want to update my monitor with an led backlit one. I thought, well let's see what Apple is offering. Guess I'll keep looking.

KLanD

bought two dell 3007WFP-HC for 500 a piece off craigslist for my mac pro, much better deal indeed.

Sunlokyee

@Chester_Copperpot: In all seriousness I edit HD Video and am a professional photographer and from what I've read the Apple monitor is better for pro applications.

[reviews.cnet.com]

Chester_Copperpot

@KJA: ::Sipping Quad Soy Latte and working on 23-inch Cinema Display::

Maybe ignorance is bliss but...oh wait can you hold on a second...."Can I get another Quad Soy Latte? I just looove them."

Chester_Copperpot

@KJA:
[reviews.cnet.com]

Way too lazy to search for more comparisons. If your a professional photographer or graphics artist the difference in color quality makes a huge difference.

PCLoadLetter

@KJA: disagree, in the 4 comparison tests I've read, besides inputs, the apple beat the dell in every category.Not to mention I own the apple 30 inch, and use the dell 30 inch at work. I can easily say that the apple's picture quality is slightly better. And don't call me a fan boy for this because I use all kinds of computers. But make sure you buy it refurbished, it's a much better deal, I got mine like a year and a half ago for like 1400$.

LostAtoll

@KJA: *sipping at his grande mocha, staring into his 30" cinema display*

Say what? I don't know what you're talking about.

Aloof

Dell Ultrasharp Monitors are much better in value and cheaper than Apple Cinema Displays. You don't even get as many inputs on the Cinema Display compared to the Ultrasharps.

I'm guessing you're just paying on the Apple design to go with your other Apple products. Go drink some Starbucks while you're at it.

KJA

It's about time. Built-in iSight?

funman895

LED= lots of money

snitch29

Let it be known:

I was talking about price-wise not quality-wise in comparison of the Ultrasharp and the Cinema Display. I doubt that all people who buy Apple Cinema Displays and Ultrasharps use it for professional applications such as Photoshop. I swear some people spend this kind of money just to improve their computer setup. From a cost perspective, a normal consumer would find it logical to get a cheaper monitor with better value (value as in inputs). Some people would rather opt for the "luxury" of an Apple Cinema Display for the Apple Branding and design.

But what at what cost does quality make such vital substantial difference? Looking at that CNET review shows that both the Apple Cinema Display and the Ultrasharp are very close in terms of quality with Apple's offerings being slightly better than the Ultrasharp.

But at what cost? Despite the small difference in quality in both LCDs, the cost-to-quality ratio is astounding.

A Dell UltraSharp 3008WFP will cost you $1,399.00 whereas a Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel) will cost you $1,799.00. A substancial difference of $400. For $400, you could buy another video card at that price.

Some people would still argue that this substancial difference in quality is vital to their work or lifestyle. If you have the money, go for it. However, most people would rather save $400, especially during the high cost of gasoline and the low economy the United States of America is currently experiencing.

(Please ignore any punctuation or grammatical errors that may occur.)

KJA

@burddog: because they do, so what?

sos10

Apple monitors are some of the most inflated hardware on the market. I'm surprised they haven't reduced the prices significantly. I have a Dell 22" I got for $180 with some extra dell dollars kicking around ($250 original price). 2000:1 contrast, 3ms response with a 1680 X 1050 resolution. My brother's apple display is 20" with a 700:1 contrast ratio and a 1440 X 900 resolution. The model has been updated to have a 1680 X 1050, but everything else is still the same including its 600$ price tag!

I think displays are where apple followers really show how stupid they can be. I like my ipod as much as the next person, but this is just idiotic! Worst deals on the market by far. How can people still be paying 600$ for a 16 ms response time and a 700:1 contrast ratio? That's garbage!

burddog

@PCLoadLetter: Acutally KJA is right. That chart that you're looking at on CNET is old (March 24, 2006). Between the the time that article has come out and now, Dell has put out 6-7 revisions of their LCD monitors and Apple has put out 0. If you compared them now, you would find that the Dells have better picture, higher contrast ratios, and are cheaper.

I recently did a lot of research for some new monitors and I spent about a month thoroughly checking every brand out.

Joseph

@seizure: thats complete nonsense. Go put one side by side and then come back and give us your review.

imTheKing

Apple cinema displays are extremely overpriced. You can purchase monitors from LG or Philips for half the price. Since all three use the same LG.Philips S-IPS display panels and backlighting mechanisms, there is no difference in quality. The only difference would be the hype machine.

seizure

@KJA: Dude Dell is the worst choice for anything, Not so long ago a New York state court found them guilty of a Consumer Fraud Charge and a range of other multiple charges

snitch29

@burddog: As a note however, contrast ratios are not standardized across the industry. As inflated as they are, I'd put down alot of cash that the 20" apple looks a poop ton better than the $180 dell despite its supposedly better contrast ratio.

ALT

@burddog: yeah man you are right. back in the day it seemed like a 23incher was just amazing. I got an amazing deal for 900 refurbed, maybe as far back as 2005 and it was incredible... but at this point I wouldn't even THINK of picking up another one until the not so inevitable refresh. Here's hoping it wont be a half assed job once they do.

ALT

@KJA: oh and funny enough, I'm drinking my Starbucks Venti Iced Carmel Latte.... hahaha

imTheKing

@KJA: In the sense of cost, yeah the average consumer might look at the Dell first BUT Apple Cinema's are used mainly by the professional (Prosumer) users and and high end video / audio / graphical studios.

Price wise your correct though. (props for clarifying too)

imTheKing

BTW, I think that Starbucks comment I made put it over the top lmao.

KJA

@KJA: Apple Cinema's have better color, brightness, sharpness and contrast. I've used multiple monitors side by side to the 23 and 30 inch cinemas (including Dell, NEC, Lacie, HP and Acer) and I can tell you first hand, the Apple Cinema output a much better picture.

imTheKing

@KJA: It was mentioned above that the CNET comparison is old (March 24, 2006). Since that time monitors have become much better and cheaper while Apple's have remained the same.

As for the "Pros using Apple monitors" arguement. I ask you, can you really edit video with a 16ms delay? That's horrid. Try an LCD with a 350 - 400 cd/m2 and a 1000:1 contrast with a 2ms refresh, you'll never look back. Not to mention you'll probably save some cash.

KLanD

Actually, after using a few of these monitors, they sure make my HP w2007 look tepid. It's not a bad monitor, and I actually like the gloss (gasp!), but its color range doesn't look as good as the Mac displays (the color gradient is choppy in comparison). Also, I have yet to see a non-Apple monitor with a firewire hub in it, and likely never will, unless someone can point one out to me.

Kaiser-Machead's BSDM Shenanigans

@snitch29: I don't know about any fraud charges but that doesn't make any sense with the statement of Dell as the worst choice for any type of consumer electronic. Dell is a fine company.

KJA

@KLanD: My clarification comment was made at 1:38 PM. Joseph's comment, where he clarified that the CNET review is outdated was made at 1:21 PM. At the time of typing my comment, Joseph's comment was not apparent to me at the time until I refreshed my browser. I was only talking about the CNET review only because other people before Joseph used it in their comments.

Secondly,

I never said anything about "Pros using Apple monitors". So don't be asking me questions about in depth specifications. That is all.

KJA

Gief huge price drop on at least the 20" and 23" screens, please.

That's all I need to be happy.

Eruanno

I thought real pros used the Lacie LCDs?

Weezie

The really question here is how the color accuracy will look. Apple's monitors are one of a few monitors that have achieved SWOP Certification. For Color accuracy the price is actually a deal. The only other 30" monitor to achieve this is the Eizo which will run you around $5,000, Ouch. I may have to get one though. Does anyone know how this will effect color?

4q2000

@KJA: Or are you just jealous that I can afford an Apple product and don't mind paying extra for something I find more visually appealing sitting on my desk than some ugly Dell black plastic thing...?

Seriously, what good are reviews of the current technology when considering buying a new technology monitor that hasn't even been announced yet?

distortedloop

A properly calibrated Cinema display, using a device like an EyeOne Display 2, is superb for color critical work. Very few displays sold today are sufficient. Apple's displays are SWOP certified. That said...

iSight (long, long, long overdue) & HDMI por favor

KBeat

@seizure: You understand that just becuase they use same panels, doesnt mean the quality is the same. Look at Bravia's. Sony Bravia LCDs are actually another high end LCD maker, yet the Bravia LCD's are noticeably better than other LCDs.

imTheKing

@KLanD: Considering I work for one of the biggest Motion / Video related firms in the US, I'd say that yes, the Apple Cinema's are definitely used among the top companies for video / audio / graphic work. Theres no question about it. All video is obviously tested on a production monitor before its actually exported to determine any flaws but the main monitors used are still Cinemas.

As for Apples price not changing since that time, you need to wake up. If you don't like Apple thats fine, but you obviously have no clue about what the company has done over the past years. The Displays are HALF of what they were. Do some research next time before you post.

imTheKing

@imTheKing:

Just to offer further proof, here are the panel details of every available ACD from Apple.

Apple Cinema Display 20 M8893 = 20.1 inch 50 ms DD-IPS (IDTech IAWS64) panel.
Apple Cinema Display 20 M9177 = 20.1 inch 16 ms S-IPS (LG.Philips LM201W01) panel.
Apple Cinema Display 22 M5662 = 22 inch 60 ms IPS (LG.Philips LM220W1) panel.
Apple Cinema Display 23 M8537 = 23 inch 25 ms S-IPS (LG.Philips LM230W01) panel.
Apple Cinema Display 23 M9178 = 23 inch 16 ms S-IPS (LG.Philips LM230W02) panel.
Apple Cinema Display 30 M9179 = 30 inch 16 ms S-IPS (LG.Philips LM300W01) panel.

Notice the ACTUAL manufacturer of the panels?

seizure

@imTheKing:

Well, my company's digital studio just switched over to LG's pro displays from Apple cinema displays after 2 years of testing and our review is that there is no quality difference. The FACT is Apple USES THE EXACT SAME S-IPS panels and backlighting mechanisms as the LG and Philips pro displays, so why don't you explain to me where the difference (which you claim exists) would reside?

seizure

@imTheKing:

Which is why you have to match the actual panel models. If you take a Bravia and compare it to another LCD with the same model panel, you'll get the same quality.

seizure

@KJA: Didn't mean to imply you did mention the Mention the pros thing. That's why I put it in a separate paragraph.

@imTheKing: I never said pros didn't use them. I just said they were getting ripped off if they were.

KLanD

PS- I'd rather Apple support Blu-Ray movies than make a $6,000 display. Not just burning data with an MCE Blu-Ray drive, but playback of Hollywood movies. This $hit is going to be dead before Apple adopts it. Oh well, I've saved money by not buying BDs yet. What really burns me is Apple is part of the Blu-Ray Army. Why is Blu-Ray supported on Micro$oft computers when M$ was on HD-DVD's side? That's a rhetorical question- I know the answer. blah blah blah

DurfDiggler

Giz should start a chat rooms for you babies. JK... Chat rooms would be nice, though.

Alright, since some of you are dreaming up specs/features, here's my requirements for the new displays-

-Each color of each pixel should have it's own 5W LED
-Pixel for pixel dynamic brightness adjustment
-60" diagonal
-2.35:1 aspect ratio
-500 pixels per inch (not 500 per square inch... that's 250,000 pixels per square inch)
(You do the math to figure out the X/Y resolution)
(remember A square x B square = C square, or something like that)
-1 or 2 NANO second response time
-480Hz refresh rate, vert and horz
-5000 cd/m2
-8,000,000:1 contrast ratio
-16.7 billion colors
-1/2 inch thin (or less)
-1/2 millimeter bezel (or less)
-12MP dual iSights, for 3D video chats... with a roller coaster background.
-3-D, with no glasses (Sharp did it)
-100W RMS Left, Center, Right speakers built in, with Wireless Surrounds and sub
-Built in Studio-quality stereo microphones
-Mag-lev stand, or some sort of magical levitation system to keep it off the desk.
-Multi-Touch screen
-Smell-o-vision
-Taste wafer dispenser
-Built-in Va-j-j
-Firewire 400, 800, 1600, 3200, two each
-12 USB 2.0 ports
-4 eSATA (I never use it, but someone would want it)
-Battery operated (since it levitates, and all those ports are wirelessly tethered to the computer)
-Waterproof
-$300
-10 year unconditional warranty

Feel free to amend/continue this list. And I'd appreciate your help petitioning Apple to make this a reality.

BTW a Samsung 30 inch LED LCD (6ms GTG) is $4,300 on NewEgg.com

DurfDiggler

@seizure: Thats not true in all cases. Bravia's have been positioned next to their "LG and Samsung" competitors and the Bravia's picture always looks noticeably better. Its' because of the technology used in the XBR's that boosts the quality of the output.

I'm not saying that the general consumer or anyone would know a damn difference. I'm surely open to use other monitors as well, but my main monitor to date will / has always been an Apple Cinema display. I do however use a standard Samsung monitor as a secondary display (to view what the average consumer see's on their LCD) along with a output production monitor (to work on the final outputs and catch any discolored areas).

@KLanD: I understand totally. I actually wasn't trying to call you out on that matter, although it probably came out like that. I do agree with you that the average consumer would be better off buying a display from the likes of Dell, Samsung, Acer and so on.

imTheKing

All I would like to see them do, and I know I'm going to get completely blasted for this, is add a glossy option to all their displays. I know I know, "but what about the glare? THE GLAAAARE!" Yeah well you know what? Fix your lighting problems or learn how to tilt your screen a couple degrees so you can stop squinting through that god awful cloudy mess you call matte! It seriously isn't good for your eyes to have the glare diffused across a layer of plastic covering your whole screen. Give your eyes something nice and CLEAR to focus on for a week and you'll understand.

ftv

Sippin' on gin and juice... posting on a Dell 30" with an Apple 23" for a side monitor... it that wrong?.... (the gin and juice I mean.)

CapriceKlik