[Grapho]

[quote name='Londoner']
>

fribhey said:

> so basically those with macpros who have been waiting YEARS for a new display can't get one because it's only compatible with laptops?
What's wrong with the other three Cinema displays (20", 23" and 30") which have been around for YEARS and are specifically intended for the MacPro? Sure, they don't have built-in speakers, iSight camera and a mic, but most MacPro users wouldn't be interested in such consumer gadgets anyway, as MacPros are intended for professionals who need much higher quality speakers and aren't using Photo Booth or iChat.

Speak for your self. I would love an iSight on my Cinema Display, are you kidding me. Why do I even have iChat on my MacPro. Professionals also need to collaborate, even more then consumers. What about screen sharing for trouble shooting other peoples computers. Sure, I can still do it, but through texting?

This apologetic attitude that if Apple does not offer it, then their must not be a demand for it, puzzles me. This same argument could be made for the headless mid size tower. If iChat is being touted as one of the cool OS features, then they should have support for it available to every Mac they sell, even trough an iChat Apple branded stand alone iSight camera, but even this option the has been abruptly pulled out. So basically the Mac mini and the Mac Pro are left out of the party?

So if iSight cameras have no demand outside of the market that Apple is already covering, then why do they sell for so much on eBay, if no one wants them?

[Paddy]

The new MacBook Pros can be shipped with the following adapters:

DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter (optional)
VGA output using Mini DisplayPort to VGA Adapter (optional)
Dual-link DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter (optional)

If there are adapters for the output, you would think that they'd manage an adapter for input as well, though there is no sign of one on the Apple site.

As for comparing this monitor to the high-end graphics monitors from Eizo, LaCie and NEC, um...this monitor is about one third to half the price of any of those. I really don't think it's aimed at the "Pro" (graphic/photo pros), but at those who are using their laptops for everything but would like a bigger screen to work on at home or in the office. So, no sense in getting your shirt in a knot about that, though it would have been nice if Apple had been a little clearer about this. Of course, I suppose they don't want to actually come out and say "This isn't a pro graphics monitor." BTW - it's pricing isn't out of line with other LED non-pro 24" displays out there - not that there are many. The Lenova ThinkVision L2440x was announced a couple of weeks ago (and has a suggested list of $749), but apart from that, the LED technology only shows up in the professional monitors from what I can see. Until we see more complete specifications and some reviews/testing/comparisons, we're really NOT going to be able to figure out where exactly this monitor fits on the spectrum, nor how it compares to the current Cinema Displays, apart from the general aversion to glossy screens.

A refresh of the Cinema Display line is long overdue, and I suspect that Apple engineers are working on LED displays. I would be surprised if they put glossy screens on the "pro" Cinema Displays if they wish to continue to stay in this area of the market. Since they clearly want to keep the pro end of the market with the MacPros, it would make sense for them to continue to compete with the monitors as well, though I'm not sure that they will compete at the absolute top end of the market with Eizo, NEC etc. (prices get pretty scary up there!)

[ruralOregon]

I agree with Gregorius. I think people are jumping the gun regarding this display. It seems pretty clear that this is aimed for notebook users and not the professional market. I don't see any indication that they've discontinued the older Cinema displays...

[Vanmo92]

Any word on weather it will be compatible with the old macbooks. (ie. a mini-dvi to the new display adapters.

[icerabbit]

Did you mean the 24" or 26", moosensquirrel?

I'm guessing the 26" since that's the model number you included and its color accuracy specs seem better than the 24".

I don't mind paying extra for a matte screen quality monitor. I find it personally important to be able to trust the entire image on screen whether I'm viewing it a bit off center or not. I bought the 20" Cinema Display when it was introduced and it has served me (non pro) very well to this day (knocks on wood). I love using it every day and think it has been absolutely worth it; mainly because it is a) matte and b) doesn't color shift like every other standard to mid-range monitor I have seen in years at all the retail outlets. I think there was maybe one exception with a Gateway 24" but nothing else has impressed me. I can't imagine a dual monitor setup with the majority of current LCD monitors out there.

With EIZO and LACIE way out of an amateur / prosumer budget; I really appreciate you mentioning the NEC. I will definitely keep it in mind for the future. I'm assuming their viewing angle would be truthful (unlike most manufacturers) and comparable to with that of the Apple Cinema Displays.

Have you seen it in person?

[moose_n_squirrel]

icerabbit said:

I'm guessing the 26" since that's the model number you included and its color accuracy specs seem better than the 24".

You're right.

Quote

With EIZO and LACIE way out of an amateur / prosumer budget; I really appreciate you mentioning the NEC. I will definitely keep it in mind for the future. I'm assuming their viewing angle would be truthful (unlike most manufacturers) and comparable to with that of the Apple Cinema Displays.
Have you seen it in person?

Honestly no, it's just that dropping into a number of photo forums, that NEC seems to be recommended almost universally, specifically the one that comes with the SpectraView calibrator. For those who can afford that whole package. I'm not there yet.

[montgomery_burns]

CheeseHead said:

{quote}Can someone explain Apple's constant obsession with making proprietary display connectors: Mini VGA, Mini DVI, Micro DVI, and now Mini DisplayPort when the standard DisplayPort connector would have worked fine?
{quote}

Aside from the iMac, Apple used the mini ports only where necessary. Now that all of the ports on the Macbook pro are located on one side I'm sure the standard DisplayPort would not have worked fine. Would be nice to know if Apple is including any adapters though since they have in the past.

Sorry, but size is a weak excuse for lack of industry standard DisplayPort or HDMI connectors. The standard DisplayPort connector is approximately the size of a USB port. There is also a industry standard Mini HDMI connector which appears to be even smaller than Apple's proprietary connector:

http://www.hdmi.org/...enter/mini.aspx

The fact that these options are available but Apple chose to ignore them means that Apple is being ridiculously petty regarding connector sizes, and perhaps trying to squeeze more money out of selling yet another different adapter that only Apple makes.

[icerabbit]

Thanks.

Ideally - for me and Apple - I would be able to buy and get the next Intel update in an aluminum MMMM in a Cube / Dell Studio hybrid / ? type shape with dual display support, full I/O, blu-ray superdrive and two matching matte 24" Apple displays (with FW & USB hubs) *

But I am not there yet either. I'm more thinking ahead of what I want my next setup to be. When the dual G4s were out I decided to stick it out with the Cube and saved for the G5 with the 20" Cinema Display. Anyway. For dual monitor setup I would need additional hardware or a new system as my G5 has a DVI and an ADC port. Probably not worth it to upgrade the G5 (having noted quite some G5 failures in the Apple fora once they go beyond 3 years). Plus I'd have to get a new desk or reconfigure the one I have, as it currently doesn't have horizontal room for two displays (taken up with other stuff). I am certain I would like something smaller than the G5 / Mac Pro though. Too big. Too many internal expansion features ($$) that I don't use.

* According to Apple there is no market for this product, users prefer glossy, blu-ray is to difficult to license, ... :-/

[Fpryor]

As a commercial photographer I'm very disappointed in todays announcement as Apple has exerted an enormous amount of effort, energy, expertise and genius to produce a line of products that are useless to me. None of the stunning achievements these 'Books and this display represent matter one jot to me if I have trouble seeing what I'm working on.
Note to Engineering: If you're blasting light through these screens to overcome the glare inherent in the surface material, then they can't be calibrated, they can't calibrated and no imaging professional will be able to use them.
fp

[Philbert]

I too am a professional photographer, and no one I know who's serious about color would dare to rely on a laptop screen - period - matte or glossy doesn't make a bit of difference. The ability to change the appearance of contrast with a slight tilt of the head or screen makes ALL laptop monitors pretty much worthless for color-critical work.

Despite all the improvements, Laptops are still a compromise - features for portability. I recently accepted an extended location shoot that required a laptop so I bought a Macbook. (I don't normally need a laptop so I really couldn't justify the MBP) After hardware calibrating, I was actually surprised how close I could adjust my RAW files on the MB when compared to my NEC 2690 WUXi / Mac Pro setup. They weren't perfect - but close. Of course, "close" isn't good enough but it has nothing to do with the glossy screen - it would have been the same with a Matte screen.

About the new glossy Cinema Display - pretty sure Apple has other screens in the works to cater to "pro" users. The product page clearly states that this new screen is made specifically for Macbooks. I think this is just another case of Apple not anticipating the "wrong message" of their actions. Stupid really, but that's Apple.

icerabbit -
I bought the SpectraView version of 26in NEC 2690 about 4 months ago and I couldn't be happier with it. The included calibrating software is a one-click affair and the calibrations are absolutely perfect. The NEC is a 10 bit monitor and when you calibrate, you're actually altering the LUTs in the monitor and not the video card. And it's really not much more expensive than the 23 in ACD when you factor in that you're also getting a 4 year warranty and an EyeOne DIsplay 2 calibrator device (rebranded). To get the equivalent with the Apple monitor, you're only saving $100 or so. The NEC 2690 absolutely provides the best bang for the buck in higher-end LCD screens.

-phil

[Fpryor]

Philbert,

I agree that laptop screens are not the optimum for working with images in any case, but there is better and there is worse and a glossy screen with nuclear brightness as these have been described are decidedly worse.

As professional photographers you and I find our selves in circumstances on location, away from a calibrated work station, where we may need to examine captures on the fly, not for critical color correction, not for delicate density relationships, but for gross evaluations of density, sharpness, etc. These platforms as described appear to be a large step back from a Macbook pro with a matt screen.

Further, once we professionals get back to the studio the scenario Apple envisions for us is that we'll slap our glossy, sunburn-inducing laptops next to the new display to do our serious work. if the 24 inch display is intended to be the go-to large monitor for the laptop line, the glossy screen takes it out of the competition with any of the available matt screen competition for professional use.

The debut of Aperture for the professional photographic market was a disaster because it appeared that Apple had not consulted ANY serious professional photographers in it's development (as revealed by it's awful RAW engine, flattening of layered files, hostage library, fatal image destroying Undo behavior, etc). It was an expensive mistake.

Apple should be made aware that, while these products all have spectacular innovations there are many, many professionals who will find them completely unsuitable: the very people who desperately need the improved speed and power these devices provide.

fp

[icerabbit]

Philbert, I sincerely thank you for sharing your personal insight and experience.

I had hoped Apple's displays would be updated by now in a normal fashion and maybe see a little price drop like in the past, but when it comes down to it ( Steve Jobs said they're going ALL glass ) then it looks like that NEC model will be on the top of my list as my next monitor.

I am just not satisfied with what I see at common retail outlets in terms of gloss and color shifting and viewing angles.

As an individual I wasn't planning on splurging on the Spectra View / Eye One ... since that is an extra $200, it seemed.

[moose_n_squirrel]

Fpryor said:

Note to Engineering: If you're blasting light through these screens to overcome the glare inherent in the surface material, then they can't be calibrated, they can't calibrated and no imaging professional will be able to use them.

Wow, I never thought about it that way before but if that's their excuse, you're right...can't have any kind of a decent black level at a high luminance level.

[mrkjhn]

I agree with those in the professional fields where color accuracy is paramount. I don't understand why previously Apple seemed to be supportive and even pushing in this direction with SWOP certified CinemaDisplays, ColorSync and professional grade software such as Aperture, and now hands us rose-colored glasses. Brilliant! Why the disconnect?
Apple's previous MacBook Pro with their matte LED displays proved to be highly capable and accurate once calibrated (via hardware/software). Why not implement the same technology in a larger display?
Granted from a marketing point of view, there's probably a larger market for floss n gloss, but disregarding a community of users who have been part of Apple's users base since inception (walk into any graphic design or photo studio and you'll find it littered with Macs) is hard to understand, and insulting.