27" LED IPS iMac Ping!
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Posted on 10/27/2009 12:39:23 AM PDT by Swordmaker
The more I think and learn about the curious pricing of the 27” iMac, the more bizarre and incredible it seems.
It has a resolution of 2560x1440, which no other monitor in the industry seems to have (that I can find). 30” LCDs are the same width but 1600 tall. Shrinking 2560-wide into a screen that’s 3” smaller diagonally yields an impressive pixel density, especially given the panel’s still-immense size.
It has an IPS panel. IPS is the best and most expensive LCD type, giving the best viewing angle and the least color- and brightness-shifting as the angle increases in any direction. Nearly every panel on the market, including every laptop panel, is the cheap TN type. (TN panels wash out as soon as you move your head slightly, especially vertically, which is why it’s so hard to find a good viewing angle for your laptop lid while watching a dark movie.) Other 27” TN panels exist (only at the lower 1920x1080 resolution), but I can’t find any other 27” IPS panels.
It’s also LED-backlit.
So it’s a very high-specced, brand new panel that’s apparently not being mass-produced yet (since no other monitors for sale are using it). That must be expensive. How much of the base 27” iMac’s $1700 retail cost does this represent?
The closest existing panel for comparison, spec-wise, is the 30” IPS panel that Apple uses in their Cinema Display. It has the ultra-high resolution and size, but doesn’t compete with the 27” iMac’s panel for brightness, contrast, power efficiency, or color range. It’s overpriced by today’s standards at $1800, but not by much — Dell’s original 30” monitor with the same panel is $1200, and a newer version with better specs (although still not as good as the new iMac’s) is $1700.
A standalone monitor with the new iMac’s panel would be perfectly reasonably priced at about $1500. From Dell. Apple’s only charging $200 more than that for theirs, and there’s an entire high-end computer stuck to the back of it.
When they mentioned on last week’s quarterly earnings call that they expected lower profit margins for a new product, I don’t think anyone expected a change of this magnitude. How are they making anything — or even not losing money — with the base-model 27” iMac?
My guess: a massively successful negotiation with the panel’s manufacturer (most likely LG) to get not only an incredible price on these panels, but also apparent exclusivity for a while. It’s a hell of an accomplishment, and presumably a hell of an effort, for a computer that isn’t even Apple’s most-selling model (or even product line). That raises a more interesting question: Why?
Until we know why the panel is so cheap, I bet we’re going to see a lot of Mac Pro owners buying 27” monitors for $1700 and trying to figure out what to do with the free computer stuck to the back. For new-computer shopping, a lot of people are going to abandon whichever laptop or Mac Pro they were considering and get this instead.
That helps answer the “why” question: Maybe Apple wants to push more buyers away from today’s default system-type choice — laptops — and show them why they should consider getting a fast, spacious desktop instead. And, for the time being, it’s a desktop with absolutely no equivalent in the PC world.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
That new iMac with the new monitor sure looks sweet. Wish I could justify it, but my Macs are going strong. I was kind of taken aback at the price, I thought it was going to be like 2500 for the 27.
Actually, I think the 27’’ iMac’s panel is S-IPS, not plain old IPS. That would make it pretty much the only LED backlit S-IPS display on the market.
Put a battery in it, and you’ll have a great 27” laptop with detached keyboard.
Apple execs said during the conference call last week that there was going to be a product coming up on which they were going to take a smaller margin. I suspect it's the 27" with this gorgeous high-quality monitor.
What's the response time of the iMac's monitor?
Dell has a 30" monitor with the same resolution but the response time is slow at 15ms.
Dell 30" LCD with 2560x1600 resolution for $1,200
Dell has a new Samsung 24" flat panel with wireless keyboard and mouse for $199.
I have a 25" off brand ( I-Inc iH-252HPB ) I bought online at CompUSA with instant rebate for $189 a couple of weeks ago and am thrilled with it's price/performance. It allows me to view/edit two 8.5"x11" documents side-by-side with desktop space left over.
Some say the LCD's don't have the color capability of CRT's but neither my wife nor I could tell a difference between the LCD versus Viewsonic 20" CRT or Viewsonic 17" we previously used on our two machines. I couldn't do a true side-by-side test because one of our machines is a 32-bit Dell P4 and the other one is a 64-bit Dell P4 Xeon. Graphics cards while different, are in the same class.
We've been very happy with the 25" LCD but would like to view/edit letter sized documents side-by-side in MS-Word with all toolbars displayed which will drive us to the I-Inc or equivalent 28" for our other PC once we find one on sale in the $250 range.
bookmark
;^)>
At 30.5 pounds plus a battery, I wouldn't want to be shlepping that monster around an airport terminal trying to make my next flight...
Actually, that 2560 by 1600 Dell has more horizontal pixels than the iMac—"27-inch models: 2560 by 1440 pixels "—but the iMac is true 16:9 widescreen movie format rather than the distorted 16:10 of most large screen monitors. Also, the Apple monitor is E-ISP technology, 178º viewing angle with little to no distortion of color or brightness and it's instant-on to full brightness LED backlit instead of CCFL. The Dell monitor on your link seems to have a 8ms response time. nice.
What's the response time of the iMac's monitor?
Looks like 5ms... that's the speed of the E-IPS tech.
That Samsung 25" with keyboard and mouse is a hell of a deal... it's 5ms as well but still CCFL.
May have to retire my G4 “iLamp” for this.
Great line.
For editing documents the color accuracy is not much of an issue, nor is response time, as the documents don’t require complete screen rewrites quickly. For documents raw speed is secondary to the amount of screen real estate available.
I agree that the prices are dropping. I’ve been thinking of getting a cheap second monitor to put next to my iMac just to keep the tool boxes, etc, on.
What have you got against Interstate batteries???
I have one of those in my broom closet office where I hang out on Sat and it is a slug on wireless as it only has 763 ram. What is the max ram for it? I have inherited my late brothers 17” G5 that I may substitute...
Nothing? Why did you ask?
I have one in my '87 Benz that is 5 yrs old and going strong! I posted it because it would have enough power to play all day on the 27"er!
Just funnin ya... I take it you’re not a Bobby LaBonte fan?
Wash out y’ur moutn with Lava!
It's not "distorted" per se. It's actually a perfect aspect ratio for watching 16:9 content in a way that lets the user interface overlay controls not always have to be fading in on top of the actual movie (I hate it when they do that all the time!).
Then when you are not watching video content, you get a desktop that is actually the same aspect as the Golden Ratio, the most aesthetically pleasing rectangular shape.
I know that sounds weird, but the Ancient Greeks figured out a lot about that ratio and in particular why some rectangular shapes just seemed to "feel better" than others:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Personally, I think the LCD makers have begun to make 16:9 screens in order to save a few bucks, not because it makes more sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.