Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

New Flat Screens From Apple 191

Posted by CmdrTaco from the bigger-is-better dept.
Hah! Apple has announced a new flat screen. Colm@TCD sent us the linkage but check out the numbers: 1600x1024 (same as a widescreen TV, or the SGI flat panels) but its 22 inches! Holy yummyness batman! Bet ya gotta mortgage your home. (insert sounds of drooling here)Update: 09/03 08:50 by H :We originally touched on this while talking about the G4
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Flat Screens From Apple More

New Flat Screens From Apple

Comments Filter:
  • Actually if you post a message of over a certain length (i think its 10000 characters) it is automagically given +1 to its score. So its probably not someone just being stupid with moderator points but rather someone taking advantage of this fact to bore the general public and make moderators waste points. -N
  • It is likely to be an Apple thing for now. The catch about a digital display is that requires a video card that knows how to talk to the monitor and puts out a digital signal. Most video cards today all put out an analog signal. If the display catches on, someone, probably ATI, may put out a card for the IBM compatibles.
  • always thought movie format had an aspect ration
    of something like 1.8:1, not the 1.56:1

    1.8:1 is "anamorphic" widescreen. It's used by all of the newer, big budget movies (Titanic, Episode 1, etc.)

    1.56:1 is "letterbox" widescreen. That is the aspect ratio that has been in use by hollywood since the mid 50's, when they needed some kind of "hook" to differentiate themselves from TV.
  • If you want it out of there, I have a growing room full of Apple stuff. Send me what your asking price is for some of it, and I'll let you know if I'll bite. :)
  • Take a look at the specs for the Sawtooth logic board in the two high-end models. 128 bit path to memory. This thing has a system bus nearly as fast as an SGI Octane! This is some serious shit. Apple also claims that it has PCI access twice as fast as the B&W G3. The B&W has 64 bit 33MHz slots.

    This thing is more targeted at SGI's visual workstations than the typical PC. That's where the price comes from. Well, all except the "low-end" model. It uses the same logic board as the G3 did.

    Only problem is, Apple is moving too fast. Good support for all the stuff in the G3 still isn't done, and the G4 is already here.

    --
  • SMP fun fact #2: MaxBus.

    G4 processors in an SMP configuration can talk to each other on a separate (and of course much faster) bus than the system bus. Someone just needs to make a logic board that supports it now.

    --
  • This rumors has either proved incorrect or upgrade makers have found a way around it. The folks at Mac OS Rumors say they've seen a B&W boot and run with a G4 card in it.

    --
  • Why do I bet you wouldn't see this if this were from any other company?

    --
  • Hi,

    You got me thinking...

    With a diagonal of 22" and an aspect ratio 25:16, I figure the Apple Cinema Display is 18.53" x 11.86". That comes in at 219.77 Sq In, not 200 Sq In.

    Thesis
    One of the major costs for manufacturers in producing flat panel displays is in the 'yield': i.e. the number of produced units that you have to throw away because too many of the pixels are faulty. Most manufacturers will tolerate 2 or 3 faulty pixels on an LCD display. More than that, they're junked. This would indicate that fails would increase approximately in linear ratio with the number of pixels on screen, hence the cost of manufacture.

    We'll leave out the factor of the display quality, though the reports I've read from people who've actually seen a Apple Cinema Display in the flesh is that it's very impressive. Let's also set aside other manufacturing difficulties and costs associated with producing a significantly larger flat panel display, such as physically moving it around the factory, etc.

    Anyhow, we can then assume that the cost of any LCD display ought to be roughly proportional to the number of pixels it has.

    Check my calcs, but.

    Apple Cinema display: 1600 x 1024 = 1638400 pixels

    It seems that for most large LCDs the resolution maxes out around 1280 x 1024 (Aspect ratio 5:4, not 4:3, you'd have to drop down to 1280 x 960 for that). At this resolution, you get 1310720 pixels on screen. Pixel ratio vs Cinema display = 1638400:1310720 = 1.25:1

    On this basis, we'd expect the ACD to cost approx 25% more than a 5:4 aspect ratio LCD display with a max resolution of 1280 x 1024. The Cinema display is officially listed at $3999, so that makes us expect a 'standard' LCD to cost about $3200 at list price.

    Data
    Now, if I get some competing product pricing on a random selection of large LCD displays from C|Net (All these max out at 1280 * 1024).


    Eizo FlexScan L66 (18.1")
    Official retail: $3599
    Cnet est. price: $3003
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.11:1 (ACD list:Eizo list)
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.33:1 (ACD list:Street price)

    Compaq's TFT8000 (18.1")
    Official retail: $3199
    Est. price: $3245
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.25:1 (ACD list:Compaq list)
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.23:1 (ACD list:Street price)

    IBM T85A (18.1")
    Official retail: $3499.00
    Cnet BM T85A: $3465
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.14:1 (ACD list:IBM list)
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.15:1 (ACD list:Street price)

    NEC MultiSync LCD1810
    Official retail: $3599
    Est. price: $3336
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.11:1 (ACD list:NEC list)
    Price ratio vs ACD: 1.20:1 (ACD list:Street price)

    N.B. An 18.1 LCD display at 5:4 aspect ratio has an area of only 193.92 Sq In.


    So, by my reckoning, using manufacturers' own retail pricing, with and Apple Cinema Display, you're getting 25% more monitor space for at worst a quarter more in price (exactly in line with my prediction) and, at best, only 11% more $$. Even when you're comparing Apple's official price with average street prices, only with the Eizo do you get more screen real estate for your money compared with the ACD, at 33% more in cost for a 25% increase in screen size.

    If you stack the ACD up against the only 20.1" LCDs I could find, made by NEC, which still only max out at 1280 x 1024, it looks even better.

    NEC MultiSync LCD2000 Special Edition (20.1")
    Est. price: $4,734
    Price ratio vs ACD: 0.84:1

    NEC MultiSync LCD2010 (20.1")
    Est. price $4649
    Price ratio vs ACD: 0.86:1

    N.B. these are 'street' prices, not list - I couldn't find the list cost of an NEC 20.1" panel display.

    I calculate the screen area of a 20.1" LCD of 1280 x1024 proportion should be 197.35 Sq In (12.57" x 15.7"). Still smaller than the ACD.

    Conclusion

    The official list price of the ACD is actually 14% cheaper than street prices for the nearest LCD display in both resolution and screen acreage (remember, the ACD has a screen area of nearly 220 Sq In) while still providing 25% more pixels and 11% more screen area. To put it another way, if the Apple Display were in line with NEC street pricing, it would cost nearly $6000.

    By my reckoning, it's actually remarkably cheap versus the competition and if you need that much information on screen at one time, there's nothing to touch it.

    Cheerz,

    Rob
  • And my 486es don't even have heat sinks on them. What's your point?

  • around 7K US. Sign me up for two!
    oh, if I only had the money.
    That looks quite impressive. I don't know who could buy one? Companies with a lot of money throw around maybe...something to look good in the lobby or corporate board room. Still, that would be nice

  • Well, in the tech specs it says it uses a DVI
    (Digital Visual Interface) 24 pin connector
    with TMDS. (Transition Minimized Differential Signaling)

    So no, you cant hook it up to your standard 15-pin D-SUB connector (or 3/5 BNC if yer real cool :)) and yes, you will need a special video card (special ATI rage 128 I assume since thats what is in the G4 boxes) to use this monitor.

    This is pretty much the same as the SGI flat panel where you could only use the number 9 video card that came with the panel to drive it.

    -N
  • The cinema display has a "Digital Visual Interface (DVI) 24-pin connector with Transition Minimized
    Differential Signaling (TMDS)" according to the specs on Apple's site. It also requires USB connection for onscreen controls. To connect it to a PC you would need a video card with this type of connector //read:digital// and USB. I'm sure Apple will make it only for Apple machines however if you can find a driver for the display, I'm sure it would work.

    -Derek
  • The Apple Cinema display is not available seperatelly for 3 reasons:

    1) It will only run from a 450Mghz and 500Mghz PowerMac G4 machines, for reasons listed bellow.

    2) It's in *very* short supply for now, and since the 450 and 500 G4s dont ship right now, it gives Apple a chance to build-up supply.

    3) It requires the AGP2X graphics connector only available on the 450 and 500 machines. See the data sheet (PDF) at

    http://www.apple.com/displays/pdfs/AppleCinemaDisp lay_DS-a.pdf

    Now, onto the Not-Supported-On-400 issue.

    The *current* 400Mghz G4 machine has a Yosemite motherboard. That it, the same as the Blue and White G3. The processor is that of a G4, however. The 450 and 500 machines uses the Sawtooth motherboard. This is partly the same motherboard as the iBook (both motherboards derives from Apple's new Unified Motherboard architechture--a cost-cutting measure).

    At some point, when Apple ships the last of the Yosemite motherboard, it will release a new 400Mghz G4, which will probably be refered to as "revision B", as they do for most machines (current iMac is rev D). Either that or, most likelly, they will speed bump the 3 offerings by 50Mghz. The line of G4s would then all be based on Sawthoot, and will range from 450 to 550Mghz. This is a common upgrade path at Apple (withness the iMac).

    At that point, the low-end machine (either a 400 or 450) will have the AGP2x port and thus will be able to use the Apple Cinema Display.

    Weither or not a controler for other machines will ever be made remains unclear. But I think I can answer this for myself: if your machine doesn't have AGP2X (or better), then you're out of luck
  • Retail is $3,999 not $6,500. For $6,500 you get the display and a bad ass machine.

    -Derek
  • Bundling is not illegal. Wedging out a product by changing in the background published specs is. Requiring an oem to use your product under your operating system or nothing is coercion at best, extortion at worst.

  • Price (Score:2)

    by Booker ( 6173 )
    At the Apple Store, it's $6500 as part of a bundle:

    $6,498.00
    450MHz G4
    1MB L2
    128MB SDRAM
    20GB Ultra ATA
    Zip drive
    DVD-ROM/DVD Video
    ATI RAGE 128 AGP
    10/100BASE-T
    56K internal modem
    Apple Cinema Display
    Accepting orders Oct 1

    Is this sort of like "Buy this monitor and get a free G4?" :-)
  • I'll take care of all your Macs, bud. And I won't even charge you! Ha ha.
  • Gosh!

    This thing looks nifty.

    It's not only biiig, it's also got a great
    design. Now I just have to win in the lottery...
  • And my 486es don't even have heat sinks on them. What's your point?

    Oh yeah, your 486 is really comparable to a modern processor like the G4, a P3 or a K7. Why didn't you just throw in an 8086 for good measure?

  • ack! (Score:1)

    by paRcat ( 50146 )
    I think it runs around $5000
  • Yeah - I saw this in the UK papers yesterday (which didn't publish specs tho'). They were quoting $4000 which seems fairly reasonable IMHO ($4000 ~= £2400 = 2.5 * Mitsubishi 2020u 22" CRTs) Presumably it'll be about £4000 in the UK, mind... Bugger.
    --
    Cheers

    Jon
  • For now, it looks like my current setup (2 screencards, 2 17-inch monitors) will give me _much_ more space for the money... (OK, OK, you don't get the full use of it, but at that price difference, I still think it's better for the `average' user...)

    /* Steinar */
  • Well, if anyone were to read the specs, they would see that it's a matter of power. The new G4(not based on the G3, but the 604) requires a new power supply and so Apple decided to block upgrades instead of get themselves into possible legal trouble with a bunch of people calling them up and asking why their computers won't work anymore. Go read the specs about it before you spread ugly rumors.

  • How about this [eetimes.com] for future LCD screens?

    ...allowing NEC to achieve 211-pixel-per-inch resolution in a 9.4-inch-diagonal LCD panel with 1,600 x 1,200-pixel UGA resolution.

    ...and 266-ppi panels should be out by the end of the year.

  • Bundling is only illegal if you have a monopoly. Apple's 13 (or so) per cent marketshare doesn't quite qualify yet.
  • you know slashdot misplaced this, it was supposed to be 2 threads up(or maybe it was me). I'm pretty sure it was in the right place :)

    All this code is getting to my head.

  • There are many of you who are trying to figure out a way to hook up one of these sexy babies to machines other than the G4. While I applaud your hacking sense, I have to say that this display is really only meant to be with a G3/G4, because the plastics match. I bet it would look really stupid with a beige rectangular box. That's why it makes sense for Apple to bundle it with their (really cool, even if you're jealous and won't admit it) G4.

  • Did someone notice that Apple still remains the M$ little bro or everyone has missed it amidst all the hype:
    1. The only system is for G4 MacOS (not even MacOS X).
    2. You pay for MacOS even if you do not use it.
    3. All offers are bundled in order achieve maximal "mortgage your home" factor.
  • HDTV is 16:9 (1.78:1), and this flat panel
    was clearly designed with HDTV in mind.

    Movies originally were 4:3 (which is why TV
    is 4:3). But there is no standard for movies.
    Many low and mid priced movies are approx. 1.8:1
    Many big budget films are done in 2:1 or 2.3:1

    2:1 doesn't work well for TVs or computer monitors, the horizontal is too exaggerated vs vertical for a small screen. 16:9 was picked as a good compromise that minimizes the need for letterboxing of movies.

    As to the 1.56:1 aspect ratio of this display, that is assuming square pixels... Are they?
  • 1. The only system is for G4 MacOS (not even MacOS X).

    There are already MACosX servers out there on their site. MACosX isn't even out yet for any platform.

    2. You pay for MacOS even if you do not use it.

    Granted, but for the most part, you pay a premium to have linux installed by dell or gateway. Instead of paying 99 for windows, you pay 99 (above asking price on the street) for linux

    3. All offers are bundled in order achieve maximal "mortgage your home" factor.

    I agree with this statement, since I don't want to write a cheque to purchase a computer.
  • Yes, I suppose Apple is the little bro, but I fail to see what that has to with with anything here. Let me comment:
    As for #1, I think you are confusing the hardware and software here. The panel only works on a G4, so your comment about "Not even MacOS X" is a bit out of place. It is hardware dependent (G4) not software (MacOS X)
    As for #'s 2 and 3, you make this point as if Apple is the only offender. Certainly the vast majority of computer companies do this.

    -- Matthew J. Secaur
    Unix Administrator
  • Ugly, and like all Apple stuff, overprice, underperform.

    Name another LCD available today with the same or better size, resolution, and price. Heck, with the exception of the widescreen Sony 24" monitor, I can't even name a CRT that beats it in all three categories. Plasmas are big, but low resolution and expensive, the big CRTs usually don't go that high-res and cost a bundle.
  • 1) The $6500 price includes the G4 computer. The 'stand alone' price is $3999. For now you have to buy it bundled.

    2) Apple has no illusions that these are for the average consumer. That's why they were announced at Seybold. For graphic designers who have to stare at a screen all day, 22 inches of non-flicker is a Godsend, and they have both the inclination and money to pay.

    3) Considering that a 24" CRT from Sun will cost you $2500, you'll have to wait quite awhile for a 22" flat panel (same viewable area) to go for less than a grand.

    4) Why should flat panels have to be cheaper than a CRT to sell? People pay extra for miniaturization all the time.
  • You say: Is this sort of like "Buy this monitor and get a free G4?"

    The obvious next question is do I have to take the G4? if I give/throw away the Mac, can I attach the monitor to something else? My Linux box for instance?

    If so, can I get XF86 drivers?

  • And that's without antialiasing...

    Maybe X isn't so obsolete after all ;-)

  • I went to Seybold SF on Wednesday. Missed the keynote by Steve Jobs, but saw the enormous Apple presence. They showed the G4 w/ the Cinema Display, and I'll tell you right now this is the best I've seen in terms of clarity and color. They had three of them up on these revolving podiums, so I walked around in cirles as different images faded in and out. The color and clarity were literally flawless.

    I also played with the G4 + Cinema hands on. Apple put something like 25 of them out for people to experience, but, like the frog in the headlights, I couldn't figure out what tests to run on it... I ran Adobe's InDesign (new product), which was screamingly fast. Interesting note: the letterbox format could be very cool for developing video, multimedia or web-based images. The extra space (out of the 3x4 rectangle) is the perfect place to stash your palettes.

    Oh, off topic really, but they also had MacOS X Server running on a G4. They netbooted a dozen iMacs or so and showed the performance meter, which showed little effect. The OS felt fast even though the "great unwashed" were busy playing with all of the iMacs, as opposed to NT which feels sluggish when the print spooler is active... I told the Apple rep that I thought the idea of having the MacOS feel and a bash window was the sexiest part about the OS. He thought I was on crack...

  • Weither or not a controler for other machines will ever be made remains unclear. But I think I can answer this for myself: if your machine doesn't have AGP2X (or better), then you're out of luck

    Which, correct me if i'm wrong, pc's have had for a year or so. If this is the same interface as the SGI screen (I beleive SGI uses the dvi interface) then it will work without difficulty.

    The agp 2x is no big deal on intel though.
  • Actually, the B&W G3 had standard 32-bit, 33MHz PCI slots. The one exception was the 32-bit, 66MHz slot for the Rage 128 video card.
  • Now, are you talking about the zif or a PCI upgrade in the older ones. I think PCI upgrade works, but the zif will not because of the power difference in the chips. Not sure about this, but that's what I was talking about. Just an independant theory actually, nothing from apple.
    Oh well not worrying about it, I'm on an Ultra box, so it doesn't affect me...
  • So buy one of the upgrades that doesn't require an old ROM. They will be released, I believe XLR8 is demoing them now.
  • No, a 486 can't compare to a modern chip. That's exactly my point. You can't compare the processing power of two chips by comparing what kind of heat-dissipation equipment is attached to them. If the hypothesis that the G4 is faster because it has just a heat sink while the P-III needs a heat sink and fan is true, then it follows that this here 486-66 could whip both their tails, because it doesn't even need a heat sink. And my 8088, as you point out, is even better, because it not only doesn't have a heat sink, it's barely warm to the touch. Oh, and those big liquid-cooled supercomputers? Those things must just suck...
  • Not true, The G4 will use a new verison of the rage 128 with a digital output. So only the G4 450 and G4 500 (not the G4 400 or any G3) will work with the monitor. If/when ATI will release the board to the masses is yet to be known.


    If what you're saying is true......I still don't care.
  • 8.6 snappy?

    In terms of the responsiveness of the interface and the wait time between tasks, absolutely. It's obviously not as efficient at hard core multitasking as a real OS, but it's a big improvement over 7.5.

    Perhaps, but it still won't take advantage of most of what the G4 has to offer. It's the equivalent of running win3.1 on a PIII. 128-bit imaging won't mean squat with the bloated 32-bit stuff Apple currently has.

    Agreed. 8.6 is not altivec enhanced.

    And do you really belive that OS-X will be out in 6 months? I mean, if that's true, why move to next month's "supposed" release of OS9?

    Apple is pursuing a parallel OS strategy. OS 9 is aimed at machines that can't do OS X (probably pre-G3 powermacs, although some of the 604 based machines might be supported as well) as well as allowing people to continue with the more mature OS 8 code base. No matter how well it's done, OS X will be a little rocky for the first few months, and so I suspect a lot of fols will want to stick with the tried and true classic Mac OS. Apps that are not "tuned up" for Carbon won't recieve many of the new OS features under X anyway, so if you've got a setup you like, it's better to stick with the classic OS for another year til Apple sorts out the wrinkles.

    OS X was originally targeted at late 99, but got pushed back because they wanted to add a new imaging model and put in a new kernal and some other stuff I've forgotten. I think at the latest it will be in time for the World Wide Developers' Conference in May. Jobs should have a complete working version to show off at Macworld SF in January. DP 2 (out before years end) is rumored to have early versions of pretty much the complete feature set, so they just have to put the finishing touches on and then start doing bug fixes.

    As for OS-X server, it needs some major work. It's about as confusing as anything I've ever used. I give it an E for effort, but it's not even close to ready for primetime.

    Haven't used it, so I won't disagree. Still, with Darwin out, some of the worst elements will likely get fixed by hackers. It's certainly no worse than NT.
  • All - I know that there is a strong anti-MS (and sometimes anti-Apple) feeling on Slashdot, but do you really want the freedom to engage in peaceful commerce* to be subject to approval by higher-ups? Apple surely wants to maximize its profits, but it has no coercive power: it can only sell frickin' huge, frickin' expensive monitors to people who want them. If they think they can sell their production quickly enough to the very limited number of people who will be snapping up higher-end G4s, that's their right, eh? And if not, how far down exactly would you like the micromanagement to go? ("You can design Web pages as a freelance artist, but only if you are licensed by the state and if you don't do more than three pages for the same company each year. That's just to be fair.") Big companies start out as small companies (except in the case of some spinoffs which start big ... I'd have to say the difference then between the big company and the spinoff is basically semantic.) And if you work for a small company, how would you like the FTC and other agencies breathing litigious fire down your neck the way they do big ones? Should big companies be watched carefully? Yes -- but mostly for stupidity and stagnation. I seem to detect a lot of of envy / resentment in the kind of 'watching' / meddling advocated in these parts ... and among the CEOs of the other companies who are clamoring to break up MS. "Waah, daddy, his toy is better! Break his toy so mine is better!" or something like that ... just thoughts, timothy *(To be clear about my use of the term 'commerce,' in this case, we're not talking kiddie porn or heroin, so that particular extreme arguement I think would be out of place.)
  • On the back of the monitor are two small ports, which look like USB. I can't confirm this, and I got lost in all of the other neat stuff there before asking someone. You might want to poke around the tech specs if this interests you.
  • The digital interface is a standard one I believe, SGI uses it for their 18" display, it requires a digital output from the graphics gard - currently #9 produce the SGI card. Digital (ok, I know all flat panels are digital internally :)flat panels are much crisper than other ones - I think all notebooks use digital video cards.

    I would assume that fairly soon most decent cards will have a digital output as well as analogue (I'm British) as TFT displays get more common. Shouldn't be too hard as al cards are digital until the final D-A converter. Which is why most PC flat displays are silly as they then have to A-D internally. Too much A-D-A'ing is bad for signal quality as all Hi-Fi buffs will tell you. Ok, they D-A-D. Shut up :)

    John
  • At that price they _might_ sell 3 or 4.

    As others have said, that price includes a G4 machine as well. However, even if it didn't, I've worked at a company where it wasn't uncommon to see 3 17" flat panel displays per machine. Don't judge prices by what home users will be prepared to pay. Corporates will pay whatever it takes to get the display they want, particularly for something like this which is aimed squarely at the publishing/graphic arts market.

  • like it sez up there. if you check the apple site for the specs on this here thingie, you'll find that it's got 2 usb ports built right in. handy.
  • ..if you are going to get rid of perfectly good G3s *and* the people who use them that's downright idiotic. There's no more delicate way to say it.

    Have you put actual thought into what you just said? You don't like that the B&W G3's are *currently* not upgradeable, so you're going to dump them and go to NT and:

    1) Get machines that are no faster than the G3. Why not spend the money for a new G4? Upgrade cards weren't going to be cheap for a long time anyway -- just move any peripherals from the B&Ws to a *much* better Sawtooth motherboard.

    2) Incur the disruption, extra training and support costs of switching.

    3) Buy all new software licenses.

    4) Watch your IT department grow into it's own little empire.

    5) Jump right into the teeth of the Y2K problem right before the rollover date. Good move.

    Do you honestly believe you'll get better productivity? Have you read *any* TCO or ROI studies that support this? And you'll do it even if your people don't like it? Guess you don't give a rat's ass about "your" people, do you? I'm glad as hell I don't work for you.
  • OS9 and OSX are parallel releases. From what I understand, OS9 and its follow ons (that will be able to run on all Macs with sufficient RAM back to, I believe, the Mac II something) will continue to be updated for at least 18 months. OSX is going to be available, supporting the G3 and G4 based Macs (basically, everything from the last 18 months and newer), and will be the long-term OS for Apple. So, basically, same thing that MS has been trying (and failing) to do since the introduction of WinNT.

  • The command line is gonna look awesome on one of these! :)
  • Acutally its the DPF connecter, and the Rage 128 and the #9 Revolution 4 has them.
  • It is not hardware dependant. The G3 Mac should be able to run one, since the DPF connector is on the Rage 128 card. So should PCs, and SGI Visual Workstations.
  • doesn't mean the logic of selling these babies is completely flawed.

    There are markets where displays like this are a godsend (publishing, digital video, graphics, etc.), and to be sure, Apple is going to sell every single one of these things it can ship, and STILL not meet anywhere near all the demand. I'm sure the profits are there, too.

    So even though you, or _I_ for that matter, can't afford one, Apple's hit the nail right on the head, again.
  • $3,499.00
    500MHz G4
    1MB L2
    256MB SDRAM
    27GB Ultra ATA
    Zip drive
    DVD-RAM/DVD Video
    ATI RAGE 128 AGP
    10/100BASE-T
    No

    I don't care what the benchmarks say, I could build a faster x86 system than this thing for $3500. This doesn't even have a monitor. Geeze... ridiculous


  • The G4 sawtooth machines can actually take 2GB of RAM, but the MacOS can only handle up to 1.5GB, so they list the max as 1.5gig. But if you put LinuxPPC on there, you could probably go to the full 2 gigs. Woohoo.

    MacOS X better support more than 1.5GB, because soon everyone will need more to run Unreal 3 or whatever.
  • Just out of curiosity, is that what they call the difference between 35mm and 72mm?
  • 1.8:1 is "anamorphic" widescreen. It's used by all of the newer, big budget movies (Titanic, Episode 1, etc.)

    Most movies are at LEAST 1.85:1, Titanic and Ep1 are 2.35:1. Anamorphic is a proccess of horizontally compressing the image on film and is independant of the display aspect ratio. 1.56:1 is "letterbox" widescreen. That is the aspect ratio that has been in use by hollywood since the mid 50's, when they needed some kind of "hook" to differentiate themselves from TV.

    To repeat the Hollywood standard is 1.85:1. 1.78:1 (16:9) is the "widescreen" TV standard. 1.56:1 isn't a standard that I'm aware of...

  • i could easily build a 4 proc. PIII for that money. *Even* if G4 is 2.7 times faster than a pentium, 4 550 MHz processor's are > 1 500 MHz processor. Hey, i'd love to have one of those things, but you ain't gettin what you pay for. Those are the facts
  • The reason imagesetters have to have such a high resolution to produce great looking output is that their "dots" can only be on or off and have to rely on some method of dithering to achieve levels of gray/colors. You don't really need 2540 dpi to produce smooth text but you do need it if you want to produce continuous tone images at a decent sharpness. With a display you can change the intensity of each pixel and achieve smooth transitions at a lower resolution. cheers, Matthew Reilly
  • MacOS X will have SMP support and the G4 is built to work with other processors in an SMP layout.

    So, put your 4 PIII in a box...but will they beat a system with 4 G4's in it?

    As for price...so what? Is that really hurting Apple? I don't think so.

    But hey, to each his own.

  • Re:Ugly! Ugly was Re:Gimme! Gimme! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Pictures do not do the thing justice. I was fairly unimpressed until I got over to Seybold and saw them in person.

    This monitor is seriously erotic.

    It's not only larger than you think, it's larger than you can think. Ditto for brightness, contrast and viewing angle. Does very high-grade realtime interpolation for supporting multiple resolutions, as well. Your "underperform" rating is simply wrong.

    The industrial design is phenomenal...perfect, I dare say. The SGI flat panel display looks clunky in comparison. The silver and unnaturally clear plastics are reminiscent of the front of a sports car or racing bike. Ingeniously simple but effective tilt mechanism. And the whole thing is tethered by a single cable combining power, USB and video signal (these split off "behind the desk").

    Of course, words don't do it justice any better than the pictures...you've got to see the thing in person. And if you've got one shred of aesthetic taste and/or testosterone in your body, you'll understand what all the buzz is about.

    Yes, it's expensive. But this isn't a monitor intended for grandma and her recipes or for pimply-faced script kiddies. It's perfectly suited to the Seybold crowd it was shown to...top-tier graphics professionals who are able and willing to pay for the absolute highest quality tools available. If it's too expensive, you could always go to one of the other manufacturers of 22-inch wide-screen ultra-high-clarity LCD screens...except that there are none. Nobody's pulled this off before.

    You get what you pay for.

  • Did anyone try to say this out loud?

    Apple Cinema Display
    Apple Cinema
    apple cinnamon

    Heh.... language is fun.....
  • As for:
    8.6 snappy? Perhaps, but it still won't take advantage of most of what the G4 has to offer.

    I have it on good authority (inside Apple) that AltiVec QuickDraw is all ready, and should be included in MacOS 9 or released shortly thereafter, although strangely no mention of this was made at Seybold.

    Yeah, I'm a Mac programmer. You got a problem with that?
  • Yow! For that kind of scratch you can get yourself a full on HDTV that will accept Digital input from your computer, but will also accept analog from your DVD, VCR and satelite dish.
  • Intel is killing the x86 line anyway. We already knew that. If you want to pull the usual Mac zealot trick of comparing products that don't exist yet, try comparing future G4s to future IA64 chips, not to current Pentiums...

    And if you know enough about Merced to make this comparison, I'd honestly like to hear it.
  • Fair enough about my assumptions on manufacturing costs. But I still stand by my point that the Cinema display isn't as overpriced as the original posting seemed to suggest. In fact, your information seems to indicate it's more competitively priced.

    You're right about the area of an 18.1" - I copied the wrong figure from the sheet of paper where I was working the areas out of the various sizes of screen.

    Cheerz,

    Rob
  • That would be comparing something that __does__ exist(G4) to something that will probably NEVER exist! (IA64)
  • And for added benefit, the Star Wars trailer is 2.2:1, but the important part of this "cinema" display is that it takes advantage of a feature on many DVDs that uses the maximum width even if the letterbox bars are cut off. Besides, this monitor can display a full 11x17 page which is just incredible for one of Apple's strongest legacy markets: newspapers and print media.
  • well if you really want to nitpick, it's $6498 because you can't buy it without buying a G4 and that's how much the package deal costs.
  • The reason 150 dpi just doesn't cut it is that you're thinking in terms of printers - dithered or halftoned. Resolution and pixel depth are (to a point) interchangable. 300dpi continuous tone colour (such as dye-sub printers can deliver) is WAY better quality than offset printing delivers (magazines use an offset printing process.)

    If you want to include tiny little details that you can see from 2" from the screen, yeah, 300dpi will make a difference.
  • I belive the Rage 128 already has the connector built in, so any Rage 128 card on the market should support the display. Which inclues PC Rage128s.
  • wont _always_ be that way, it just includes a G4 right now to limit the number of purchases so as to not be backordered for months at a time, im sure once things pick up price will go down some and be available solo
  • I don't know about you, but I don't read all the /. articles. I didn't read the G4 one, because I'm not interested in Apple. I am interested in monitors however, so this headline caught my eye. If it weren't for this "repeat" article, I would never have known about this monitor.

  • The G4 is a much much better chip than the PIII. I would *love* to have a G4 box running LinuxPPC. My only point was and still is that right now, i can get way more overall processor bandwidth for my money with an x86 box than with a G4 box. If there are 3rd party G4's available for a reasonable price when i buy my next computer, you better believe that's what I'll buy. But G4's aren't worth it right now.

  • Sure you could build a faster x86 machine. And monkey's will fly out of my butt!

    You take your fastest PII system and put it next to a G4 system running the same set of SETI@Home data and the G4 will be done in 6 to 7 hours. The PII will take over a day.

    And don't forget that these machines are classified as Supercomputers and can't be exported out of the country to T&E countries, and that the low end model of the G4 only costs $1599, only $300 more than the iMac.

    I love my Mac, and I've only owned mine for 4 weeks!
  • SGI flat display @ buy.com for $2334.95

  • Re:Price (Score:1)

    by jlv ( 5619 )
    Of course, the same system, sans the Apple Cinema Display is $2499, making the display itself just a mere $3999!
  • Pretty sure the Mach Kernel can address the full 2GB. If I'm wrong, I know someone will tell me so :-)
  • Apple was talking about the Mac market, o' uninformed Anonymous Coward. The new Cinema Display and the new Rage AGP cards are the first digital-digital LCD interface on the Mac.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • It's called high definition TV, the main purpose being higher resolution.
  • No way for a moderator to delete this?
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • >...and 266-ppi panels should be out by the end of the year.

    I believe 300dpi will be the magic number, as it was for the laser printer displacing daisywheel printers. 150 just doesn't cut it as easy enough on the eyes. At 300, electronic books, newspapers, etc. become as easy to read as the real thing.

  • Wasn't this mentioned about a zillion times in the post a couple of days ago about the G4?

  • An (possible) overestimation of taxes and shipping.
  • oh, and I was speaking of the G3 bundle. whoops. i guess I should have included that in my first comment. :(
  • They claim that like a movie theatre, it has a letterbox format (1600x1024). However, I always thought movie format had an aspect ration of something like 1.8:1, not the 1.56:1 of this display. Still, it's a definite step in the right direction. Anyone who has used a dual headed display will agree that having a wide, low display provides significant benefits over a tradtional CRT aspect ratio.

    As far as I can see it only has two problems: Apple's pig-ugly translucent styling, and the likely price by the time it reaches the UK...

  • That's exactly it. The reject rate on large LCD screens in amazingly high. Every person in the graphics industry I know wants one of these. There is no way they're going to be able to make enough, even only selling it with the G4 and only from the Apple store. The only thing that bugs me about it is it means I can't go down to the local Mac place and drool over one.

    --
  • As an owner of a G3 I can state that the Rage card it ships with does not have anything but a VGA connector.

    --
  • I've heard (from knowledgable sources) that the reason for this bundling is that they are having trouble with the yields, and so they want to make sure they have enough so they can sell a nice, whole, high-end system, rather than just selling out all the monitors at once.
  • And for the price of four G4s, you can get sixteen P-IIs...

    The G4, on an absolute scale, is faster, but it's on the losing end of the price-performance ratio, and adding more of 'em isn't going to help that.
  • So by late next year, maybe the following year, e-books [wired.com] will indeed be on the horizon. :-)
  • A little history: Apple put $100M into Samsung a few months ago to build their flat-panel assembly lines, and I seem to recall seeing something about a 22" flat panel from them a week or so ago. Apple's gambit is apparently to monopolize the supply of these things, since most of Northeast Asia is scrambling to build factories to produce them.
  • Pardon me, So, not available in shops, and not available unless you buy a POS G4. I just have a hard time with someone referring to a G4 as a Piece Of Sh!t. These machines have been demod and hyped for less than 48 hours, and you're already convinced that their pieces of sh!t? What a limited mind you must have. Whether you like Apple or not, I think they have at least earned open-mindedness. I don't think anyone should refer to any product as a piece of sh!t until they've used it themselves. If a G4 doesn't meet your needs, fine. But please don't make uninformed judgements based on personal whims.
  • The new G4s kick butt from a hardware perspective, but they still have the old emulated MacOS that will bog it down to a pace as bad as Winblows.

    There's very little emulation left. They've rewriteen almost every component toi be PPC native. 8.6 is a pretty snappy OS.

    And before the race to say "wait until OSX" save it folks..that old arguement about the next big OS from Apple is well over 5 years old and without any results.

    But this time they actually do have a product on the way. OS X server is already out. You can buy that and you've got a complete (albeit non-optimised) Unix system. And OS X client Developer Preview 2 is due out within weeks. Unless there are major hangups, OS X client will be out within 6 months.

  • ...possible to achieve 400 ppi resolution using conventional TN...

    ...but given the nature of the AM-LCD developement, 400-ppi should be within reach.

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Close