Full FeedApple Cinema Displays: Epic. Fail.
You should not buy a Cinema Display from Apple. They are a total rip-off, and aren’t even the best displays.
First off, the cinema displays are wayyyyy overpriced. For the cost of the 20-inch display, I could buy two Dell 24-inch displays. Unless you are a big-time, famous graphic designer or someone who just has a lot of money to burn, I don’t think a 30-inch display is even close to your price range. And, to pour salt in the wounds, even the “refurbished” Cinema Displays will require a second mortgage.
The image above shows the “deal” you will get on a “refurbished” display. For some reason, the folks over at Apple got their prices messed up. Here, it shows that the 20-inch display originally costs $1,299, when, in fact, it is only $599. Thus, buyers think the price drop to $499 is a much better deal. Isn’t that false advertising? Yup. Hasn’t Apple considered the fact that they could get sued for that? Guess not.
Secondly, they aren’t even the best monitors. You’re really paying for a shiny, half-eaten Apple on the back of a hunk of aluminum. This Dell monitor, which costs $389 after rebates, is an inch bigger then the 23-inch Apple. The Apple Display is almost $600 more expensive then the Dell. The Dell also has a faster response time and much better contrast ratio.
In general, you should just stay away from Apple Cinema Displays. They might look awesome, but they don’t have the performance or affordability to back that up. If Apple wants to keep selling displays, they should definitely consider an upgrade.
What is your opinion on the Cinema Display? Would you buy one?
Keep up with the latest gadget goodness! - 
Subscribe to our feed
Live from Macworld 2009
The Appletell staff is working their way through the show floor at Macworld 2009 to bring you the latest Apple products and accessories. Hit the Macworld page for non-stop coverage...
Live from CES 2009
We're live from the world's largest tradeshow. Hit up our dedicated CES page for keynote coverage, product announcements, interviews, and photo galleries from the show floor. We're excited... are you?
Wow… you obviously don’t work on Macs professionally, especially in any industry that relies on color correctness.
Your second problem is that you’re comparing two monitors that use completely different technology.
Third, as has been covered many many many times (go ahead and Google it), Dell and a lot of other companies tend to over estimate the performance of their monitors while Apple consistently underestimates it, which leads to all kinds of interesting comparisons where the “better” Dell monitor doesn’t even touch the Apple.
Apple Cinema displays are geared towards Professional applications, do some real price comparisons with Professional level monitors that use the S-IPS like as Apple instead of TN like Dell and you’ll find that the Cinema displays are 1/2 to 1/4 the price for the equivalent size.
Dell makes an OK monitor, but the only reason you’d use it would be for home use or rank and file office Macs. The photographers, graphic designers, colorists, layout developers, etc need the Apple.
That being said Apple does need to update their monitors, something like backlighting at the price point they’re going for now would make it an extremely desirable monitor for a much larger group of people.
on June 12, 2008 at 08:33 PM - LINKThis is completely a non-sense comparison, it’s like saying DON’T BUY A LEXUS, BUY A FORD INSTEAD BECAUSE IT’S CHEAPER, you get what you pay for. I have a 24” Dell and a 24” Apple Cinema, the difference is outrageous, I mean, if you want a display for internet browsing, music and msn or ichat, get a dell display, but if you want a high quality image for graphic or video editing then pay for quality, your final product will be better.
on June 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM - LINKPosts like this one are the reason why I believe Appletell is not a good information source anymore!!! Do you really think a Dell display is as good as an Apple one? you gotta be kidding me.
on June 12, 2008 at 10:44 PM - LINKBuying always the cheapest food can cost you your health and even death. A display is not like food but if you buy a bad quality image will damage your eyes. Think about it. This post’s author do not have an idea of administration at all, is not always about getting the cheapest stuff.
on June 12, 2008 at 10:49 PM - LINKMaybe comparing a Dell and an Apple display wasn’t the fairest of comparisons, but this post wasn’t really to say which display is better, but rather to make the point that there are certain displays out there that are just as good if not better then the Apple displays for less money. The “Epic Fail” is more in terms of how long it has taken Apple to upgrade them (We are coming up on the current design’s 4th year) and how overpriced they are. For much less, I could get a display with better response time and a better contrast ratio, like this Samsung.
on June 12, 2008 at 10:55 PM - LINKYes, Apple has taken a long time to upgrade their LCDs. But do they really need to?
You’re still not getting it though, Apple monitors are very well priced for what they are meant to be: Color Correct. Their <a >competition</a> in this regards starts in the $1k range and goes to $4k just in the 23-24” size.
Find a Samsung that uses S-IPS instead of TN and do a physical comparison of the monitors side by side. I would like to see proof of your statement that it’s better then the Apple. And please don’t use the published stats, as I stated above most manufacturers overstate their specs while Apple goes the opposite way.
I, and I suspect a lot of other people really do want to know. I for one would be willing to leave Apple monitors for something cheaper and better quality.
on June 13, 2008 at 12:35 AM - LINKWe’ve seen this before. Now you’re even repeating stuff on here? WE KNOW WE KNOW. At least wait a year before posting the same crap over again.
on June 13, 2008 at 10:01 AM - LINKApple’s next cinema display update would likely include LED backlighting. It’s all part of their “environmentally friendly” push to eliminate mercury, which is still present in most LCD monitors (including Dell’s). Hopefully, they’d also drastically improve screen response time, closer to 2ms - 5ms, instead of the current 19ms.
on June 13, 2008 at 12:27 PM - LINKhttp://www.apple.com/environment/materials/
Hey, everyone, it’s just an opinion piece. My experience with Apple monitors has been really good (and I’ve been using them for a long, long time), even the iMac monitors. At my office, my boss went through a Dell, an HP, and finally a Samsung LCD monitor before he found one that even came close the image presented by my 24” iMac. But that doesn’t mean we’re going to prevent Mark from stating his opinions based on his experience.
That being said, the reason we have comments is so people can discuss the articles, so we welcome your arguments and defense of Apple products.
on June 13, 2008 at 08:44 PM - LINKI’m sorry I have to agree that the comparison to dell monitors is a bad comparison.
The beter comparison would be getting a new liquid plasma for the price and size (especially the 30”) Frys and other retailers have stands that will support these monsters and you get about the same price now for a better more versatile monitor and with HDMI connection (Now shipped on Mac Pros) you do not have the problem with color loss or correctness. In fact when I was even looking at a 20” monitor I almost went with an HDTV over my Optiquest simply for the quality and versatility.
These Apple displays are really HDTVs with a control to turn off your computer from the monitor and 2USB ports. So for the price you decide you will pay about the same for similar outcome, but HDTVs will give you the ability to use the screen for more than just your Mac.
on June 13, 2008 at 11:15 PM - LINKThe Dell displays are much better then the Apple one. You can use them also for Photo and Video editing. We use in our company Mac Pro´s and Dell displays.
If you calibrate them, they are also coulour true, there is no problem to use them for grafic or video editing. But if you want to have something for your eyes and want to spend more $, some “eye catcher” the Apple Cinema Display might the right one.
on June 15, 2008 at 04:21 AM - LINKWell dell’s monitors, the latest ones anyway use TN panels which creates much much faster response times but not the color correctness needed for professional image work. I think this has already been pointed out ;)
That being said, the average user probably wouldn’t know/neither care what technology was used in their monitor.
I think Mark used Dell’s in his comparison simply because they are touted as the ‘ACD alternative’ a lot since they used to use the same, more expensive IPS panels. This isn’t true for for most models after 2007.
I would be more inclined to buy a Dell since the ACD displays are way out of my budget (for a display anyway) even if you do get what you pay for.
on June 16, 2008 at 06:02 PM - LINKThe displays are said to look a lot like Apple’s aluminum iMacs, only without the large aluminum bottom side. They are described as using a thinner version of iMac’s stand, while the black bezel seems to be present in these designs as well.
on December 19, 2008 at 03:21 PM - LINK<a rel=“follow” href=“http://www.washingtonmortgageaz.com/chandler-mortgages.php”>chandler mortgages</a