Apple Cinema Display Questions

Yes, there are 2 backlights. There is one on top of the screen and one on the bottom. There is then a piece of plastic that runs behind the screen that spreads the light out over the entire screen. I probably wouldn't fix it if I were you.


30 incher eh? Wow, that's a step up. Expensive too.


I don't know about watching video on the 30 inch display. Honestly, if I were you, I'd get an LCD TV if video is your primary concern. 1080p LCD TVs would be much cheaper than a 30-inch cinema display.


I have a 26-inch HP LCD TV (1368x768) that I hook my MacBook Pro up to and it looks far better than video on a computer monitor. The color brightness and contrast just isn't matched by a computer monitor.


If you are set on the 30 incher, then you'll need one of the Pro macs to drive it. If you are satisifed with 1920x1200 or less, then even a Mac mini will drive it an play 1080p video just fine.


If this setup is dedicated for video then I think the Mac mini is perfect. I love my MacBook Pro too. (MBP should be update to Core 2 Duo processors any day now...)


If I were you, I'd buy a good LCD TV, a Mac mini, and a decent DVD player and I'd pocket the rest. Just my opinion though.


-- jaydillyo

Ted, what are you going to be using the monitor for?


The Apple 30" is a very nice monitor and if you are going to use it primarily for photo or graphics work I would highly recommend it.


But if your primary use is going to be HT and movies, then I would highly recommend that you consider a 42" (or even a 50") plasma from a company like Fujitsu or Panasonic. A good, well calibrated plasma set will provide a more enjoyable and more lifelike movie experience than an LCD (I do have both, actually, I have or have had a whole bunch of LCDs, mostly various sized Apples, but also an Olevia, a Sharp and several Dells.)


I know that you have had some misgivings about plasma's "burn-in" issues, but in recent years, those are not more valid for plasmas than for LCDs or CRTs.


A decent 42" Panasonic is very close to what the Apple will cost you.


The resolution talk is really not relevant for movies at 30", or even 42", unless you watch them from one foot away. In the real world, from a normal viewing distance, I really doubt you'd be able to tell any difference between a 42" EDTV and a 42" HDTV. Even if you were able to find enough 1080P material to watch, at these sizes and at a normal viewing distance, your eyes simply cannot resolve the pixels or the detail. You'll only be taxing your computer system, for no apparent benefit.


Of course, if you will be using the monitor for work, then resolution does matter a lot, and LCD would be best.


(my suggestion: get a 20" or 24" Apple for work, then get a 42" or 50" plasma for movies


Good luck.

I should have given more info -- my home theater is in my bedroom, my computer setup is in the living room. The primary purpose is computer work -- programming, iPhoto & probably Aperture, possibly some video editing. However, I have been playing with front row, video podcasts, iTunes downloads, have some DVDs ripped to disk, and have EyeTV 500 coming -- all of which I can only do in the living room for the moment, until I upgrade my HT to HDTV, which isn't going to happen soon, as I am not impressed with how the current choices look compared to my widescreen multi-standard CRT.


Bottom line -- I need a new computer monitor. Choices are: the 23" ACD, the 24" iMac or the 30" ACD. My desktop computer is a DP G4, which I want to upgrade as well for obvious reasons.


A Mini is attractive but it can't drive the 30". A iMac is attractive, but considering I already have almost 1TB of disk space associated with the G4, and need more disks for backups, this would mean a gaggle of external drives. But, yes, getting a MacPro + a 30" would cost me ~5K, but would certainly be highly usable for the next 4-5 years.


I'm still very undecided.

Mac Pro + 2 23 inch displays?


I have dual monitor setups at work and home and I love it. Personally, I feel its a better value than a 30 inch monitor. That and I'm just used to working on a dual monitor setup.


2 x 23 inch Cinema display = 4,608,000 pixels


1 x 30 inch Cinema display = 4,096,000 pixels


When I check out the prices on Apple's store, the 30 inch was cheaper than I thought. I forgot that Apple recently dropped its display prices.


Either way, that's a lot of screen space for $2k.


-- jaydillyo

Quote:
Hmm, the Pioneer HD1? (50" 1080P Plasma is quite good), but, yes the Sampo (right?) is something that I also have a hard time letting go of. Probably have it ISF'd for the end of it's term, then go to a front projector.

My computer setup, the opposite of you, is a 22" ACD on the wall, and a 17" widescreen Viewsonic that I use to watch my eyeTV/iTunes/AVI/MPEG recordings in bed. The 17" also has component inputs that I use as a monitor when doing my DVHS dumps to hard drive.

My though is to upgrade to a 23" or greater, and then get the Gefen Minimate for my second monitor, which I would upgrade to a 20" or greater. That way I can use the second monitor to watch DVHS, DVDs and my computer stuff. Just wish there was a media player that could also do MPEG-4 (unless the Pioneer Blu-Ray deck finally comes out). Too much of a pain to dump to DVHS then go to my home theater.


But for you I'd echo the others here, a plasma (one with square pixels--i.e. 1280x720, or 136*x768) as a main monitor and HDTV. Though the 30" has dropped, but, the high resolution will be pretty tough to watch when you're further back for HT watching. Certainly with even a G4 DP you'll still be watching at 1/4 resolution and that probably won't look too well on the 30". Best deals may be in the other widescreen LCD monitors, the suggestions for Plasma are with much better color, but, resolution is better made for HT viewing.


Maybe check out some monitors and displays, up close and back to get a feel for what compromises you can deal with. You might be able to go with the 30" as a compromise towards computer, and then wait for the investment in an HDTV.

Quote:
Actually it is an European Sony.


I can't get a 50" plasma -- there is simply not enough room in my small apartment. Anything larger than 40" for my bedroom simply doesn't make sense. In any event, I have no immediate need to upgrade my HT -- but I do need to upgrade my computer setup.
Quote:
I have no intention of trying to run a 30" off my DP G4 (which isn't supported without a video card upgrade anyway.) My G4 is a hunk of junk, and I need to replace it anyway (I'm not even using it right now -- my Mini is hooked up to my half blown display, but I need it for my HT once I've done ripping my CD collection).


The only way to run the 30" ACD is with a MacPro or a MacBookPro. My basic choice is between a 24" iMac (I chuck the G4 & the monitor), or a MacPro with a 30" ACD.


I have no intention of watching anything at any less then the monitor's native resolution. I am sure that a MacPro has more than enough processor power to display anything at full rez without dropping fames, but my question is whether all the commonly used software like the Apple DVD Player or EyeTV support 2560 x 1600 (the 30" ACD resolution).

Edited to fix typos.

Quote:
Then maybe one of the 37" LCDs would be good, they come in both 1080 and 768, which would should work well.

Quote:
But, you could do as I plan, use the G4 as the recording station, that way you can create a clean Mac--with know updates and no betas--to record with multiple eyeTVs, add a RAID, or many hard drives, and use that to serve to your iMac, or mini w/ monitor? As for resolution support, they do, but, you'll just magnify any problems (think DVD Player with video) that they already have. EyeTV has a Fullscreen/fill-screen options, and you might wonder what an iTunes video would look like blown up. You could experiment, at the Apple Store, with movie trailers since like eyeTV, they're Quicktime, and it's probably a similar graphics engine.

Quote:
The G4 has too much fan noise. If I wanted a dedicated machine for that, I'd buy another mini, but I fail to see the need for one, as I doubt I'm going to be using the EyeTV500 all that much. Until now I have lived with no TV what so ever (DVDs only) (I do not have a NTSC tuner of any kind), and with the EyeTV I am hoping to watch some baseball and the occasional awards show, election night coverage, that sort of thing. I consider TV a big waste of time. When there is a worthwhile TV series (like BSG, Veronica Mars, The Wire), I buy seasons on DVD. Now we have the iTunes store as well and I hope they will increase their resolution past 640x480 and add even more TV shows.

While watching a television series on dvd certainly has had its benefits Ted--no commercials, extras and commentary tracks, often in 16:9 and 5.1 when broadcast originally in 4:3 and 2.0--but those times have been a changin' for years--now those shows are originally broadcast in high def and a whole season can be archived for viewing later in high def. Why do you think some AVS users have 3 EyeTV500s hooked up to their Macs? Waiting for those series on dvd now is a step down, even played back with a top-rated standalone upscaling dvd player there's no comparison to those same series in high def. Battlestar Galactica and Veronica Mars in HD are significantly improved if you have a good display, even though they're broadcast on networks (UHD and WB/CW) not known for pristine HD quality. The thing is, unless you apply the same sort of scrutiny to this that I know you applied to the audio side of things, you may not notice much of a difference.


I know you'll be holding on to your big analog CRT, and your PAL dvd collection, I'll be keeping the 100 or so of my PAL and R2 discs as well since 'Double Life of Veronique' or 'The Naked Island' won't be in R1 let alone on HBO or Blu-ray anytime soon, but in order to move forward you have to give yourself an opportunity to appreciate high def before you decide (prematurely I suspect) that you're not impressed with how "current choices look." What kind of position are you putting yourself in to evaluate how current choices look--have you had an larger diameter screen HDTV in your apartment and tuned something in via OTA or QAM to compare with dvd or ever hooked your Mac mini up to an HDTV anywhere? I don't think so, you're just beginning down that road. And if you're forming your opinions based on what you see in stores or at friend's houses, don't rely on that.


Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly OK to decide to wait a bit, for any number of reasons that apply to your situation: space, budget, not enough content you want to watch to warrant such a purchase, just realize "the current choices" as you say look absolutely amazing to the rest of us who are a little further down the road than you, hell, even an old EDTV like Ryan has displaying his preferred HD-lite can look as amazing as on a comparable HDTV if viewed from the right distance away--you just have to have the combination of 1) a good digital display, which you understand how to adjust, 2) good capture and playback devices and 3) good source material in order to appreciate it. If you don't have all three, you can't form meaningful comparisons.


You'll probably need an actual HDTV to move forward, though, just get a display and display-type appropriately sized to your apartment. Now, will Fritz Lang or Mizoguchi or Bresson be broadcast in HD or see Blu-ray or HD-DVD anytime soon? No, so dvd will stay relevant for the home theater cineaste among us for a long time. But no one with an HDTV thinks an iTunes video download is worth a damn nor expects any significant improvement anytime soon, you shouldn't either except as a down and dirty way to catch up on a series ep you might have missed (if you're watching something in sequence weekly in real time.)


When you first started posting here your focus was audio--you wanted to load all your cds onto hard drives and serve them with iTunes and a mini--a bold move for an audiophile steeped in the analog side of things. You accomplished that transition. Next up is the video side--you bought an EyeTV500 but haven't used it yet. You won't be able to record 'BSG' off of UHD with it (if you can even get UHD on Time Warner, it's been years since I lived in NYC so I just don't know) but it should get Veronica Mars for you in HD perfectly OTA. Plus baseball and network news, so begin there.


Most of us with bigger displays have a hard time watching anything in SD once we made the HD transition--and that's not just because many HDTVs don't handle SD well--it's because the bar has been raised significantly and you can't put the genie back in the bottle. Given your space and your situation, with TV and high def not being such a high priority it may be the best choice for you is that 30" Apple display--you can write it off because it'll be in a home workstation and ease it into limited home theater tasks. Win-win.

Thanks for the detailed answers!


chefklc -- I have one piece of good news for you: The Double Life of Veronique is coming out from Criterion shortly.


Anyway, as you point out, I still haven't used my EyeTV 500 (it arrived yesterday, and I still don't have an antenna), and I don't know at all what I'll be able to receive OTA, or whether Time Warner Cable offers clear QAM in Manhattan (no one seems to know).


I take your word for how marvelous HDTV is, but I am not about to start watching TV shows live with commercials, so unless I can get a practical, time waste free DVR solution going, I'll be making due with DVDs until the victor of the Blu-ray/HD DVD war starts offering TV seasons in HD.


In the meantime, I doubt I'll get anywhere with EyeTV until the NY Film Festival is over so I'll stay in suspense until next week

Or, you can just forget work and go for one of the new Panasonic 65" 1080p plasmas ( http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=728770 )


Gawd, how far we've come! This thing costs less than my first 42" flatscreen! And it does 1080p! The higher pixel count would make it more watchable in smaller rooms (just something to think about


Anyway, that's what I am eyeing, just waiting for the next year model, when the HDMI 1.3 thing will hopefully be resolved.


As for TV, cable just sucks, IMO. And TW in Manhattan sucks doubly I watch virtually nothing on the networks (Lost is the only show I've liked there since Seinfeld so OTA is out for me. The little TV I watch is VOOM ( http://www.voom.tv/ - the best HDTV and the best TV available in the US, IMO, exclusive to Dish,) or the Sopranos and Entourage Those you can get on DVD, and unless you go for the 65" Panny, you will not know the difference between the DVD and HDTV.


But VOOM does rock (although Dish is starting to dumb it down....)

Quote:
I actually got the email from Amazon before Criterion .

Quote:
Well, the eyeTV is best for recorded TV, and with the new 10' interface, a mini, lots of hard drive space, you can have a pretty good DVR for OTA, and the QAM in the clear (maybe you'll be lucky and TW carries CW in HD). I I've got all episodes of VM on various hard drives, and have many other episodes from this season sitting waiting to be watched. With the skip button shows go much faster. Just plug in your eyeTV, split off the cable to the 'QAM/Out' port, and hook up a Silver Sensor (probably nasty multipath in NYC, but), and scan through the channels ('Channels' in the left window), set-up some recordings (hit the red dot on a program in the 'Program Guide'), and play with it. Then after recording are done, hit the 'enter' key on your remote and play with the 10' interface, should give you a good taste watching a show.


For noise you could get a 'hush box' for you G4, but, it's probably cheaper to go with a mini or iMac (though it will be a pain, with the iMac, using eyeTV 10' with a dual monitor setup).