“It has a resolution of 2560×1440, which no other monitor in the industry seems to have (that I can find). 30” LCDs are the same width but 1600 tall,” Arment writes. “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 1920×1080 resolution), but I can’t find any other 27” IPS panels,” Arment writes. “It’s also LED-backlit.”
Arment writes, “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)… 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,” Arment writes. “How are they making anything — or even not losing money — with the base-model 27” iMac?”
“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,” Arment writes. “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.”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “since1984” for the heads up.]
can’t be true, some putz was here the day of release telling us all about his home built for under $500! i am sure that had quality parts and a 27″ screen….
Boo yah!! Papa bought a quad core thanks to stock doing so well!!
I just want one to replace the 27″ TV currently in my living room.
The same $1699 will get you a Dell 2560×1600 monitor.
It’s not the same high-end IPS image quality, it doesn’t have cleanable protective glass, it doesn’t have a webcam, speakers and a mic, and it’s made of cheap plastic instead of aluminum. It doesn’t come with a wireless keyboard for sofa control, nor an IR remote receiver, nor a wireless mouse with a scrolling trackpad on the back. It doesn’t come with a Snow Leopard license, the ability to run Windows, and the iLife software bundle. It doesn’t have Firewire 800 and fiber-optic audio I/O. It doesn’t have WiFi N, Bluetooth, an SD card reader or a DVD player/burner. And it doesn’t have a 3GHz dual-processor Macintosh with 4GB RAM, 1 terabyte of hard drive, and a 256MB graphics board.
But it IS a display for the exact same price. And it has 160 more vertical pixels
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
And displays have always been among Dell’s BEST deals.
That’s always been Apple’s strategy. Don’t compete by copying. Compete by making desirable products that the competition cannot easily copy. If you can do that, you have a monopoly on cool.
and the Dell doesn’t have the LED backlight so it will dim and turn yellow while the Mac is still bright and clear.
I wonder what the 3-year resale value is on a $1699 Dell display with old-style fluirescent tubes, vs. the resale value on a 27” 3GHz iMac with all the trimmings?
We all thought Apple was going to cut margins to offer cheaper machines—even though they’ve done great in this economy without such a move. Turns out they cut margins by going really HIGH end!
Reading these reviews, I find that this is the first time in a long time I’ve actually been tempted to get a desktop again. I think I can hold out until these brilliant specs show themselves on an MBP. But just barely.
Free iMac server connected to a MacPro or a MacBook Pro, for that matter!
Where’s the anti-glare option?
@shen
Yeah, and they used duct tape, and old spare parts around the house. There is always those BS braggarts running around the net.
Something else to put under my X-mas tree.
Or … <harrumph> … to give my wife for X-mas. Yes. That’s what I meant. Yup. That’ll sooth her feathers.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
So guys, with the ability to run this as an external monitor, does this mean I can connect it to my MacBook, and at the same time have the iMac running with say Snow L server?
@ McIntosh,
“I think I can hold out until these brilliant specs show themselves on an MBP.”
You bet buddy. When that 27″ MBP hits the Apple Stores I will be all over it too.
For the next Mac/PC commercial, the guys should just whip it out and see who is bigger.
If you thought reading the specs makes it tempting, then do yourself a favor and do NOT go see one. You’ll be ruined if you do. No written description or even a photo can do these justice…wow.
Did any one hear about a new OS from a company called “microsoft”? something like 7ista or something like that.
Jubei, that is bailing wire not duct tape, and the 14.4 modem is top of the line i tell you. soon as i figure out the IRQ setting. and i heard on the news group that this CPU totally rocks with this motherboard even though it isn’t supported…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
i built over 2000 computers, myself, from the ground up, for real. Usually from spare parts. What can I say, it was part of the job. In Americas “no child left behind” school system you use what you can find. anyway, the point is that I have been there and done that, and yes you can save a few bucks. but you very often get what you pay for.
i don’t know what your time is worth, but for me the time spent on keeping windows running or even linux on a home built vs. the time saved by having a Mac was well worth the $100-150 i spent to have the Mac vs the home built. especially since the Macs have been lasting, on average, 5 1/2 years vs 14-18 months on the home built before i needed to consider replacement.
…but what do i know?
@ BlahBlahBlah
<Boo yah!! Papa bought a quad core thanks to stock doing so well!!>
Hey that’s EXACTLY what I did . . . I bought AAPL a few years ago and this will be my second computer paid for by the profits. You got the Q4i7 right?
@84 Mac Guy
Fun-nee
Just bought the 27″. HUGE screen and the instant on LEDs is something to behold.
Grocery stores offer what are known as “loss leaders” – items sold at a loss just to lure people to the store, knowing that those folks will buy more stuff once they are in the door. I’m picturing these gorgeous gargantuas positioned at the entrance of every Apple Store, luring people in. The profit margin may not be as great on them, but people will buy plenty of other stuff once in the door, if not the actual iMac itself. (Personally, I’m saving up right now for a quad-core).
I’m just wondering if there’s something up Apple’s sleeve besides trying to get more people into the stores and/or buying more desktops vs. laptops.
@George
Unfortunately, no, it doesn’t look like you’ll be able to hook up your MacBook (or any computer) to the new 27″ iMac’s video input UNLESS it (the MacBook) physically has a DisplayPort (or Mini Display Port) output.
Specifically, you CANNOT buy a cheap physical dongle for $20 that will convert DVI/etc to Display Port connector format.
The analogy is similar to power adapters: in some cases – like laptops that generally will take current from anywhere in the world (both 110 & 220V) – you can just buy a $5 adapter to overcome the physical obstacle. But a cheap coffee pot made in the US will probably blow up if you try to feed it 220V through a physical adapter. If you moved to Europe with it, you’d have to buy a much more expensive $30-50 transformer to actually step down the voltage.
DisplayPort has same limitation. Even if you get the physical interconnects right, you’ve still got another obstacle – and one that’s more expensive to overcome.
Hopefully Apple will provide a cheap solution for that to, but it wouldn’t shock me if that was $40-50. That’s cheap if you have no alternative on a $1699 purchase, but for some that’ll be irksome.
seems like a continuation of the story about the (now old) iMac 24″ released in spring 2009:
http://www.derekunderwood.com/general-computer/new-imac-24-is-basically-a-screen-with-a-free-computer/
and at 27″ the new iMac display is even better than before and the value keeps getting greater and greater
@geekplus
Check again there is a mini display port on both the new MBPs and IMacs. But I’m not sure if what George wants to do cxn be accomplished, which is to have both the internal processor and an external MBP. It may be possible as it would allow a new IMac to be display and controller for the new Mac Mini server. This would make sense for Apples strategy in small business znd home networks.
> “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,”
Not this puppy. Bring on the 30+ inch.
yup just bought me a 27″ i7 to replace my dual 2.7 G5 PowerMac