Guys you know that the 2.4 GHz iMacs are not the 'low end' Macs you claim they are. The 2.0 is the low end iMac, so why am I, a 2.4 GHz model user, getting the same display?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple sued over 'inferior' panel in 20" iMacs
- Thread starter MIDI_EVIL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The actual issue is that (1) Apple has lots and lots of money in the bank, and (2) there are lawyers who think they can get a bit of that money by complaining as loud as possible in the hope that Apple gives them money to go away. Fact is that the 20" iMac has an LCD screen that uses 6 bit per channel + dithering to produce 16.2 million colours, just as the advertised (Apple advertises it as "Millions of colours"). not 260,000 colours as these lawyers are claiming.
These people are complaining that for $300 more, you get an iMac with a bigger and better screen. That's what people pay more money for it. I have been told that US hospitals have problems if one of their X-Ray machines breaks down and any replacement would be better than the old machines they have. If they have say two old and one new and better X-Ray machine, any patient who is x-rayed using the older equipment could sue them because they are not given the best possible care. So the hospital tries to get a replacement that isn't better than the old equipment, to avoid being sued.
Hmm... So, you cleverly chose a model with "the specs that you desired" from
a spec sheet that listed all models "the exact same way"? ...how very special!
"The discipline of the written word punishes both stupidity and dishonesty."
- John Steinbeck
BTW, how is it that the self-proclaimed "great researcher" who always studies
purchases carefully (or not) is so naive as to expect that ALL the manufacturer's
specifications for a computer would fit on a one-page thumbnail data sheet?
The simple FACT is, the "spec sheet" you referenced contains only a tiny
fraction of the published iMac product specifications. The vast majority of
"The Specs" are organized in a hierarchy of individual "Developer Notes"
(Video, Audio, RAM, Firewire, Bluetooth, Ethernet, etc., etc.) with links for
each subsystems collected in an iMac Developer Note for each generation.
...but thanks for all them expert tips on "research,"
LK
...
Hey Leon - check this out....It has an amazing wealth of information. It just wasn't that hard to do a little research. You are just angry because every point you have made on this issue has proven to be just blind, angry BS.
I already conceded the mistake it was to order the mini 3 years ago, because it was a rev 1a item, when you posted it in that other thread. It died 2 years later. Funny thing is, I was not disappointed in the specs when it showed up - it came exactly as I expected. The rumors were buzzing for months before that release, and I got caught that one time in the frenzy. Actually, it was kind of fun! But I knew exactly what I was ordering from a spec basis. The fact that it died was the bummer, and it sucks about Apple, and probably most tech companies, that is is necessary to avoid a rev 1a product.
But I am going to tell you what the difference is between you and I. (See, I can bold selected words too!) Maybe your iMac was your first Apple product and you felt greatly disappointed. Or Maybe you just hate Apple. But you had this bad experience, and have been running around all over this forum for 6 months throwing your cry-baby temper tantrums, first about your iMac gradient issues, and now in a trollish way about many various things that never even affected you. You have shown that you are either a very angry, vengeful person, a very elaborate troll or paid anti-marketer.
For me, in the past 6 years, I have purchased 7 Apple hardware items, including 5 Macs and 2 iPods. I have purchased maybe a dozen software items from Apple, and frequent their retail stores and web site. In all these experiences with Apple, save the Mac Mini, Apple has done something pretty amazing for a tech company: they have consistently exceeded my expectations. This is a very, very rare thing in this tech age, for me and most others. So when my Mac Mini that I ordered on the day of the keynote dies 2 years later, yes, I am angry, pissed at Apple and feel that I got gipped out of a machine that should have lasted many more years. But here is the difference between us: I got over it. I am not going to carry that anger around like you. I understand how terrible the average tech experience is with most other companies. Only 2-3 companies out of hundreds have consistently and repeatedly exceeded my expectation (Tivo is another one), and I understand what a rare thing that is. While they deserve my anger over the Mac Mini, and I unfortunately had to learn the lesson not to buy a rev 1a from Apple, or any other tech company, I see no reason to take things to the level that you have - ridiculous, childish, cry-baby trolling over every little thing for months and months.
People like you operate from a very strange and biased assumption - a bias that is more strong and blinding than anything that you mistakenly believe the so called Apple faithful have. It is the assumption that the magic of Apple starts with Steve Jobs, and continues through a path of religion, blind faith and loyalty to everything Apple by its followers in an unquestionable and blind manner, and that there is no other possible explanation for the loyalty and happiness that Apple so obviously brings so many people. We must all be drinking the same kool-aid, right? Maybe you have that disposition because you got burned on your first purchase. Or maybe you are just an angry person. Or maybe you are just a troll. Either way, people like you have it totally backwards. The loyalty to Apple comes first from them exceeding their customers expectations, and the loyalty is built as this result is repeated. It does not come from magic, or Kool-Aid or Steve Jobs mind control. It is a simple formula, it works, and it is the Zen place for a company to achieve.
People like you feel the need to try to tear it down. Problem is, it simply won't work, because for every bitter, angry, biased and blinded by some strange internal anger Leon Kowalski out there, there are hundreds of people who are thrilled by Apple. People like you will continue to be angry, and the rest of us will be enjoying the rare thing that is Apple. Truth is, I feel sorry for you. But I will also not tolerate your angry BS all over this forum.
Well you start by complaining in these threads about how you've been wronged by Apple and how you can't look at your display anymore because the internets told you it sucks and that you're a smuck for liking it in the first place.
Who is the angry bitter one here? I am sorry to jump in, but feeling sorry for someone over the internet is silly. Not to mention attempting to characterize and subsequently bash your characterization. It is the internet buddy. Move on, don't try to take the "high ground" by feeling sorry for someone you don't even know one thing about. Pitiful.
Just don't get it, do ya? No one could give a rat's rump about whether you
bought that mini on a whim, or after decades of painstaking "research."
OTOH, ridiculing others, to the point of declaring them suckers, for actions
which you deceitfully claim to "NEVER" take is the height of hypocrisy and
dishonesty. Furthermore, posting such disingenuous rubbish on the very
same forum that contains smoking-gun-proof of that duplicity is nothing
short of weapons-grade stupidity.
LK
When the low ground is taken, there really is only one place left. Sorry if the high ground bother you in response to an angry, vengeful troll. Go read his post history - he is full of angry BS and he will get called out on every time. Yes, it's the internet - trolling BS will get called out - get used to it.
I still ridicule you and call you out for your claim of buying the iMac based on just what Jobs said at the keynote. I still call you a fool for believing all his uses of the word "professional". You got suckered, you drank the kool-aid, you are mad about it, and it cracks me up. You can not let that go. It will be fun to see how long this anger lasts around here. Enjoy your posts here - I will call your BS every single time I see it as long as your anger lasts, regardless of how dishonest, hypocrite, or deceitful you think I am. You blame everyone else for your mistakes, to a point of blindness. And go on the personal attack when you are called out. Pure and simple troll. I don't just feed Trolls - I stick them with a hot iron and watch them writhe around in their own venom! It's so much fun!
Though this constant complaining about the gradient and poor viewing angle etc. is annoying the crap out of me, I must defend Leon Kowalski.
First of all he has a point:
It is hard to disagree with the fact that Apple somewhat deceived the customer with the poorer TN panels used in the 20 inch iMacs.
Especially to those who have worked with a previous generation iMac.
Secondly, he isn't trolling.
He only gives his opinion and his experiences so far with the latest alu iMacs in dedicated threads/questions about the screen quality.
It is not like he rants in every single thread about the poor quality of the latest iMacs.
Thirdly, he isn't even ranting.
He backs his statements with links/photos and specs.
That said, I must confess that it (the constant whining about the LCD screen) annoys the hell out of me, because it almost seems I am not allowed to enjoy my iMac for the following reasons:
- The previous generation of iMacs have better screens, so it appears to be my duty to be angry and disappointed about it.
- If I don't notice the gradient and the fact that it only supports 260.000 colors there must be something seriously wrong with my eyes.
- If I DO notice the gradient, but don't care that much about it, I must be an Apple fanboy.
Oh well.
The screen of my 20 inch iMac isn't perfect, but with the proper calibration and a program called DarkAdpted it is good enough for me.
First of all he has a point:
It is hard to disagree with the fact that Apple somewhat deceived the customer with the poorer TN panels used in the 20 inch iMacs.
Especially to those who have worked with a previous generation iMac.
Secondly, he isn't trolling.
He only gives his opinion and his experiences so far with the latest alu iMacs in dedicated threads/questions about the screen quality.
It is not like he rants in every single thread about the poor quality of the latest iMacs.
Thirdly, he isn't even ranting.
He backs his statements with links/photos and specs.
That said, I must confess that it (the constant whining about the LCD screen) annoys the hell out of me, because it almost seems I am not allowed to enjoy my iMac for the following reasons:
- The previous generation of iMacs have better screens, so it appears to be my duty to be angry and disappointed about it.
- If I don't notice the gradient and the fact that it only supports 260.000 colors there must be something seriously wrong with my eyes.
- If I DO notice the gradient, but don't care that much about it, I must be an Apple fanboy.
Oh well.
The screen of my 20 inch iMac isn't perfect, but with the proper calibration and a program called DarkAdpted it is good enough for me.
Do you feel duped by Apple over it? They moved the low end from the 17" to the 20", and migrated the lower quality 6 bit panel to the 20" along with it. They did this while the main specs linked to off the iMac page listed both the old 17" and the new 20" as having "million of colors". If you check the video developer notes, they used to clearly call the 17" out as 6 bit dithered to accomplish this, but in the new 20", they do not. Does this make you angry?
No I don't feel duped and no it doesn't make me angry.
I guess I didn't make myself clear.
The constant whining on this forum and other forums about the gradient and so on annoys the hell out of me because it almost seems I am not allowed to enjoy my iMac: if don't care about the gradient and 'only' 260,000 colors I must be blind or an Apple fanboy.
But still I don't think Leon Kowalski is trollling, because the gradient for instance is obvious
The trolling has been split between two thread in the last few days on the screens. Most of the trolling was here, but this thread continued his angry tirade.
It all stems from this sentiment about 6 months ago, which he still trolls about daily, and just can't get over. His posts these last few days just echo the same anger he has been spewing all along. He is tricky troll, because he carefully flips back and fourth from making careful posts that he can support with links in one thread, and then shows his true color in others - accusing all Apple users of being blinded by the Anointed One, who we follow like religious zealots. A few examples are quoted below.
Nonetheless, I see you are a pretty reasonable, non-angry, non-vengeful 20" iMac owner. I think that you and I could boil this whole thing down to a pretty simple issue:
Apple has always used the same language in their headline iMac specs and marketing language: millions of colors, which is technically correct. They changed the practice in their tech notes to no longer disclose which panels are 6 bit with dithering. Does this warrant legal action? Is this unethical? Interested in your particular take on this.
He is the fun troll reading:
Yes I have read most messages Leon has posted on Macrumors and on the Apple discussion board as well, under the nickname The Looby.
Maybe you're right in calling it "trolling", but I personally don't see/feel it that way.
He is just passionate in warning and convincing people about Apple's (to what he feels) 'decline' in qualitiy over the years.
And he gets, like many other forum posters, a bit vicious when people doubt his reasons.
But as I have said earlier, it's getting annoying.
Though it's not his fault people constantly start new threads about the gradient whereas they could use the search option on this forum or only type 'iMac and gradient' in Google's search box to find everything about this subject.
No I don't think it warrants legal action and it is not unethical.
But I can understand the deception and the big disappointment from the viewpoint of owners of previous generation iMacs.
They have every right to be angry.
A priori new generation of hardware is supposed to be better (why would anyone buy a new Mac if it would be of poorer quality?)
True, the new processor, videocard and hard disk are better, but as an loyal Apple buyer you would not expect the LCD screen of the 2.4 Ghz 20 inch iMac to be of poorer quality than the previous generation 20 inch iMac.
The anger and disappointment is valid, but I definitely don't think it warrants any legal action.
They downgraded the video card too, at least in the high-end 24" iMac. But that's Apple for you.
I got a 20" iMac about a month ago. I like it. Screen looks good, colors look good, I dont see any gradient. I dont sit off at a 60 degree angle from the screen and try to use it. I dont use it standing up. Im not a professional graphics designer or photographer. I feel like I got what I paid for.
I'm with you. I think the American buying public is a bit schitzophrentic on this one, though. We expect and demand ever dropping prices on tech gadget, buy cheap crap from Wal*Mart, import sub-par products from China, and then get all surprised when we found out that *gasp* companies are producing lower quality, lower spec'd items to accomplish this!
You can still avoid this buy doing your research and paying a little more. There is a 24" iMac with a better panel. There are alternatives to Wal*Mart. You still get what you pay for. Not much has changed there. Accept it and move on. Every time someone want to hang all the blame for this on the company that practices these things, I feel the need to remind them that companies are only reacting to the market and consumer demands. If you don't like what a company is doing, don't but from them. Heck, even educate people on the web about the practice - it is what makes the web community strong. But there is a big difference between posting such practices, and being hell-bent on trolling.
I very much appreciate the posts of Leon Kowalski.
He does an excellent job of explaining things and provides a very refreshing amount of information to balance out the rhetoric of the blatant (paid poster) Apple Fanbois which populate this forum to an almost dangerous (from an informational POV) degree.
Thanks Leon, you do a great job of deflecting Fanboi attacks with solid information.
I am starting to see that this forum is not the best place to get critical Apple information, as the Fanboi rhetoric is so loud and so repetitive that it drowns out genuine critique.
czachorski: the opposite of the troll: the paid poster. You are at almost every critical thread on this forum sticking up for Apple whether they deserve it or not. Do you live at Mac Rumors? The amount of post you have is astonishing, and they all always have the same flavor of rhetoric: Fanboyesque.
He does an excellent job of explaining things and provides a very refreshing amount of information to balance out the rhetoric of the blatant (paid poster) Apple Fanbois which populate this forum to an almost dangerous (from an informational POV) degree.
Thanks Leon, you do a great job of deflecting Fanboi attacks with solid information.
I am starting to see that this forum is not the best place to get critical Apple information, as the Fanboi rhetoric is so loud and so repetitive that it drowns out genuine critique.
czachorski: the opposite of the troll: the paid poster. You are at almost every critical thread on this forum sticking up for Apple whether they deserve it or not. Do you live at Mac Rumors? The amount of post you have is astonishing, and they all always have the same flavor of rhetoric: Fanboyesque.
Quote some of this so-called rhetoric. What you are really saying is that it is not possible to discuss all facets of an issue without being called a fanboy. That is a blindness worse than the accusations you yourself are doling out.
Tell me too, how this is genuine critique: "Now that David Koresh and Jimmy Jones are gone, it's down to S.J. or nothin'" ?
lightning-quick.... I should expect no less from the paid poster.
Keeping on topic: the 20 inch display in the new imac is poor.
Keeping on topic: the 20 inch display in the new imac is poor.
part of me hopes that in the presumably coming update (sheesh, they've left it so long now they may as well wait for WWDC and the next gen chipsets) apple will actually say 'okay guys, we've been rumbled, we garantee high end displays in imacs from now on'. i may just slip off my fence...
then again, apple admitting to a mistake?
then again, apple admitting to a mistake?
7 minute response time, same as yours. Thanks for proving yourself a troll, too. That comment serves no purpose other than troll. It's so easy to smoke you guys out!
Lol, I think we should send Czachorski a badge with "Apple iMac defender" written on it
Seriously though, you would expect Apple to produce a better machine after updating its product, but in the case of the 20" iMac this clearly is not the case.
Still with this product and its price, based on the company's previous reputation, Apple really have made a substantial dent into the current volatile computer market with the Al iMac. Even after this case is settled, win or lose, they'll still be laughing all the way to the bank. But you can bet a lot MORE people will be closely examining the next upgrade.
After sending my 24" iMacs back I did consider buying a 20" However based on many of the reviews on here and elsewhere, and the complaints about the poor, cheap TN panel I didn't. So thanks to everyone for that.
Lol, I think we should send Czachorski a badge with "Apple iMac defender" written on it
Seriously though, you would expect Apple to produce a better machine after updating its product, but in the case of the 20" iMac this clearly is not the case.
Still with this product and its price, based on the company's previous reputation, Apple really have made a substantial dent into the current volatile computer market with the Al iMac. Even after this case is settled, win or lose, they'll still be laughing all the way to the bank. But you can bet a lot MORE people will be closely examining the next upgrade.
After sending my 24" iMacs back I did consider buying a 20" However based on many of the reviews on here and elsewhere, and the complaints about the poor, cheap TN panel I didn't. So thanks to everyone for that.
Hey, I'll take that badge.
Critical, well-thought out rhetoric doesn't bother me. Those aspects of Leon and Doug's points are even useful. They will get called every time by the "defender of the ALum iMac" when they cross that line.
I've been disappointed since purchasing my iMac
The last generation of iMac and its panel disparities has no bearing on the issues with the current generation. With the current iMac, Apple clearly calls out the similarities and differences for the displays. The similarities are listed as:
While the differences are clearly listed as well:
Obviously the displays differ in ways not described in the tech specs above. Not only that, but the claimed vertical viewing angle for the 20" is no where close to 160 degrees. Roughly 30 degrees above perpindicular to the screen, the contrast is extremely poor. In some cases the contrast disappears or inverts. For example, the gray color used to indicate selection on a window without focus disappears. The shadows around windows appear brighter than the surrounding desktop rather than darker. This has been my biggest disappointment with the iMac. I constantly find myself adjusting the tilt or brightness because of my viewing angle. My iMac is in my kitchen so often I'm standing rather than sitting.
As far as the in-store evaluation goes, most of the in store models are 24-inch. Many shoppers will demo the 24 and then purchase the mid or low-end 20 without evaluating it for such unexpected differences in the display. Seriously, if you wanted the larger HD capacity, would you be paranoid enough to test for differences other than capacity? What Apple has done is equivalent to slipping in a 5400RPM drive without telling you when you pick the 500GB option.
People are acting dumb about this simply because the 20-inch is less expensive. Who cares?? Buyers had the choice between options, along with a description of the two options and their differences. It doesn't matter which option was the more expensive. What matters is that buyers did not have the information needed to make the right choice.
The last generation of iMac and its panel disparities has no bearing on the issues with the current generation. With the current iMac, Apple clearly calls out the similarities and differences for the displays. The similarities are listed as:
- widescreen TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display
- Millions of colors at all resolutions
While the differences are clearly listed as well:
- Resolution
- Viewing angle
- brightness
- contrast
Obviously the displays differ in ways not described in the tech specs above. Not only that, but the claimed vertical viewing angle for the 20" is no where close to 160 degrees. Roughly 30 degrees above perpindicular to the screen, the contrast is extremely poor. In some cases the contrast disappears or inverts. For example, the gray color used to indicate selection on a window without focus disappears. The shadows around windows appear brighter than the surrounding desktop rather than darker. This has been my biggest disappointment with the iMac. I constantly find myself adjusting the tilt or brightness because of my viewing angle. My iMac is in my kitchen so often I'm standing rather than sitting.
As far as the in-store evaluation goes, most of the in store models are 24-inch. Many shoppers will demo the 24 and then purchase the mid or low-end 20 without evaluating it for such unexpected differences in the display. Seriously, if you wanted the larger HD capacity, would you be paranoid enough to test for differences other than capacity? What Apple has done is equivalent to slipping in a 5400RPM drive without telling you when you pick the 500GB option.
People are acting dumb about this simply because the 20-inch is less expensive. Who cares?? Buyers had the choice between options, along with a description of the two options and their differences. It doesn't matter which option was the more expensive. What matters is that buyers did not have the information needed to make the right choice.