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.
Panel Question imac 20'' (2009)
- Thread starter tms568
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I did this and I have the supposedly better M201EW02 VF panel. I'm wondering if the 20 inch 2009 panel "lottery" (where there are 2 panels and one is "better" than the other) has something to do with where and when one buys their iMac (for example, maybe the big box resellers have the inferior panel). Just a theory. Has that theory already been refuted? I've read all 200 posts and can't put together the answer. I bought mine at an Apple store in April 2009.
I have the standard panel and i got it from the official apple store, liverpool one, UK.
It's really no different from hard drive lottery, in which Apple uses more than one vendor for a particular component. Someone could luck out and get the faster or more reliable HD, just as someone anywhere could get the good bet in a panel lottery.
Canadian Bacon, for example, got the AUO panel in his first (defective) iMac, but his replacement came with the LG panel, which was unacceptable to him so he returned it.
My local reseller put a 20"er on display in the last two weeks - it has an LG panel (I checked yesterday.) I was kind of hoping the lottery might be over. Guess not. Sigh.
You could always just spring for the 24 just to be done with it. A better display. More memory. Everyone says you get used to the 24 after a short time. Just a thought.
Yup...that would probably put an end to my misery. I freely admit to being stubborn about wanting the 20" over the 24". But as other people have posted in another thread, I prefer the physical size (height) and thinness of the 20", the more user-friendly minimal brightness etc. But, the clincher is my desk, which is in my small living room of my small apartment. The 20" was perfect as I have low IKEA bookshelves behind my desk. Heightwise the 24" would just drown my particular room setup. Otherwise, the 24" base config would be a logical no-brainer. At the store the other day I looked at the 20" LG iMac panel, then looked left at the 24" panel, and essentially thought exactly what you're saying. I'm just being a knob.
LOL - I guess I opened myself up for that one. We live in Europe - our apartment is small by any sort of N. American standards, and space is really tight. But, basically my wife and I didn't want a computer on our living room desk that's bigger than our 20" TV. It would just look huge. We've always been laptop people, but I've been drooling over a smallish iMac for ages. Many people wouldn't worry about it. We do - it's just us.
I live in a Japanese apartment and feel exactly the way you do.
The 20" is perfect for us.
Yup...that would probably put an end to my misery. I freely admit to being stubborn about wanting the 20" over the 24". But as other people have posted in another thread, I prefer the physical size (height) and thinness of the 20", the more user-friendly minimal brightness etc. But, the clincher is my desk, which is in my small living room of my small apartment. The 20" was perfect as I have low IKEA bookshelves behind my desk. Heightwise the 24" would just drown my particular room setup. Otherwise, the 24" base config would be a logical no-brainer. At the store the other day I looked at the 20" LG iMac panel, then looked left at the 24" panel, and essentially thought exactly what you're saying. I'm just being a knob.
If I had to do it all over again, I would also go with the 24". Problem is I have plenty of room. It's the height of the imac that is the problem. The 20' because of my desk is about three to four inches above my head. Even with my chair at full height.
I have a old desk, a expensive one at that that is wood with a "shelf' made for regular monitors. Not one with the height of the imac. The imac was made to sit on a desk without a "shelf'.
So the 24 would be six inches or more above my head. No can do. Next time in a few years, I will get a new desk, chair and imac and be done with it.
Yup...that would probably put an end to my misery. I freely admit to being stubborn about wanting the 20" over the 24". But as other people have posted in another thread, I prefer the physical size (height) and thinness of the 20", the more user-friendly minimal brightness etc. But, the clincher is my desk, which is in my small living room of my small apartment. The 20" was perfect as I have low IKEA bookshelves behind my desk. Heightwise the 24" would just drown my particular room setup. Otherwise, the 24" base config would be a logical no-brainer. At the store the other day I looked at the 20" LG iMac panel, then looked left at the 24" panel, and essentially thought exactly what you're saying. I'm just being a knob.
If I had to do it all over again, I would also go with the 24". Problem is I have plenty of room. It's the height of the imac that is the problem. The 20' because of my desk is about three to four inches above my head. Even with my chair at full height.
I have a old desk, a expensive one at that that is wood with a "shelf' made for regular monitors. Not one with the height of the imac. The imac was made to sit on a desk without a "shelf'. The 20 looks huge because you have to look up at it. The 24' would be just too much. The keyboard sits way low due to the chair sitting up so high, making for a non comfortable environment.
So the 24 would be six inches or more above my head. No can do. Next time in a few years, I will get a new desk, chair and imac and be done with it.
I Like the 20".
I like that the brightness goes much lower than the 24". The 24" brightness control ranges from extremely bright to insanely bright. That brightness was too much.
The 20" screen is easier to take in too. Everything is front and center. You don't need to turn your head.
The 20" also weighs less. I do move my iMac every so often to the kitchen table.
The 20" uses less energy.
The 9400M gpu performs better at the lower resolution of the 20".
And the 20" has a greater pixel density.
I might be the only one that switched from a 24" back to a 20".
I like that the brightness goes much lower than the 24". The 24" brightness control ranges from extremely bright to insanely bright. That brightness was too much.
The 20" screen is easier to take in too. Everything is front and center. You don't need to turn your head.
The 20" also weighs less. I do move my iMac every so often to the kitchen table.
The 20" uses less energy.
The 9400M gpu performs better at the lower resolution of the 20".
And the 20" has a greater pixel density.
I might be the only one that switched from a 24" back to a 20".
That's how I feel too. The LED Cinema Display has almost the identical overall height of the 20" iMac, which I feel is ideal. If I had €2000 burning a hole in my pocket, I'd just buy a Macbook with the LED display, enjoy the best of both worlds (and not worry about value for money compared with a 24" iMac.) That would have the additional benefit of the better brightness settings of the LED Display over the 24" iMac, too. If the 24" iMac were lower though, I'd probably buy that instead to save money.
I Like the 20".
I like that the brightness goes much lower than the 24". The 24" brightness control ranges from extremely bright to insanely bright. That brightness was too much.
The 20" screen is easier to take in too. Everything is front and center. You don't need to turn your head.
The 20" also weighs less. I do move my iMac every so often to the kitchen table.
The 20" uses less energy.
The 9400M gpu performs better at the lower resolution of the 20".
And the 20" has a greater pixel density.
I might be the only one that switched from a 24" back to a 20".
I think I read that someone was giving you flak for that in another thread, but to me your reasoning seems right on the money. And re: power consumption, the 20" uses 56% of the power that the 24" consumes (46W vs. 82W) due to the brightness settings (posted earlier in this thread). That alone is a big deal for people like me living in places like urope where energy costs a fortune.
Cool! When I posted that I was thinking of a friend of mine who spent 6 years in Japan in a tiny apartment with her kids.
I Like the 20".
I like that the brightness goes much lower than the 24". The 24" brightness control ranges from extremely bright to insanely bright. That brightness was too much.
The 20" screen is easier to take in too. Everything is front and center. You don't need to turn your head.
The 20" also weighs less. I do move my iMac every so often to the kitchen table.
The 20" uses less energy.
The 9400M gpu performs better at the lower resolution of the 20".
And the 20" has a greater pixel density.
I might be the only one that switched from a 24" back to a 20".
I agree totally as I use a 24' for work every day. But that being said I don't like the fact you have to play the panel lottery.
By the way, my model number is MB4I7LL/A. What is your model number. Maybe there is a correlation between panels and model numbers?
Same model # here. MB417LL/A.
I put a 1TB drive in my iMac a few days ago.
Love the extra space. I'm digitizing quite a few movies now.
The 20" has fewer pixels overall, but more pixels per square inch (denser/ closer together)