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.
Your iMac (late 09) screen is NOT fine
- Thread starter El Jack
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Their description is entirely accurate. It is their ultimate display, unless they have released another one in the meantime that I don't know about – in which case it would be their penultimate display.
What is your native language by the way?
Thanks for actually having the balls to post a picture of your screen, I wish some of those with "perfect" screens would too, but they've probably realized their screens aren't as perfect as they claim. Your screen has a yellow tinge, but its not as bad as some cases including mine. If mine looked like that and everything else worked, I would have a hard time taking it back and risking getting something worse.
And whats the point of calling out people who have no problem and most likely won't even look at this thread?
A little overboard I say.
Did you even bother to read the thread? Numerous people in here have claimed to have perfect displays.
FFS are you being serious or do you get a kick out of being deliberately obtuse..?
The new
iMac
The ultimate all-in-one. Now with the ultimate display.
FFS are you being serious or do you get a kick out of being deliberately obtuse..?
The new
iMac
The ultimate all-in-one. Now with the ultimate display.
The word ultimate relates to the last in a sequence, or size, or authority.
This iMac is the ultimate all-in-one they have produced. It is the ultimate display they have produced (for such a computer), until the next one. Nothing obtuse about that.
Any interpretation beyond that is entirely your own.
Perhaps less time here and more time reading a dictionary would be good for your vocabulary.
Are you serious!? Maybe if YOU spent more time reading a dictionary you'd realize that there are often multiple definitions for the same word.
In the case of ultimate, it can mean: "the finest or most superior quality of its kind" OR it can also mean: "being the last or concluding element of a series".
It's clear to anyone with an IQ higher than an infant that Apple's use of it in their slogan intends to use the first definition of ultimate.
What a frackin' lawyer. This kind of BS just disgusts me. Not that I'm surprised with it coming from you.
Not at all. Advertising copywriters rely on easily-led minds to attach the meaning you prefer to nebulous words like "ultimate". No advertising standards authority could penalize the creator of the line as it would be defended in exactly the terms I've already expressed.
If you saw an ad talking of the 'ultimate' toothpaste, would you assume it means your yellow tinge will disappear overnight?
This reeks of the pink 23" Cinema Display problem, which was never acknowledged.
Apple’s good at a lot of things, but admitting there’s a major problem with a product line is not one of them (NVIDIA graphics issues with the MacBook Pro, original MacBook Air overheating, iPhone/iPod power adapter prong issue, MacBook plastic cracking chassis, iMac G5 capacitor problem, iBook G3 logic board failure, etc).
Most of those issues took statements from suppliers and/or threats of lawsuits to even get Apple to acknowledge an issue. In some cases, it took years (iBook G3).
I was going to bite on a new i7 27” after the first of the year, but I think I’ll hold out until the next revision.
Apple’s good at a lot of things, but admitting there’s a major problem with a product line is not one of them (NVIDIA graphics issues with the MacBook Pro, original MacBook Air overheating, iPhone/iPod power adapter prong issue, MacBook plastic cracking chassis, iMac G5 capacitor problem, iBook G3 logic board failure, etc).
Most of those issues took statements from suppliers and/or threats of lawsuits to even get Apple to acknowledge an issue. In some cases, it took years (iBook G3).
I was going to bite on a new i7 27” after the first of the year, but I think I’ll hold out until the next revision.
Alright. I'm going to try to be the voice of reason here.
First, I believe the thread starter to be 100% correct in his assessment. Judging by his camera choice (Canon EOS 5D MKII), he's clearly VERY conscious of image quality. In the interest of full disclosure, I also own a 5D MKII.
I've owned a LOT of computer screens in my time. Loads. From laptop displays to external displays, a LOT. I've never, not once, encountered a perfect display. Whether it's the buzz that CCFL LCDs make at less than full brightness (including every single 20", 23" and 30" CCFL Apple Cinema Display that Apple ever released - that people maintain they can't hear despite EVERY SINGLE screen suffering from it), to color casts on screens, no screen is perfect.
Now, I've owned several Apple 24" Cinema Displays (the LED model), and none of these displays make a buzzing sound because they're not CCFL of course. However, I've not seen a single 24" Cinema Display with a perfectly white screen. Not once. I've personally used FIVE 24" LED Cinema Displays, with my wife and I both owning one, and having had a couple of issues with previous displays.
I can tell you for sure that none of these displays, not even the ones my wife and I currently use - are perfect. Mine is slightly yellower toward the bottom of the screen, and hers is what I might describe as slightly "green" toward the left/bottom. It does not bother her ONE BIT. She would never EVER notice it. Ever. People have posted pictures of their displays in this thread, and I can see the color casts clearly in each and every one. For anyone to claim their display is perfect is sheer madness. There's absolutely no such thing as a perfect display!
In any case, while I do believe there may be a touch of arrogance in the thread title, the thread starter's logic is sound based on my own experiences, which include over 20 Apple Cinema displays in my computer lab at uni and having experienced a multitude of Apple laptops, Dell laptops, Dell LCDs, Apple LCDs over the years.
I live with my slight color cast on my Apple display because I'm well aware that in the real world it doesn't affect my photograph to any real degree. There's no such thing as true 100% accurate color reproduction in print in any case.
Personally, I've ordered a 27" iMac which should be here in about 10 days. I know for a FACT that my screen will not be perfect. But I can live with that. It just amuses me that every time a new display-related product comes out, people complain like this. While I do wish the creation of the LCD came without a cost, color casts etc are just part of the equation at this point.
To sum up:
1.) Color casts are NORMAL, and EVERY display has them to some degree. My two Nintendo DS LCDs are completely different from each other!
2.) This is not an "issue" exclusive to Apple's own displays.
3.) Not everyone will notice it. I can't think of a single person I know who would notice it, except one or two especially anal friends (and of course, me).
4.) Let's move on?
First, I believe the thread starter to be 100% correct in his assessment. Judging by his camera choice (Canon EOS 5D MKII), he's clearly VERY conscious of image quality. In the interest of full disclosure, I also own a 5D MKII.
I've owned a LOT of computer screens in my time. Loads. From laptop displays to external displays, a LOT. I've never, not once, encountered a perfect display. Whether it's the buzz that CCFL LCDs make at less than full brightness (including every single 20", 23" and 30" CCFL Apple Cinema Display that Apple ever released - that people maintain they can't hear despite EVERY SINGLE screen suffering from it), to color casts on screens, no screen is perfect.
Now, I've owned several Apple 24" Cinema Displays (the LED model), and none of these displays make a buzzing sound because they're not CCFL of course. However, I've not seen a single 24" Cinema Display with a perfectly white screen. Not once. I've personally used FIVE 24" LED Cinema Displays, with my wife and I both owning one, and having had a couple of issues with previous displays.
I can tell you for sure that none of these displays, not even the ones my wife and I currently use - are perfect. Mine is slightly yellower toward the bottom of the screen, and hers is what I might describe as slightly "green" toward the left/bottom. It does not bother her ONE BIT. She would never EVER notice it. Ever. People have posted pictures of their displays in this thread, and I can see the color casts clearly in each and every one. For anyone to claim their display is perfect is sheer madness. There's absolutely no such thing as a perfect display!
In any case, while I do believe there may be a touch of arrogance in the thread title, the thread starter's logic is sound based on my own experiences, which include over 20 Apple Cinema displays in my computer lab at uni and having experienced a multitude of Apple laptops, Dell laptops, Dell LCDs, Apple LCDs over the years.
I live with my slight color cast on my Apple display because I'm well aware that in the real world it doesn't affect my photograph to any real degree. There's no such thing as true 100% accurate color reproduction in print in any case.
Personally, I've ordered a 27" iMac which should be here in about 10 days. I know for a FACT that my screen will not be perfect. But I can live with that. It just amuses me that every time a new display-related product comes out, people complain like this. While I do wish the creation of the LCD came without a cost, color casts etc are just part of the equation at this point.
To sum up:
1.) Color casts are NORMAL, and EVERY display has them to some degree. My two Nintendo DS LCDs are completely different from each other!
2.) This is not an "issue" exclusive to Apple's own displays.
3.) Not everyone will notice it. I can't think of a single person I know who would notice it, except one or two especially anal friends (and of course, me).
4.) Let's move on?
pointless thread, if you don't like your imac then return it. My i7 has been flawless for a month now.
This is what Apple is counting on. Honestly, wanting a perfect screen is not too much to ask in a $2200 computer
This kind of color shift is simply unacceptable, IMO.
Exactly, while I agree with much of what WilliamG said, its not unreasonable to expect a display to have decent colour consistency. I've owned many monitors that have much better colour consistency than the iMac, some of which were very inexpensive and thats the point.
Right, I'm definitely not returning it. And with my Applecare warranty, I'll have no anxiety over this issue because I've already dealt with Apple's customer service and have found it to be exemplary. I am at ease that if my screen becomes unacceptable at some point during my warranty, it will be replaced. Now for those with an unacceptable display, I guess they have to ask themselves whether it's worth trying for a replacement now, OR just log this issue with Apple and get it replaced once they work out a fix into their production run.
Finaly some sense .
Thats why i posted this
Eizo Nanao EIZO ColorEdge CG221
LCD display - TFT - 22.2" - 1920 x 1200 - 200 cd/m2 - 400:1 - 30 ms
Price : $5,689.99
This is why it costs that sum : "The CG221 reproduces the Adobe RGB color space and incorporates a newly developed integrated circuit to produce uniform color and brightness from corner to corner. The CG221 delivers accurate and reliable hardware calibration so soft proofing can be done with confidence.
All of what you said makes sense and is indeed "reasonable". There is a balance between expectations and reality and in some cases, it's pretty obvious that their display is not "acceptable". I agree with you that there is NO perfect display, and seeing this issue come to light has made me more aware of imperfections in OTHER displays I own. Even with the slight color gradient, the screen on my 27" iMac is considerably better than the screen on many of my other devices. The screen on my wife's Macbook, for example, pales considerably and I'm not referring to size or resolution. My PC LCD is not uniform, and my 52" HDTV has backlight bleed.
We DO have to draw the line somewhere. There are certainly objective attributes to compare: uniformity, bleed, color accuracy, etc. But at the end of the day, whether or not a screen is "acceptable" is an individual choice.
I'll give you another example. I have a Samsung 52" LCD HDTV that has a panel made by Samsung themselves. However, they also sold this EXACT same TV with panels made by other manufacturers and you could tell if yours was made by Samsung by looking at a code on the back of the unit. There were message board posts full of owners who claimed the panels made by Samsung were better than the ones contracted out (in terms of uniformity, bleed, etc). And some claimed that the store models in places like Best BUy were always units made by Samsung themselves so that they looked better.
If I wasn't a hard-core user who visited these forums, I would have never been aware of this issue or would I have ever noticed it (which is why I purposefully refrained from doing any tests for the first week I owned it). If my screen looked like some of the examples I've seen, I would definitely have noticed.
So there's definitely different degrees to which this issue manifests itself, AND there are different degrees to which owners will find their display "acceptable". And with that, it's no surprise to find extremes of all sides posted here: some defending their displays, some doing multiple exchanges, some accepting "imperfections", etc.
They need to live up the following claim (from their website)
http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html
And that btw from every angle which debunks the explanation of the apologists that it has everything to do with the viewing angle... No matter how they try to spin this, there isn't a lot of room to interpret that particular sentence. It is laughable that it isn't possible to have "excellent color consistency" looking straight at the screen.
Although I have heard different explanations ranging from small percentages of faulty screens to a worldwide international conspiracy orchestrated by Apple competitors. And that from the same group of people ! They can even hold one single argument in this whole discussion.
Agreed.
This whole thing has turned into a cluster. Anyone that sees something claims the problem.
Most of these are placebo affect problems, IMO.
Reading these yellow tint screen forums is freaky. The Apple fanatics make me feel as though I am living in some Orwellian world. Apple says they have the "ultimate screen" (or Apple new iMac screens are double-plus good) and that is that, end of story. There is no yellowing. (2+2 does not equal 4) Sorry folks, the yellow is there. And now we have Gizmodo to back us. http://gizmodo.com/search/yellow%20screen
Then there are the Apple apologists. Patronizingly they may concede that "your screen" may be yellowish but if so, get over it--nothing is perfect. Like who cares if all the past Macs we have ever owned have had the ability to produce uniform colors. For some reason we should no longer expect this?
Then there are the uber troll posts like those of Cecil who's small world is completely incomprehensible and a waste of everyone's time.
It is simple. There are many, many of us who have yellowish screens and they are not acceptable. We obviously like Macs and are eager to have a new acceptable one. This thread was started because someone has seen so many bad screens that they would love to see a screen without yellow. For those who don't have yellow screens, having a yellow screen (or several in a row) the concept of NON-yellow screens seems almost mythical. That is it. It is our experience. The original poster, out of frustration, just requested that those who have good screens to post a picture of that screen--to give us hope that a good screen actually exists. If you have a screen that works for you, we are happy for you.
As for me my 21" week 44 and weeK 49 were yellowish. I am sending the 49 back for a refund and will painfully wait a few more months and hope....
Then there are the Apple apologists. Patronizingly they may concede that "your screen" may be yellowish but if so, get over it--nothing is perfect. Like who cares if all the past Macs we have ever owned have had the ability to produce uniform colors. For some reason we should no longer expect this?
Then there are the uber troll posts like those of Cecil who's small world is completely incomprehensible and a waste of everyone's time.
It is simple. There are many, many of us who have yellowish screens and they are not acceptable. We obviously like Macs and are eager to have a new acceptable one. This thread was started because someone has seen so many bad screens that they would love to see a screen without yellow. For those who don't have yellow screens, having a yellow screen (or several in a row) the concept of NON-yellow screens seems almost mythical. That is it. It is our experience. The original poster, out of frustration, just requested that those who have good screens to post a picture of that screen--to give us hope that a good screen actually exists. If you have a screen that works for you, we are happy for you.
As for me my 21" week 44 and weeK 49 were yellowish. I am sending the 49 back for a refund and will painfully wait a few more months and hope....
These sentences are 100% false. I bought my father a 20" iMac in 2008. It's a great machine and he loves it. However, it too suffers from a color cast. I set up some good friends of mine with a 2008 20" iMac, too, and it also has a color cast to some degree (slightly worse than my father's). You're making it sound like this is the first time in iMac history this issue has been present. Believe me it's not. And I'm certainly not an Apple apologist.
By the same token, just because Apple SAYS theirs is the "ultimate display" doesn't mean all of sudden the displays are going to be perfect. It's not like Apple has reached some mythical perfection in display technology. In many ways, the screen IS a lot better than past screens. Despite the slight color gradient on my 27", it's a heck of a lot better than previous LCD screens I've had (which have indeed had non-uniform displays, backlight bleed, uneven brightness, ghosting, etc).
As I said before, there's a balance of acceptability that is individually governed. You can evaluate a screen using objective measurements but because of the lack of a "perfect" display, there's always a subjective element to acceptability.
For those with unacceptable displays, there's no apologizing necessary: you have the right to return and/or exchange it for another one. I think those expecting a "perfect" display are expecting too much and should take a second look at displays they've had in the past. Perhaps they never took the time to do uniformity, color accuracy, or other tests to evaluate their display? I know I never did, but now when I've look at some other displays, I've noticed things I never noticed before. Again, this is not to dismiss a display that is deemed unacceptable by its owner. Nor does it means we shouldn't have good expectations at all.
Forums are a funny place. You ALWAYS find extremes of two sides and you always find those who try to mediate. It's always the same and it will never change. I've seen it in just about every forum I've ever visit from video games to religion to sports.
This forum is obviously no different. ;-)
Absolutely correct! My 24" iMac has color cast issues as well but for my everyday use it's perfectly fine for a consumer machine and I'm a power user. In fact I don't know ever a time where Apple hasn't had complaints about color issues with displays on iMacs, Macbooks, Powerbooks or iBooks and Apple always advertises their displays as being stellar. The person that mentioned the Eizo monitor obviously understands the difference between a consumer machine and a professional monitor.
Tnx , i had some hope that someone would understand the difference between a consumer grade display and a professional one
Would i love that the 27" Imac was that good ? Yes , but i know its not and it could never be at that price range.
of course they would use perfectly tested ones at a demo
They're just like the rest of them. Unless you have a perfectly white screen to test this, you're never going to be able to tell anyway if your screen has a cast of any sort. In the store? Even less likely to be able to tell.