Filed under: Apple
Forget the faster Mac, get a bigger monitor
Don't waste your money on a new Mac if you are looking to upgrade, just get yourself a huge monitor. That's Paul Boutin's theory, and I agree. Computers now a days are pretty much powerful enough to handle whatever the regular user throws at them (I'm not talking about pro users like video editors and the like, they have known the benefits of a large monitor for a long time). You'll get the most bang for your buck with a new, crisp, big monitor.My new 23 inch Cinema Display at work has really increased my productivity. I have a lot more room for everything I need.
Give it some thought when you're next in the market for a new computer.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
pragmatic67 said 7:41AM on 9-11-2006
I ahve to agree. I use a 20" widescreen at work And a 17" standard at home. it's frustrating as hell just trying to navigate around more than a handfull of open folder windows & files. Need to get a widescreen for home too now.
Reply
arkowi said 7:45AM on 9-11-2006
I invested in a 23" cinema display at the beginning of the summer (before the small upgrade and price drop, thought I did get the student discount). I have to say I really love it. I paired it up with my Dual G5. I can't go to Intel yet, because I spend all day in the Adobe Creative Suite and Macromedia Studio. Once they get their universal Apps out, I think I will be able to just pick up a high-end Mac Mini and use the Dual G5 as a media server/Eye TV server for the entire house. Would be nice to see something between the Mini and the Mac Pro. A Mac "Middle" if you will.
Reply
Mr Lizard said 7:57AM on 9-11-2006
I have to agree. My MacBook is hooked up to the 23" cinema display and it rocks.
My only (slight) gripe is that is lacks the component inputs that it's Dell cousin has.
I've had to shell out for an EyeTV solution just to be able to view the output from my AV products on the screen.
But there's no denying the style and size of the beast commands respect. It sits proudly on my desk and I'm thinking of modding it with a backlight as seen on this weeks Rig of the Week!
Reply
simone said 11:03AM on 9-11-2006
It just seems that the standard is moving to the next level. If before displays above 20" were considered only for pro users, now they're being publicized for the regular users as well.
Of course more room for windows increase productivity, no doubt, and i agree that most of computers now can handle average users tasks, but to me screen estate is addictive! I've moved fro a 19" crt to a 23" ACD a year ago and now my screen doesn't seem big enough to handle my needs (i work mostly with the Adobe CS), so i'm planning to get another 23 to get along with the new Mac Pro i'm ordering soon.
But now the point is: is better to have two 23" or a big 30"?
Reply
Brendan said 8:55AM on 9-11-2006
With leopard, Exposé and a 17" iMac, my desktop will be a 10' widescreen ;)
Reply
cj said 9:01AM on 9-11-2006
I would add - Hard Drive disk space is as important. For the home user all the photos and movies take up huge space - and they are not deleted/cleaned up.
Reply
nevrozel said 9:25AM on 9-11-2006
My 17" from the PowerBook G4 is great! I'll never return to smaller ones! Ever! The single "problem" is that I'd really like the newer brighter displays.
Reply
Smivey said 10:15AM on 9-11-2006
Agreed. But keep in mind, if you have a really old Mac, you'll probably need an adapter or even a video-card upgrade to get the monitor to work with your computer. I have a 466 G4 Tower and it required a video-card upgrade, since it only had Apple's proprietary ADC input and no DVI. Love the larger screen, but I miss the simplicity of the all-in-one ADC connector.
Reply
Angel said 10:27AM on 9-11-2006
I just ordered a Dell 24-inch widescreen that will be delivered tomorrow. I can't wait. I'm still trying to maneuver how I'm going to hook up my Macbook, a PC desktop, and my Xbox 360 to it.
Reply
mark said 10:14AM on 9-11-2006
I've got a 30" Cinema Display (2560x1600) as my main display and a 19" CRT (1600x1200) as my secondary display -- and I still feel like I could use more screen real estate. As it is, I do all my work on the 30" display and use the 19" one for storing palettes in Illustrator, Photoshop, QuarkXPress, InDesign, etc; also have my AIM windows on the secondary display, plus a few other odds and ends. But it would actually be really nice to have at least a 23" Cinema Display, or even better a second 30" one, as the secondary display so I can use the two displays almost equally. I'd love to be able to set up the left-hand display specifically for work apps and the right-hand display for their palettes plus all other apps I need to use (ie, email, calendars, web, etc). I suppose I could do that with the 19" CRT, but text is so much less crisp than on the Cinema Display.
Truth be told, no matter how much screen real estate you have, you can always use more. If I did get a second 30" display, I'd still want to keep the 19" CRT as well, so I could have two primary workspaces (be able to keep two large windows open simultaneously for work), plus palettes on the small display...
Reply
MrBlank said 10:20AM on 9-11-2006
Last year, I had the option of getting a 15in PowerBook or a 12in PowerBook with a 20in Cinema Display. I went with the 12in. It works great and I can use the 12in as a second display.
Reply
Kirk Rheinlander said 10:26AM on 9-11-2006
I did a study for a large DoD contractor years ago. The basis was what would give users the greatest gain in productivity.
A - faster processor
B - more memory
C - faster hard drive
D - larger monitor
Overwhelmingly, the larger monitor provided greater productivity, BUT only if it was used with more pixels - size in itself was no value, but having more windows open concurrently, allowed people to assimulate more data - kinda like having stuff laid out on a desk.
I watch so many users take big screen displays, and blow up a window to full screen, where all the text is down the left side, and the balance of the display is unused. If this is the operating mode, get them a 15 inch display and call it good.
Reply
Ric said 10:40AM on 9-11-2006
I agree on monitors. I went with a Macbook (with RAM and HD upgrades) and Viewtronic 20" widescreen LCD and still saved over $1,000 over the Macbook Pro 17" I was considering. Smaller for travel, larger for home. Best of both worlds.
Reply
spain said 11:32AM on 9-11-2006
As I posted in the "how often do you upgrade?" entry yesterday, mmy 867 mhz Tibook is doin me just fine. I'd just like to have something bigger and more stable to watch movies on and manage the media that I can't fit on this computer.
In other words: a mac mini hooked up to a TV w/ an external hard drive.
Reply
ajprice said 5:59PM on 9-11-2006
Just got a Dell 2407 hooked up to my G4, replacing a 17" CRT. Now I'm used to it (it was strange at first, I noticed myself moving my head around like i was watching tennis!) its great, lots of space for more than one window at a time, and lots of room to lay out all the photoshop etc palettes on the screen. With this setup, my G4 is good til next year now :) . So I agree completely.
Reply
Chris said 8:34PM on 9-11-2006
I bought a Dell 2407 about half a year ago, and love it. At the time (and probably still now) they were significantly cheaper than the Apple displays. Apart from the missing Apple logo it doesn't seem to be missing much.
Reply
Tom said 12:00AM on 9-12-2006
Plus a good monitor will last you for years, and doesn't become obsolete as quickly as a computer.
Reply
Alan Hoffman said 1:20AM on 9-12-2006
I wholeheartedly agree. I have a 15" Powerbook connected to a 21" Gateway widescreen display (excellent btw, highly recommended). It makes computing much more enjoyable, and eventually when I get an Xbox I can hook it up with its component inputs to enjoy some nice HD gaming.
Reply