Whirlpool

I thought someone would mention this sooner or later here on WP, but since there was no go yet, here we are.

I bought the 20" iMac a few weeks ago and I'm absolutely pissed off with the quality of the display. I was naive enough not to return it in first two weeks, as I could have with Dick Smith, but hey ...

The colours are washed out as you go down the screen and the viewing angle is absolutely pathetic. Apple states 160 degrees horizontal viewing angle, and while it is correct that you can see that the computer is powered on from 80 degrees left or right, try to tell what the colour on the screen is by looking from 30 degrees either side and you are a genius.

here are the screenshots shots of the screen and a video
www.silvermac.com/2007/i...lours-washed-out

I have compared this screen side by side to the following displays:

20" and 24" iMac (old model)
24" iMac (new model)
Apple Cinema display (23")
MacBook Pro (non LED display)
MacBook 13"
19" Benq Fp92W
Samsung 710V

Every single one of these displays is far far far far far (enough?) better than 20" silver iMac screen when it comes to viewing angle and colour consistency across the entire screen.

I know it's the TN panel, but having talked to a few people who use TN panels on other screens and compared them to iMac, this one is absolutely rubbish,they all agree.

I have spoken to Apple and they asked me to take the computer to the Apple store, so I did and compared it to other identical machines and it's the same on all, it looks junk (that's where I have compared it to the most of displays I've listed above)

Even techs at the Apple store agree, even being TN panel - it looks horrible.

There is quite a discussion in Apple support forums on the same topic as well.

So there, pheeeew, I feel better now ... but not much :-)

Anyone on WP with the same issue?

I'm hoping there is some recall soon - cause this is my third imac replacement still got some LCD bleeds but at least its not as bad as the other two.

I'm using the 24" model and the lcd panel is different but it still has issues as bad as the 20" model. I'm going to wait until there's like a second batch of new imac's and ill check it out at the stores and if its improved i will be taking this imac back to applecare to get it sorted - at least i have something to compare the screen with - most applestores say it's normal.. pfft!

i really think its more to do with the quality issue in China (i believe these were built there?)

Hey,
I noticed this with the ones we have on demo in our store. But I managed to fix it to make it look crystal clear you just need to change this setting you will thank me when you read this :D

Go to system preferences click Displays then click the Color tab then under Display profile. Select Adobe RGB (1998).

And enjoy your nice looking screen :)

DeanCorp

So how about we hear from people who are happy?

Perhaps we should have a poll.

I am very happy with my 24" imac - just the bleed is noticable when i play a dvd (black background)..

The last two replacement i had - they were horrid!! I guess i just unlucky then.

DeanCorp writes...

Go to system preferences click Displays then click the Color tab then under Display profile. Select Adobe RGB (1998).

And enjoy your nice looking screen :)

wouldn't it be better to do a calibration, rather than use a profile the iMac can't come close to for colour gamut?

I like that profile! It looks awesome and this customer when I was showing him the iMac said the 20" doesn't look as sharp as the 24". I changed the Profile to the Adobe (1998) and he said "oh there we go" and smiled.

Just try it first then calibrate if you still don't like it.

DeanCorp

It sounds very much llike my el-cheapo runout 17" imac. I can live with it cos for the price I wasn't expecting much more but boy if I had spent up big on a 20" or 24" and it looked like my 17" I would be really pissed off...
(yes I calibrated it and tried every available profile)
I have ended up connecting my iMac to a 24" Dell and using that as the main screen with the iMac's 17" just for email etc. The Dell is just so much better in every way - no change of colour or brightness as you change viewing angles - just really crisp clean desktop all the way that you can see from almost any angle...
Funny thing is that the Dell 24" has copped a lot of flack around these forums but quite honestly it's damn superb compared to the imac17 sitting next to it.
I have also noticed that when i play my HDTV clips (Elgato) on the iMac screen I get quite bad 'tearing' effect or horizontal picture breakup where there is any moving image. I don't get this when I view the same video on the Dell...

You know - I love my Apple stuff (I have an imac, an MBP and a Mini) but I get really annoyed when I think that we are basically paying very top dollar for what in general is cheap Chinese junk, just as bad or worse as most other PC stuff... :-(

Ah well, what can you do about it? It's the way the world is going - cheap Chinese disposable rubbish with NO alternative, at *any* price...

Phew! Now *I* feel better too! :-)

angryofmayfair writes...

I get really annoyed when I think that we are basically paying very top dollar for what in general is cheap Chinese junk, just as bad or worse as most other PC stuff

Me too.

Which is why I feel that OS X isn't really $199. It's $199 plus the Apple Tax over the same spec and hardware PC that I can run Linux on and be just as happy.

*Note: I know Linux can't be compared to OS X, but the price is right, and I know what I'm doing.

Stelex writes...

The colours are washed out

Try changing the gamma to 2.2.

All Macs come set with the gamma at 1.8 and it looks a bit washed out.

I think this is the last time Apple uses TN. They are just no good.

There is no problem with the 24" screen. It doesn't use a cheap TN monitor.

Talmid writes...

I think this is the last time Apple uses TN

I reckon they're using TN in the MB. My MB screen is pretty ordinary. That said, it's a cheap computer.

I'd expect a lot more from Apples' [more] professional line of computers.

I'm aware the iMac isn't specifically a professional computer but due to the (previously) high quality build of the machines, I've used them for my web-development business for years with fantastic results.

heggaton writes...

the iMac isn't specifically a professional computer

but you've contradicted yourself because in the next line you write

I've used them for my web-development business for years

I think any computer can be used for "professional" use. With the Mac range we tend to equate the MacPro as the "professional" machine. If your doing an enormous amount of video/audio/image editing, then a MacPro makes sense. But others who don't need all the grunt are quite happy with the iMac range and still use it for their work.

I think the issue is that as a standalone computer the new 20" screen is not up to scratch; perhaps a deliberate ploy to move "serious" users to either a 24"iMac or the MacPro. The other option is to invest in a quality external monitor and use the iMac for application palettes.

plop101 writes...

I HAVE HAVE HAD 7 IMACS ALL HAVE BEEN REPLASED

What is it with you and typing capitals? You seem to do it a lot...

doubledark writes...

but you've contradicted yourself

Nah, I didn't contradict myself. I chose my words carefully. The iMac is marketed as a consumer machine. Or more to the point, it's not marketed as a pro machine - even though it can easily be used as one.

Essentially what you said ;)

From looking at other comments on the web, Apple have either fixed the problem or people aren't saying much at all...

I'll be looking very closely when I go to see a 20" and 24" side by side.

Wow thats terrible

I had a 20" iMac for a few days but couldn't stand the glossy screen so I got a refund minus $20 from Apple

Hopefully they will fix this problem with a new revision (and add a matte screen option!)

Yeah, well it's one thing to say that the MB and iMac aren't aimed at the Pro market. But that shouldn't mean ending up with sub-par displays, etc.

It's like they're saying "You can't afford a GOOD computer, so here's one that will just have to do"

I don't know about you guys, but I post here less and less these days because of how I feel about Apple's products. I was once an Apple zealot. Now I'd rather spend the same money elsewhere. I post less here because I would rather not say how I feel about Apple than be called a troll.

This is a classic example of how Apple is taking us for a ride these days. But don't get me wrong, they still make sveet looking machines. They are still a great design company. It's just a shame that I have to pay more for things like bad screens, poor after sales support and Apple Tax.

pipsqeek

pipsqeek writes...

But that shouldn't mean ending up with sub-par displays, etc.

I agree completely. Whilst I truly believe there is no better consumer computer operating system, I think Apple are trying to keep prices low - handicapping their machines. I guess maybe they're feeling the pressure of consumers expecting constant price drops? Who knows why they're doing it!

It makes the "pro" line stand out from the "i" line.

You have a computer for letters, some games and intertubes.
If you want, need or like a better display, get a display that has some info about colour quality.

Helpmann  writes...

If you want, need or like a better display, get a display that has some info about colour quality.

And exactly where on the option list for the new iMac is the option to 'get another display'?

The MacBook Pro has a matt/gloss option but nothing similar exists for the iMac.

I had a rather bad surprise couple of days ago when starting using my iMac Alu 20"

www.hardmac.com/news/2007-09-10/#7165

I had a chance on the weekend to see the new iMacs. Nice looking machines.

The first environment was very well lit and I found the glossy surface to be distracting occasionally. Not a big fan.

The second store wasn't as brightly lit and it wasn't as much a problem.

Comparing the 20" next to the 24" side by side. The 24" screen is a much better screen, especially from side on.

Looking at the 20" from a side view it was noticeably not as good to the 24. Even looking at the 24 on the far side of the 20 - the 24 was brighter and sharper at the wider angle.

Not saying the 20" is a bad or miserable screen. I assume 99% of the time your sitting in front of it and would never notice the difference.

But the 24 is better.

And OMG the fricken screen real estate ;) Can't wait to upgrade next year when the time comes.

heggaton writes...

I agree completely. Whilst I truly believe there is no better consumer computer operating system, I think Apple are trying to keep prices low - handicapping their machines.

I completely agree - it's quite disappointing really.

I've upgraded a couple of G4 iMacs to 20 inch iMacs, I can't say that the display was disappointing at all - maybe if I compared it too a more expensive display I would of noticed a difference but I thought it looked great.

So great in fact that I'm going to buy one.

When Leopard comes out.

Probably around 2009 :)

I bought the 20" iMac as oppose to the 24". Have done sufficient research and thinking to compare the display between these two products. The different between these two displays are merely at 2% out of millions of dots. To go for 24" display if you are well & truly a Graphic Pro and for normal users, the 20" display is more than adequate. A savings of approx. $430 (20" with 2.4GHz) that you could upgrade to 4Gb memory at $179, getting an Elgato DTT stick at $139 and upgrade to wireless keyboard & mouse at $70 (Buy-to-order). All these, you still have some money left that would cover your petrol & parking to shop those items. Don't always follow the Pro and wasting your "Do$h" that something you never use or utilise! Think wisely and spend smart :). Have fun with iMAC 20" :)

hytan writes...

Have fun with iMAC 20" :)

The greatest fun was when I sold the damn thing, about two months after posting the original post here. Lost about $250 in the end (OK, I was using it for 3-4 months) but I'm happy that it's gone. Using MBP which has a beautiful display and waiting for a new iMac, the one with normal display.

I heard about the guys who sued Apple for misleading consumers, advertising millions of colours, where the TN panel can display only a small part of what Apple claims. Good on him, I hope they bleed and are forced to pay big bucks in fixing this.

Indeed, the new iMAC will probably be out in August! I've read about the iMAC display deception. If the TN panel is really that bad, I'm confident Apple will withdraw the product. Go to the Apple web site, there are sections shown the comparison of display resolutions between the 20" & 24". However, most of the LCD displays were selling in the market these days were in fact using the same display technology or worse. iMAC is just a desktop to work and probably viewing some DVDs, photos manipulation etc... To really have a super display of 1080 Full HD and ability to view at any angles, I bought a Sony KDL 46" XBR Bravia.

Stelex writes...

The colours are washed out as you go down the screen

Yeah, our IT guys have found that to be correct.
They are deploying 24"s to our people with colour critical needs (art dept etc) & us writers will gets 20"s.

www.news.com.au/technolo...-5014239,00.html
www.macdailynews.com/ind...h_imac_deception
hardware.slashdot.org/ar...221&from=rss

"Apple told consumers that both the 20-inch and 24-inch iMacs displayed "millions of colors at all resolutions." Indeed, the new 24-inch iMacs display 16,777,216 colors on 8-bit, in-plane switching (IPS) screens, as did the previous generation of 20-inch iMacs. But the new 20-inch iMac monitors do not even come close, displaying 98% fewer colors (262,144)."

Does this explain why the IMac's are washed out?

deathray writes...

Does this explain why the IMac's are washed out?

I don't believe so. The problem with 20" iMacs is that the colour fades as you go closer to the bottom of the screen. Even with 262k colours, the colour should be consistent on each line of the screen.
I think the problem here is in signal distribution, but don't really know exact details how TN works.

Essentially there are two issues, one is that Apple mislead its customers about the number of colours. They still do it, just have a look at their website, and that's what the law suit is about.

The other problem is that even so few colours can not be evenly displayed across all lines of the screen.

No I don't think it's 'signal distribution' as you word it, it's more to do with the construction of the panel and the location of the backlights...

I've calibrated my 20" display and it gives a more vibrant colour. I guess the display problem not only on some of the 20". It also applied to the 24" too. My 20" display seems to be fine.
Take a look at this link - www.trick77.com/2008/01/...en-imac-displays

Stelex writes...

The greatest fun was when I sold the damn thing

I totally agree that the display on the 20" is not the best but then again it is not targetted towards people who would actually notice it.

Also, I am curious to know whether you actually looked at this machine in store prior to purchasing?

loafofbread writes...

Also, I am curious to know whether you actually looked at this machine in store prior to purchasing?

No, I haven't. I have purchased it through DS Power House, they didn't have them in stock, so I paid and the guy who lives nearby delivered it to my home three days later.

There is one thing apple did that actually masks the wash-out 'effect', all iMacs came with a very pale calibration, the whole picture is sort of washed out and if you look at one in the store you don't really notice the fault, unless you of course 'play' with the computer a bit.

A very easy way of noticing it is if you open 2 finder windows, put the toolbar of one at the top of the screen, the other one on the bottom (toolbar again). Then click on desktop so none of the two is selected. You will notice huge difference in colour. The on top is nice and shiny brushed metal (talking about Tiger here), the one on the bottom is light grey. See my original post for the link and sample of this. (Upgrading to leopard never made any difference).

Stelex writes...

all iMacs came with a very pale calibration, the whole picture is sort of washed out

Yeah I noticed the default Apple screen profiles for my Cinema Display and so on are very pale and make everything look like it's got a high gamma. Once properly hardware calibrated, the colours look darker, but that's how it should be.

deathray writes...

But the new 20-inch iMac monitors do not even come close, displaying 98% fewer colors (262,144).

Technically that kind of claim is wrong, 6-bit TN film panels can display more than 262,144 shades of colours (by using a dithering hack such as Frame Rate Control), but they can't display as many as 8-bit panels can. I think the "16.2 million colours" spec that used to appear all the time on 6-bit monitors is probably a bit more accurate, though it likely still overestimates the colour capability.

Nowadays though, most monitor manufacturers claim "16.7 million colours" for their 6-bit screens even though this is blatantly false.

And the other major problem is the narrow viewing angles of TN film panels, which causes colours to distort if you're not looking at it head-on.

Stelex writes...

There is one thing apple did that actually masks the wash-out 'effect', all iMacs came with a very pale calibration, the whole picture is sort of washed out and if you look at one in the store you don't really notice the fault, unless you of course 'play' with the computer a bit.

I agree and I don't agree with this. I use a 20" iMac at work with my 15" MBP connected to a 20" Dell display. I didn't notice how bad the 20" iMac was until I got my 15" MBP and sat it next to the 20".

But i guess a lesson learned here is to go and check out what you are buying before forking out $1700. The two iMacs (20 & 24) are displayed next to each other at most resellers which would have highlighted the difference between the two displays.

However I do agree that the panels suck!

Bear in mind the 24" resolution is 1920 x 1200 pixels and the 20" resolution is 1680 x 1050 pixels.
The differences are there and so do the price tag! I suggest to calibrate the display and you will see the great improvement. If the display is really a disaster, I'm sure Apple will withdraw the products from the world wide stores.

hytan writes...

I suggest to calibrate the display and you will see the great improvement.

No, calibration does nothing. The blue colour is blue at the top and light blue at the bottom. When you calibrate the monitor, the blue at the top becomes blu-er and on the bottom light blu-er.

I'm sure Apple will withdraw the products from the world wide stores.

How long it's been since August 2007, 9 months? I'm sure they'll withdraw them in another 25 months.

Apple is VERY aware of this, read any discussion on any decent apple forum and you will see that tehre are thousands of people pissed off about this. Apple chose to piss off 20% of users in order to make twice as much money on other 80%.

They gladly replace your computer, but what you get is exactly the same. They also nicely suggest you to upgrade to 24", which is another few hundred bucks.

I am a great fan of Apple products and I have 'sold' so many Macs to my friends and work colleagues, converted at least 20 people to mac in the past 3-4 years, but my word for 20" iMac is - DON'T BUY, it's a shittiest piece of equipment Apple has released in many years.

deathray writes...

"Apple told consumers that both the 20-inch and 24-inch iMacs displayed "millions of colors at all resolutions." Indeed, the new 24-inch iMacs display 16,777,216 colors on 8-bit, in-plane switching (IPS) screens, as did the previous generation of 20-inch iMacs. But the new 20-inch iMac monitors do not even come close, displaying 98% fewer colors (262,144)."

Solid fact to bury the 20", its just not acceptable for the price for any level of computing

well ive had my 20" since 2 days after they came out in August.

I just dont really care about it i guess. Never noticed it, never really cared. Im a step above from the average user and do photo, video editing, among many other things and it just never really bothered me.

Its not a Apple Cinema Display, but should please 98% of people, even if it is a step below what they've offered before or anyone else is offering.

i do agree with your points. Somehow, i guess "someone" is hoping to make millions Do$hs out from the millions colours that Apple has already put on productions :)

loafofbread writes...

But i guess a lesson learned here is to go and check out what you are buying before forking out $1700. The two iMacs (20 & 24) are displayed next to each other at most resellers which would have highlighted the difference between the two displays.

It's really not that easy, unless you know what to look for you wouldn't notice until you get the thing home and start using it for a few days.
It seems to me that all the iMacs on display are set up with the standard desktop background and screensaver which almost seems to be designed to hide the problem and if they are running iPhoto then at first (& 2nd) glance the pics look stunning on both the 20" & 24" displays.
It's very easy to be sucked in with the glossy 20" display showing glorious photo's - it's only when you start to use it and get involved with solid colours that turn into gradients on the 20" that you notice the problem.
Some people may never notice the 20" shortcomings - for many it will look great....

angryofmayfair writes...

Some people may never notice the 20" shortcomings - for many it will look great....

Human eyes are amazingly adaptive, so yeah often you can only tell when you look at a 6-bit and 8-bit screen side by side.

It's very easy to be sucked in with the glossy 20" display showing glorious photo's

Agreed. And I'd like to point out that most 6-bit screens including the one on the new 20" iMac are not bad screens at all. In fact, to most people, they look brilliant, and meet all their needs. It's just that they're not great for image editing and graphics work.

I would also like to point out once again the best way to tell whether an LCD is 6-bit or not is to look at the viewing angles. If you stand off to one side or move your head up and down and the colours look really washed out or change hue significantly, then it's 6-bit. Most 8-bit panels, especially IPS panels, don't distort much at all even when you're looking at the image from a very oblique angle.