Giveaway: Bracketron Case

If outdoor adventures are in your future this summer, enter to win a Bracketron Sport Case with Mount Strap from MacNN and keep that iPhone, iPod or other electronic device safe from the elements.

toggle

AAPL Stock: 454.74 ( + 1.77 )

MacNN News

http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/03/31/imac.display.suit/

Apple sued for iMac display "deception"

updated 03:05 pm EDT, Mon March 31, 2008

iMac display suit

Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP, a law firm out of Los Angeles, California, has filed suit against Apple on behalf of a class of users claiming that the computer maker "deceptively marketed" the 20-inch iMac by purporting improved display performance, though the device's monitor is allegedly of "inferior" quality. The suit claims that the monitors are incapable of displaying �millions of colors,� despite Apple's marketing claims. "Apple is duping its customers into thinking they�re buying 'new and improved' when in fact they're getting stuck with 'new and inferior,'�"said Brian Kabateck, Managing Partner of Kabateck Brown Kellner.� "Beneath Apple�s 'good guy' image is a corporation that takes advantage of its customers. Our goal is to help those customers who were deceived and make sure Apple tells the truth in the future."

The "millions of colors" claim stems from the assertion that while 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, the new 20-inch iMac monitors display 98 percent fewer colors (262,144).

The suit also alleges that the screens used in 24-inch and 20-inch iMacs respectively are of radically different technology. "The 20-inch iMacs feature 6-bit twisted nematic film (TN) LCD screens, the least expensive of its type.
The 20-inch iMac�s TN screens have a narrower viewing angle, less color depth, less color accuracy and are more susceptible to washout across the screen," a statement issued by Kabateck Brown Kellner suggests.

"Apple is squeezing more profits for itself by using cheap screens and its customers are unwittingly paying the price,� Kabateck said.

Apple recently agreed to an out-of-court settlement in a long-running lawsuit over the MacBook and MacBook Pro. Two California photographers, Fred Greaves and Dave Gatley, filed the class action suit in May of last year, over Apple's claim that the Pro could display "millions of colors." According to the filing, the reality is that Apple fakes the notebooks' color range through software dithering, and yet offers the extended color option in a Mac OS X drop-down menu, without any mention of software emulation.

by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

lawsuit, California, monitor, Class Action, display, Apple

toggle

Comments

64stang06
Mac Elite

Joined: Aug 2007

0

03/31, 03:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
Great

Oh no, I can't view a million colors!

njfuzzy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2001

0

03/31, 03:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
I wonder

This may affect me. I recently went from a PowerMac (G5 Dual 2.5) with a 20" Cinema Display, to a 20" iMac (Core 2 Duo). I am a photographer and do my own digital post-processing. I would not want to find out I took a step backwards in terms of the quality of my monitor.

pixelcruncher
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2005

0

03/31, 03:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hope this isn't true

I count on Apple products being "best in class".

ViktorCode
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2006

0

03/31, 03:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
I have doubts

about those displays being 6-bit. The suit Apple settled out of the court was filled by the users who were experiencing problems with banding on their laptops. The banding was a result of 6-bit display installed there. Banding could be clearly seen even given the fact Apple masked it with software dithering. I don't remember anyone mentioned banding on his 20'', though I read a lot on other display issues of aluminium iMacs.

mgpalma
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2000

+1

03/31, 03:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Our Goal

"Our goal is to help those customers who were deceived and make sure Apple tells the truth in the future."

More likely, to make millions in legal fees...The case may have merit, but I am sick of lawyers and politicians giving humanitarian airs while really only doing it for the buck or for power.

bobolicious
Junior Member

Joined: Aug 2002

0

03/31, 03:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: our goal

...I concur - the public complaint rate against lawyers where I live if true is appalling - perhaps the fox is minding the hen house so to speak...

eldarkus
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2004

0

03/31, 04:01pm | report spam | close Reply |
njfuzzy

Going from a 20 cinema display to an iMac? errr.. yes, you did take a big step backwards!!

As a photographer, you should do your research. CRT displays are the best for color proofing. PERIOD! while flat screens are getting better and there are some high end monitors that will do the trick for color proofing, nothing beats a CRT for color representation.

And if you thought a $600 monitor is built in to a $1200 computer.. well, shame on u! :)

emark
Forum Regular

Joined: Feb 2001

0

03/31, 04:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
darn right

Apple deserves to have the a$$ handed to them on this one if there marketing materials only mentioned/spec'd the quality of the screen in the higher iMac.

Certainly, even if they mentioned it, few would've balked at the difference for the price savings...but it can't be a suprise, (albeit a distantly possible but unlikely oversight) if it required the additional engineering to compensate for them.

tsk tsk.

dom2cool
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2006

0

03/31, 04:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
!

must be funded by micro$oft

tindrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

03/31, 04:28pm | report spam | close Reply |
if true

I'd be kinda angry too. 8 bits per color is very different than 4 bits per color. If it doesn't go that high, don't say it does. Not sure about lawsuits, but when I get an Intel Mac, these things will be factors in what model I choose. Sure, it doesn't hurt a playthrough of Myst or Myth, but it's important if you do that kinda PShop work. Really, why blame the messenger for pointing out that vid. isn't as good as it can or should be.

legacyb4
Mac Elite

Joined: May 2001

0

03/31, 04:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
i've got a bridge

i can sell you if you truly believe that paying the lower cost gets you the better product...

hayesk
Professional Poster

Joined: Sep 1999

0

03/31, 04:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
Bull

Consider the best LCD or CRT displays. They have 8-bits of R, G, and B, and black. That means 256 red, 256 green, and 256 blue, and black. That equals 769 colours.

The eye is fooled into thinking there are more colours because of the size and placement of the RGB elements. Customers have no problem with this.

6-bit displays do this, but they also quickly flash between, for exmple, 4-bit red, and 5 bit red to fool the eye into seeing something in between. This is temporal dithering.

So why is it ok to fool the eye in one manner (spacial positioning of elements) but not in another (temporal dithering)?

There's no merit into this case, as Apple did not advertise the displays as being new and improved, and 6-bit displays is no less honest than 8-bit displays that can only really display 769 colours.

testudo
Forum Regular

Joined: Aug 2001

0

03/31, 05:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: bull

Sorry, but you're doing the math wrong. The 8 bits of rgb are based on stauration, luminesence, brightness, or some other word people who know something about color on screen would know. You would multiply these numbers to get a specific number of colors, thus the 16,777,216 value.

They don't dither the color, but change the brightness value of the three to come out with a specific color (just like adding a bright red light to a dim blue light gives a different color then a bright blue with a dim red).

If all they show is 769 true colors, no one would ever use an LCD for anything. (BTW, IIUC, CRTs work under the same general principles).

testudo
Forum Regular

Joined: Aug 2001

0

03/31, 05:13pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: bull

BTW, you got your counts wrong, also. Each have 256 values (0-255), where black is the case of all three being 0.

testudo
Forum Regular

Joined: Aug 2001

0

03/31, 05:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hey!

Where's all the complaining that no one would use an LCD for color correctness, so the lawsuit is just bogus! And this is more bogus, because last week's was with a so-called "Pro" machine. These are lame consumer machines. Who could expect the colors on these to be correct?

iFrankie
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

03/31, 05:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple Displays Are Awful

Apple has always shipped terrible monitors/LCDs.

Most LCDs that Apple ships come with dead pixels or other issues.

Our company has ordered hundreds of Dell laptops and LCDs and never once got one with a dead pixel. However, the handful of laptops we got from Apple all had at least one or two dead pixels.

I'll still take an Apple system over a Dell. It just sucks trying to get them replaced every time.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

03/31, 05:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: bull

Actually, hayesk is 100% correct. For example, NO MONITOR, whether it be LCD or CRT, can actually display yellow. There is a red pixel, a green pixel, and a blue pixel. The ONLY colors those pixels can produce are red, green, and blue. If you turn on the red and the green pixel, you see yellow. But under no circumstances is the monitor emitting yellow light. The eye is TRICKED into seeing yellow by the close proximity of the red and green pixels. All the other c*** testudo mentioned will make you a different shade of yellow, but the monitor is still only giving off light in the red and green wavelengths.

So, to restate hayesk's question, why is tricking the eye into seeing millions of colors by placing other colors in close proximity in space OK; while tricking the eye into seeing millions of colors by putting the other colors in close proximity in time all of a sudden grounds for lawsuit.

Both methods are tricking the eye into seeming something that isn't there.

hayesk
Professional Poster

Joined: Sep 1999

0

03/31, 05:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
testudo, think carefully

Yes, testudo, my math was wrong, it's really 255x3 + black, so it's 766 colours, not 769.

However, as ender pointed out with a perfect example, the three elements do not combine to emit a single colour wavelength, they emit separate wavelengths in close proximity that fool your eye into seeing one. So again, why is that ok, but temporal dithering not?

csimon2
Junior Member

Joined: Aug 2000

0

03/31, 06:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: I wonder

How could you be really affected if it takes an article on a website mentioning that there is a lawsuit for you to ponder this? Either you notice a difference or you don't. And if you were a real pro photographer who switched from a "high-quality" cinema display to an iMac's display, which apparently has such a worse display according to this lawsuit, you should have seen this difference by now. But you didn't, indicating that the iMac's display doesn't in fact bother you, which means you HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!

kerryb
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

03/31, 07:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
phototog dummy

Sorry but anyone that says they are a real photographer replaces a G5 powermac and Apple display for a 20 in aluminum iMac is not paying attention to their craft.

nat
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2002

+1

03/31, 08:06pm | report spam | close Reply |
think carefully?

he doesn't think carefully, he looks for posts where he thinks he's smarter than the poster and tries to put them in their place. he never has a take on an article, he only has a take on another posters take on an article

aburgh7
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2006

0

03/31, 08:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: think carefully

I won't touch the dithering question, but the spatial method is valid because of practical optical considerations. There is a limit to the eye's ability to separate points of light, so it's effectively the same thing. For the same reason, if you sit 10 feet from a 40" TV, it doesn't matter if its 720p or 1080p--your eyes can't resolve the difference.

In other words, the rods and cones in your eye have a certain diameter, and if the points of light are small enough, the R, G, and B points all reach the same rod or cone, so it doesn't matter if the sources are different points.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

03/31, 09:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: think carefully

"the spatial method is valid because of practical optical considerations"

And the same applies to the temporal method. The eye can see changes in only so small of an increment of time. For example, all CRT monitors have flicker. If you set the refresh rate too low, you can see it. For me, if it's slower than 60 Hz on a mediocre monitor, I can see the flicker. If you set the refresh high enough, you can no longer see the pixels getting illuminated and then dimming in turn. But if you take a photo of the screen with a camera set to a high enough shutter speed, you can in fact see that not all pixels are illuminated all of the time, even when the screen appears to the naked eye to have constant illumination.

So just like your rods and cones "average" the red, green, and blue and thinks it sees different colors, they will average the amount of light they receive over a finite amount of time (they can only react to changes at a certain rate, anything faster than that will "blur" together).

Let's say on a 6-bit display that a red pixel is alternately switching between bright levels 27 and 28, and that switching is happening faster than the eye can detect. Your eye will see red with a brightness level of 27.5 (just like it averages out the bright and dim scan lines of a CRT TV). And even though the pixel itself can only display 64 discrete intensities of red, to the eye it appears that there are far more levels present. Just like an 8-bit monitor can "display" yellow when in fact there is no yellow present.

GopherAlex
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2006

0

03/31, 09:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
hayesk is full of it

"Temporal method?" wtf? A pixel is comprised of three component colors. Each color in an 8-bit panel is capable of 256 different luminosity gradations, and there are three of them. 256^3 = 16,777,216. Time is not involved. There is no "trick" here to "fool" your eye into seeing whatever. There is no "alternate switching" nonsense. There is no magic with the rods and cones in your eyes. Quit making c*** up.

In Apple's crappy TN panels, there is NO FLICKERING. There is no switching. There is DITHERING. Why not spend 5 minutes on Google before spouting off about the way you THINK display panels work.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

03/31, 09:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: gopheralex

All technical arguments and discussions aside, ALL displays use a limited number of colors/intensities to allow the eye to PERCEIVE colors that are not actually present. As long as the eye perceives more than 1,000,0001 shades, Apple's marketing claim of "millions of colors" is true.

They never claimed it was an 8-bit panel. The lawsuit is based on assumptions the plaintiff made when making their purchase. Not on any false statements by Apple. So what is the basis for the legal action?

Athens
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: Jan 2003

0

03/31, 09:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
this is stupid

If the Video card supports Millions of color, then the computer supports Millions of color, end of story. Correct me if I am wrong, but iMacs have external video ports right? Case closed.

macmacmac007
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

04/01, 01:10am | report spam | close Reply |
well

that said... yellow doesn't exist in nature either.

shawnde
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2008

0

04/01, 03:03am | report spam | close Reply |
re: bull (hayesk & ender)

Actually you guys are both wrong. Either you're both being sarcastic, or that's some really funny color theory. You have everything wrong including the math. The color system on computers is very much like the IP addressing on networks. You essentially have three octets, which are combined in every possible combination to give you a total of 2 ^ 24 or 16,777216 colors (24-bit -> 8-bits per color; 3 primary colors).

That whole 766 or 769 is pretty funny. So is the bit about NO YELLOW and all this approximation. There is in fact very much YELLOW in there. You can get 100 Yellow from only two primaries, and it's as every bit YELLOW as you can get; there are no optical illusions or tricks (unless you smoke some good stuff).

In fact Yellow is a primary itself (a product of RGB additive systems) which as you know is used in the printing world as in CM YELLOW K !! You can use CMYK to regenerate the RGB palette. Just because printer inks can't do it, doesn't mean it cannot be done. There are simply more than one set of primaries.

The human eye is only weak in the 'blue' section of the color spectrum and is overly strong in the reds. But of course we'll all somewhat color-blind because of the genetic mix.

It's amazing how many people just ramble without know anything or doing some research.

themacjedicali
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2007

0

04/01, 05:24am | report spam | close Reply |
Shawnde!

Actually when you say our eye " is overly strong in the reds.", we are actually most sensitive to green, not red.

ajhoughton
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2004

0

04/01, 06:27am | report spam | close Reply |
@all

hayesk is right, I'm afraid.

LCDs have groups of three pixels, each of which can only display red, blue or green. On an 8-bit display, that means 255 + 255 + 255 + 1 = 766 colours, *not* 256^3 because the colours aren't actually mixed on the display (Don't believe me? Look at the display through a magnifying glass).

The point about yellow light is quite important. Yellow light has a wavelength between 570 and 590 nanometres. The only reason that we see a mixture of red and green as yellow is that our eyes only have red, green and blue cones (the colour sensors on your retina)� that is, they don't detect the frequency, they measure the amounts of red-ish, green-ish and blue-ish light (I say "ish" because the cones have wide response curves, which is why pure yellow light triggers the red and green cones). As a result, there is no way for your brain to tell the difference between red light plus green light and real yellow light. You *can* tell the difference, however, if you use a prism to split the light� if you split red and green with a prism, you get red and green, whereas if you have genuine pure yellow light (for instance from a yellow laser) it won't split.

Now, the red, green and blue dots on an LCD are separate. So why do we see them as mixed? Because we don't have the optical resolution, that's why. Our brain therefore experiences the colour yellow, though it isn't really there at all. To an animal with different eyes, our displays might look really very strange indeed.

As for the 6-bit LCDs, well, the dithering is generally done in hardware, and it is, at least with better panels and controllers, temporal dithering (i.e. flickering between two colours). In most cases you *shouldn't* be able to see this with your eye (unless you avert your gaze and use the much faster black & white rods in which case the display may seem to shimmer), but if you take a photo of your display with a camera, provided your shutter speed is high enough you'll see artefacts. You might conceivably see artefacts in other situations too, depending on the dithering algorithm (some colours are easier to dither than others because of the response time of your eye).

I haven't seen one of these displays myself, but I'm dubious that Apple's engineers would specify a panel/controller combination that only did spatial dithering. My guess is that the various images shown as "proof" were taken with a camera with its shutter speed too high to smooth out the temporal effect.

It's still true, I think, that even with temporal dithering the 6-bit displays aren't as good, but I think the extent of this problem has been overstated somewhat.

polyfade
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2007

0

04/01, 07:45am | report spam | close Reply |
tn displays suck

my remark isn't so much about displaying millions of colors as it is in regard to the viewing angle of all tn displays Apple uses in their latest 20" iMac models � it's beyond horrible. looking at the screen head on, there's no consistent color tone from top to bottom. solid colors look like gradients!

i'm so glad someone stepped up. because who is going to make a fuss about samsung, lg, among others for using tn technology in their monitors?

using tn is a way of cutting corners and expense to make motion seem more fluid, when in fact it should be a crime.

i would have bought a 20" iMac, but refused for this sole reason.

and if you had a previous (white) 20" iMac or Cinema Display, you will truly be disappointed by the latest 20" iMac.

Mr. Fartleberry
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2003

0

04/01, 10:07am | report spam | close Reply |
pass on 20

I'm sure AAPL will bury this one under the rug when it bamboozles us with the new LCD backlights that are "much improved". The 20s I looked at in the store side by side with the 24 had real and noticable problems I thought I left behind with my old iBook.

cm3D
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2008

0

04/01, 10:19am | report spam | close Reply |
Display Colors

It's telling that most Mac users never notice or care about how many colors they see. The situation makes an inquiring mind wonder about other color-related questions.

1. Is an LCD the right device for color critical workflows? 2. Do I care if I don't know anything about color management? 3. In what applications would I see the difference? Web browsing? Photography? Video editing? Blu-ray DVD movies? Watching TV? 4. If the LCD is hobbled, what about other I/O? Is the DVI port also hobbled with respect to color depth? 5. Will I notice the difference on a projector or HDTV? 6. What's the trend in color depth for new technology? Are there 10-bit HDTV's? What color depth are broadcasters providing via cable or satellite?

A nice but LOOOOONG LCD tutorial is found here: � http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/Vikuiti1/BrandProducts/secondary/optics101/

Color produced from an LCD is also dependent on the backlight's spectrum, and many CCFL backlights are missing entire bands of color. So a dithered 6-bit LCD might not matter all that much anyway. An LED backlight should generally offer better color. Unfortunately, NEC and other manufacturers continually remove graphs on the web that support that contention.

tindrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

04/01, 10:55am | report spam | close Reply |
now I know

why people flame up when reading these things. 8 bits does equal 256 levels, but three colors of 8 bits each does not yield 700-odd colors. If it did, 8 bits x 4 for an IP address would only allow just over a thousand computers on the internet. MULTIPLY, don't add. I'm now wondering, though, where these people bought their iMacs. You can look at them in the stores, and they usually have Photoshop on them. I think some geeks figured out how it works, and just found some patsies to file this lawsuit. Please, please, think about the number of colors, though. If I have red at level 10 out of 256, i can turn green from 0 to 255, while blue is at 75, and that is 256 different levels right there. Now change red to 11, leave blue at 75, and you've got another 256. Now change red to 12, and *BAM* 255 more! Do that for all the reds, then just move blue to 76 instead of 75, rinse, repeat, and you get 256*256*256. Read it, learn it, live it. Don't be morons, you who are saying stupid stuff like morons.

jasonsRX7
Mac Elite

Joined: Jul 2003

0

04/01, 12:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
iMac

If an iMac isn't adequate for a photographers needs, as some here are suggesting, then I think it's unfortunate that Apple doesn't offer anything acceptable for a photographer to use for less than $3400 (Mac Pro + 20" Cinema).

cm3D
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2008

0

04/01, 04:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
iMac & Photography

Regarding the comment on the 20" Cinema Display, that's probably not enough real estate for a serious hobbyist or professional photographer/videographer. It also uses a CCFL backlight. As LCD displays go, it's in the top tier, but it's being eclipsed by LED backlighting. It's pretty clear that Apple is trying to "drain" Cinema Display inventory slowly.

Apple has not introduced LED backlights on it's larger displays - they're waiting for something to happen. Maybe Apple won't offer displays in the future, or maybe they'll offer an HDTV (maybe even a stereo 3D system). Supposedly Apple had some internal resource distribution problems when they shifted priorities to new high-profit items (the 2.5G & 3G iPhones). One thing that might be holding up the parade of products is DisplayPort availability (chips, prices, etc.). Another might be graphics chips availability. Blu-ray is an enabling technology for a lot of the new gadgetry, and it's not quite ready for the mass market. I am certain the recession/depression is slowing the introduction of all this technology.

tindrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

04/01, 05:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
the 24" iMac

doesn't have this "problem", so, actually, jasonsrx7, they do offer one, for several hundred more. Adequate is a relative term, too. Apple makes it pretty easy to test computers and software before purchase, so they could have checked for adequacy beforehand. Lazy, greedy, probably put up to the lawsuit by someone with another agenda.

Maldak
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2008

0

04/03, 01:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
Mac users and color

"It's telling that most Mac users never notice or care about how many colors they see."

That's fascinating. I was totally unaware of that. What's your reference for that?

Or are you just making sweeping generalizations based upon anecdotal evidence?

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/13	Job listings hint at near-future OS...
05/13	New York attorney general asks phone...
05/13	T-Mobile raises down payment price...
05/13	Bill Gates emotionally details final...
05/10	Changes coming to US AppleCare policies...

Show All

05/13	New York attorney general asks phone...
05/13	T-Mobile raises down payment price...
05/13	Lumia 925 images leak while Nokia teases...
05/13	Amazon launches Coins virtual currency...
05/13	Bill Gates emotionally details final...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Apple sued for iMac display "deception"

updated 03:05 pm EDT, Mon March 31, 2008

iMac display suit

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Great

I wonder

Hope this isn't true

I have doubts

Our Goal

re: our goal

njfuzzy

darn right

!

if true

i've got a bridge

Bull

Re: bull

Re: bull

Hey!

Apple Displays Are Awful

re: bull

testudo, think carefully

Re: I wonder

phototog dummy

think carefully?

re: think carefully

re: think carefully

hayesk is full of it

re: gopheralex

this is stupid

well

re: bull (hayesk & ender)

Shawnde!

@all

tn displays suck

pass on 20

Display Colors

now I know

iMac

iMac & Photography

the 24" iMac

Mac users and color

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace