11 Replies Latest reply: Nov 6, 2009 11:23 AM by Kort
Level 2 (205 points)
Hi,

Could someone with one of the new 21.5-inch iMacs measure something for me please? I'd like to know the distance between the top surface of your desk and the bottom row of pixels on the iMac's display.

On an Apple LED Cinema Display, this measurement is 12.5cm. On a 20-inch aluminium iMac it's 18cm.

iMac 17" 2GHz, 2GB RAM, 250GB Hard Drive (Xbench 134.26), Mac OS X (10.6), 16GB iPhone 3GS, 40GB Apple TV
• Level 1 (55 points)
15.5 cm
• Level 1 (10 points)
Yea mine measured 16.1 cm
• Level 2 (205 points)
Ok, great. So the display is about a couple of centimetres lower down to the desk, due to the smaller chin. That's good news, 'cos I've always thought the iMac displays were slightly too high.
• Level 1 (10 points)
Yea, the design on this new model is great in terms of the screen size and the way it sits in the casing
• Level 2 (205 points)
Another quick question.

The screen is 21.5-inches diagonally. But how many cms is it in width and height? I'm talking about the measurement from the left most pixel, to the right most pixel, not the dimensions of the iMac case.

Message was edited by: Reuben Feffer
• Level 7 (30,460 points)
If a real measurement with a yardstick is not provided, my calculation says

18.7" wide by 10.5" high

(based on 1920x1080 resolution and a diagonal measurement of 21.5" - using [Pythagorean theorem|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem])

Oh, metric system...

47.6 cm wide
26.8 cm high
• Level 2 (205 points)
Thanks very much for doing those calculations. You were basically spot on.

I actually now have my 21.5-inch iMac, so I can measure "with a yardstick". The actual image area of the screen is 47.5 cm wide by 26.8 cm high.

It's the perfect size and resolution for a computer display. 27 inches is TOO big
• Level 3 (810 points)
Reuben Feffer wrote:
...It's the perfect size and resolution for a computer display. 27 inches is TOO big

Hahahah! Can I hazard a guess and say that you probably don't do graphics work?
You can always sit back a little farther too...
• Level 7 (30,460 points)
You can always sit back a little farther too...

Not too far back. The pixel density on the 27-inch about 109 pixels per inch (pretty small pixels). That's a typical PPI number for a laptop, which most people use with screen closer to their eyes. The 21.5-inch iMac is a more relaxed 102 PPI. Previous iMacs have been under 100 PPI, with the old 24-inch iMacs at about 94 PPI.

The higher density pixels is an advantage or disadvantage, depending on how good your eyes are at avoiding strain.
• Level 2 (205 points)
Perhaps I should rephrase that. It's not that the 27-inch iMac is bad for graphics work, just that the 21.5-inch is perfect.

The 21.5-inch has the same horizontal resolution as the old 23" Apple Cinema Display. It's just missing 120 pixels vertically, because the aspect ratio on the iMac is 16:9, compared to 16:10 on the Apple Cinema Display. The 21.5-inch iMac has an LED backlight, whereas the Apple Cinema Display doesn't.
• Level 3 (810 points)
Reuben Feffer wrote:
Perhaps I should rephrase that. It's not that the 27-inch iMac is bad for graphics work, just that the 21.5-inch is perfect.

The 21.5-inch has the same horizontal resolution as the old 23" Apple Cinema Display. It's just missing 120 pixels vertically, because the aspect ratio on the iMac is 16:9, compared to 16:10 on the Apple Cinema Display. The 21.5-inch iMac has an LED backlight, whereas the Apple Cinema Display doesn't.

I am using an "old" 23" Cinema Display right now with my G5. Still looks beautiful and is great for my graphics work. I would say it is a tad nicer to work with than my 24" iMac screen at home. The only age related issue I have noticed is the tendency for shapes to burn in more quickly, though they always disappear after a few minutes in a screen saver or other mode. Over 4 years old and still going strong. How long are these things supposed to last anyway?