Click here for important information about

Discuss: Apple's Expensive Monitor Stand

Hewlett-packard / Hp pavilion g6 notebook p...
June 6, 2019 at 04:58:08
Specs: Windows 10, 1.4 GHz / 5610 MB
Hi all,

This week's poll question is about news that Apple has announced a monitor stand priced at nearly $1000. Discuss here if you think this move will damage the company's reputation, and, if you like, the poll results themselves.


See More: Discuss: Apples Expensive Monitor Stand

June 6, 2019 at 06:12:28
$1000 for a monitor only...? Bit steep for a domestic environment; although in broadcast, graphics and computer design arenas that price is not uncommon; but usually applies to other brands and large(r) displays.

Report •

June 6, 2019 at 08:25:42

It is not the monitor, it the stand that hold the monitor that cost $1000.00.......


Report •

June 6, 2019 at 09:11:25
Mon Dieu... Apple seriously believes there are people out there who will pay that for a monitor stand?

But then there is always "someone" who simply has to have the latest offerings from whomever...

Report •

Related Solutions

June 6, 2019 at 13:32:22

When I was in Madison Wisconsin in 1998 I was given a tour of the
public TV station there. Two things I was shown were a projection
TV screen about eight feet high by 20 feet wide (the picture looked
very good), and an ordinary-size monitor used for checking the
color of the outgoing signal which cost $29,000.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

Report •

June 8, 2019 at 17:21:37
I doubt it will upset their reputation. They've been screwing people for years. If the public are mugs enough to go for things at crazy prices then I suppose it's their business.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks

message edited by Derek

Report •

June 9, 2019 at 02:09:42
Projection systems as used in broadcast and A-V environments were never cheap, not that they were for domestic use either. Quality was ok... but a better system using flat screen crt displays arranged in blocks and each showing a portion of the picture (think mosaic format) came in post projection systems of the time, and became more popular. Many an in-shot newsroom had video walls made up arrays consisting separate crt “cubes” arranged to allow a 4x3, and later also 16x9 overall display. Many conferences and shows using video walls used the cube approach. Fast forward to tft and plasma technology and the wall system became much easier to install, align, configure than using cubes; and require less space.

A tft tile based system could be humungous... There have been some over 18ft high and
over 60ft long. These units - fixed installations in on-air news room sets cost 2-3 miyllion £’s. There were (are) reasonably reliable ; but the displays panels/tiles age over time. Thus replacing one requires the replacement settings be tweaked to match the remaining original tiles; and this can be a true PIA task.

Broadcast monitors can cost anything from £1500 upwards for a 19inch (tft or plasma if still around) or LED; significantly more usually, and certainly for larger screens. Those monitors have a full set of controls on the front panel to allow proper calibration. They’re usually for individual viewing positions monitoring whatever sources, cameras included by operators various. Control room displays generally use large (expensive...) LED screens displaying a patchwork consisting of as many sources (pictures) as required. Many Canadian, US, UK, and others use that system in studio control rooms, and in their Master Control rooms (think of a telephone exchange for all incoming/outgoing audio and video sources) and individual operator desk monitors with multiple source selection. Those latter monitors usually being high quality monitors as mentioned earlier.

When last I spec’d in shot plasma displays (separate displays) mounted around an newsroom or similar area (similar to many used in railway stations, airports etc today - but which are likely now LED) a 52ins cost well over £1200. That was in the 2008. Plasma suffer from the creeping mold effect... areas of he display start to lose usually red and blue pixels which left only green... It did look like mold. Occasionally the effect was yellow, but green was more common.

One 16x9 format display (actually was 8x4.5 ft) weighed a ton, figuratively speaking; required its own electrically operated stand to allow it to rotated between landscape and portrait modes, and physical viewing height. It also required a “very” solid floor surface on which to stand... I don’t recall how much it cost, but it weren’t cheap.

Broadcast quality kit is seldom cheap; monitors not the least if wanting have them capable of being accurately matched to one another. Similarly those used in graphics and modern “film/video” production...

I’ve seen very few Apple branded monitors in broadcast areas; no more than one per Apple station; no idea why... Cost perhaps, or package deals for a given facility favoured other brands, and came in cheaper overall per display.

As per Derek, there are invariably many who simply “must” have the latest offering from Apple-land; regardless of cost. That some will camp out for a day or more to be among the first to secure a new Apple toy or version of whatever is beyond my ken... But hey exist, persist and will likely do so nonetheless...

message edited by trvlr

Report •

July 4, 2019 at 01:36:02
Wait a second, you can:

"control its height, tilt and rotation"

Guess I'll be switching to Apple now !

Report •

July 4, 2019 at 06:35:06
I have a simple, inexpensive monitor stand which allows a reasonable variation in height pf display; allows rotation to whichever degree wished; cost well under a $100/£80 or so. Also a desk clamped arm which allows a wide selection of display height, rotation and proximity too. Again well under rhe price as mentioned the stand above.

Why would the average user want anything like the Apple megabucks device; unless they have mote money than sense, pr out to impress someone pr other?

Report •

Ask Question