[ale] Video Resolutions

[Ron Frazier (ALE)]

On 3/26/2012 3:09 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Chris Fowler
> <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com>  wrote:
>    
>> After installing a (new to me) workstation I started looking for a new
>> LCD.  Currently I am using an Acer 21" wide screen.  I started looking
>> at 27", but I'm confused about resolutions.  I need as many pixels on
>> the screen as I can get.  The more I get the more stuff I can view
>> without scrolling.  What I do not understand is why as LCD screens get
>> larger the resolutions do not.  The resolution difference between my 21
>> and the Acer 27 is not that great.  I'm just curious what I can't get a
>> LCD with a 3K+x3k+ resolution.
>>      
>
> You're really talking about achieving a specific DPI, which is
> dependent on both size and resolution.  There is a direct relationship
> between price and resolution, and you have to be willing to spend the
> money to get the higher resolution to maintain a good DPI.
>
> Many people are simply spoiled with 24" screens that cost less than
> $200.  That is incredibly cheap and the reason they are cheap is
> because they use the same panels and manufacturing process as HD TVs.
> The display quality on cheap displays however is generally poor, and
> anything outside that form factor is going to cost you.
>
> I LOLed at the Newegg link for a "very expensive" monitor at $320.
> I'm currently using a Dell Ultrasharp U2410, 24" WUXGA (1900x1200),
> $550.  This is a low-end professional quality display, and it still
> doesn't have a very high DPI.  I'm not an artist or anything, but I do
> spend about 10 hours a day looking at this thing.
>
> No matter what you think about Apple, they have finally kicked the
> display industry in the pants and got them moving forward again.  We
> used to be getting improvements in display resolution every so often,
> until HD TV came out and everyone got lazy and stuck with "Full HD".
> Now that there's a good marketing term again ("retina display"), we
> will all soon benefit when newer displays come out.
>
>
> ❧ Brian Mathis
>
>
>    

1080p is good enough for what I do, and it works out nicely if I attach 
the computer to my flat screen TV, which is also 1080p.  However, I can 
see how more pixels could be very useful.  I'd rather not recommend an 
Apple product since they're so closed and controlling in philosophy.  
However, this is on their web site.  Hope you have a fat wallet, since 
it's only $ 999.  2560 x 1440.  Looks really cool though.  I don't know 
if there is any way to attach it to a standard computer.  One problem 
with hi res displays is that the print usually gets insanely tiny.  
Maybe someone else out there is sourcing these same panels and making 
something with compatible connectors.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC914

Apple Thunderbolt Display (27-inch)

With built-in Thunderbolt technology — the fastest, most flexible I/O 
ever — the new Apple Thunderbolt Display can do things other displays 
simply can’t. Of course, it delivers a brilliant viewing experience. But 
connect it to any Thunderbolt-enabled Mac and it becomes a plug-and-play 
hub for everything you do. Features include a high-resolution 
2560-by-1440 LED-backlit display, a FaceTime HD camera, high-quality 
audio, three USB 2.0 ports, a FireWire 800 port, a Gigabit Ethernet 
port, and a Thunderbolt port for daisy-chaining additional 
high-performance devices.

Sincerely,

Ron


-- 

(PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want to
call on the phone.  I get about 300 emails per day from alternate energy
mailing lists and such.  I don't always see new messages very quickly.)

Ron Frazier

770-205-9422 (O)   Leave a message.
linuxdude AT c3energy.com