CES 2015: LG and 21:9 aspects monitors

[Chewy509]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/lg-shows-219-ultra-wide-monitor-line-at-ces-2015/

In two minds about this, but certainly leaning towards the "like" side of the spectrum since I do run a dual monitor setup and would like to get rid of the center separation between the two monitors

 

[Handruin]

I'm also interested in this type of monitor for the same reasons you mentioned.

 

[ddrueding]

Last, but far from least, is the 31MU97. This ultra-wide 31-incher is slightly smaller than its brethren but boasts a pixel count of 4,096 by x 2,160. That’s “true” 4K, and slightly better than the 3,840 x 2,160 resolution most competitors offer. It can also render up to 99.5 percent of the AdobeRGB color gamut, giving the display truly incredible color depth and accuracy.

Still needs to be bigger.

 

[Mercutio]

Why do panel makers hate vertical pixels?

 

[snowhiker]

Still needs to be bigger.

Agreed. 36" would be nice. Actually I'd love a 36-40" 3840x2560 (3:2) monitor, but that will never happen.

Why do panel makers hate vertical pixels?

It's a conspiracy to keep monitor buyers dissatisfied so they will want to buy something else next year. I "can't wait" for the ubar-super-duper-wide 45" 6144x1080. lol.

 

[ddrueding]

It's a conspiracy to keep monitor buyers dissatisfied so they will want to buy something else next year. I "can't wait" for the ubar-super-duper-wide 45" 6144x1080. lol.

Nope, that one will be 960 pixels high, just to drive everyone nuts.

 

[Handruin]

They'll want you to stack two high.

 

[jtr1962]

Agreed. 36" would be nice. Actually I'd love a 36-40" 3840x2560 (3:2) monitor, but that will never happen.

From my own personal perspective I have no use for these huge monitors given that I have limited desk space and need to sit about 15 inches from my monitor to view it clearly. I like the idea of higher resolution 4:3 monitors but a 36" to 40" 3840x2560 would suffer from the same issues that my present 20" 1600x1200 monitor suffers from now-namely I can see the individual pixels. They would need to be half the size they are now or less in order for that not to happen. My "ideal" monitor would be 4096x3072 with a diagonal size of no more than about maybe 24". It would still fit in the space I have now, offer 44% more real estate than my present monitor, and have no pixelation issues.

I personally don't understand the point of either ultra-wide screen monitors or huge monitors. Maybe if someone has 20/20 vision without glasses such that they can sit 30 or 36 inches away from a 40" monitor I can see the point but chances are that same person would do just fine sitting 15 or 20 inches from a 24" monitor. Visually, everything would look exactly the same, assuming the same resolution, plus you save desk space as well. In my opinion huge monitors are pointless until we go to 8K, the idea being you shouldn't see pixels if you're a foot away or more regardless of the size of the monitor.

 

[Mercutio]

All I want is something more than 1080 vertical pixels to become the standard. I absolutely cringe when I run in to vomit machines with less than 800 vertical pixels, but at this point that is the norm. It feels like desktop display technology is moving backwards, especially since it's well within reason to find a phone with a higher-than-FHD display. Even 4k isn't particularly exotic.

 

[sedrosken]

What'd be especially great is if there was an interest for panel upgrades in laptops. You can bet that if I could find a 1080p 15.6" panel for my laptop, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

 

[CougTek]

Sometimes, there are higher definition panels available for a particular laptop model, but I don't see any for your model.

 

[sedrosken]

Thanks for the link. I didn't think there would be, but just to be sure I tuned the search to a more general model, the c55-b series. Nothing notable there. But I imagine that if I look hard enough (especially now that I know the exact dimensions of my screen and what connector it uses) I can find one that will work.