Originally Posted by Tangster
I'd prefer to work on my little personal projects. Too much effort and pressure with a public paid one.
1080p was made popular by the film and tv industry. I don't believe a 25xx by xxxx screen was midrange for TFTs in 2003, although my old 16" Sony CRT could handle it.
I don't think most people could really justify an $18k or even the revise $8.5k screen. The resolution is a bit too high to be used raw, I'd be straining my eyes a lot with that resolution on a 22.5" monitor. The weird 41Hz refresh rate is just...odd. It's more like a purchasable tech demo, the Crysis of the LCD monitor world.
Haha, 1280x1024 was the standard in 2003, it still is, 10 years later, most office desktops still use these.
Higher resolutions have never been mainstream. They've always existed, but never really proved useful beyond a few applications.
Apple has made higher PPI screens popular with their retina display, but the thruth is, the viewing distance also matters. A 2560x1440 screen at 0.5m is totally sharp, no pixels noticeable.
To me it seems overkill when you're scaling text to maintain the font size. Yes it looks nice, but it wasn't that bad earlier.
Also, the screen quality matters, A LOT. I don't mind using my Thinkpad R61's 1280x800 screen, because the screen is smooth and wonderful, whereas I still don't like the Dell laptop I use at office (Full HD screen, Viewing angles suck, very rough and jagged colors).
The Dell IPS panels, however, are awesome.