Is 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 the largest resolution for future monitors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B)
  • Start date Start date
Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) said:
--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 9.04) Linux 2.6.30.2
^ ^ 16:19:03 up 1 day 5 min 0 users load average: 2.52 3.19 3.63
???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ????? (CSSA):
Click to expand...

And still your sig line is OTT.

SteveH
 
I would hope not.

1920x1200 is kinda rectangle...

I would still like to see monitors that are more square possibility...

Something like:

2000x1800

^ More vertical space.

Bye,
Skybuck.
 
I would hope not.

1920x1200 is kinda rectangle...

I would still like to see monitors that are more square possibility...

Something like:

2000x1800

^ More vertical space.

Bye,
Skybuck.
Click to expand...


No! Wide screen is better.
I use 1920 x 1200 now.
 
Ken said:
No! Wide screen is better.
I use 1920 x 1200 now.
Click to expand...

Me too, I still feel this is somewhat constraining, horizontally and
vertically.

Especially vertically.

Bye,
Skybuck.
 
Skybuck said:
I would hope not.

1920x1200 is kinda rectangle...

I would still like to see monitors that are more square possibility...

Something like:

2000x1800

^ More vertical space.

Bye,
Skybuck.
Click to expand...

Whatever it was /you/ would find a way to break it.
 
Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) said:
Is 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 the largest resolution for future monitors?
Click to expand...

No, you can get higher resolution than that already. It requires
a dual link DVI interface to drive the resolution of a 30"
display.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/M9179LL/A

Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)

2560-by-1600-pixel resolution

Dual-Link DVI

As for the future, try reading the HDMI article, and
see what the very latest standard supports.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdmi

Type B

high-resolution future displays such as WQUXGA (3840×2400)

Monitors with that high a resolution, were invented
in 2001. But were too expensive for most people to
use.

*******

The T220/T221 are examples of early high resolution displays.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

It is only a 22" monitor, but it has 200 pixels per inch.

http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?lndocid=MIGR-4XWF7Y

At the time, they used a Matrox g200mms quad output video
card to drive it. I don't know how they kept all the
video outputs sync'ed in terms of frames and the like.

If you read that Wikipedia article, there is another large
display out there. Just a little bit bigger physically. You'd
need a big desk to hold this one.

Chi Mei 56" 3840×2160 QuadHDTV

http://www.gizmag.com/go/5257/

Paul
 
http://store.apple.com/us/product/M9179LL/A
Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
2560-by-1600-pixel resolution
Click to expand...

I need to modify my computer table as the 24-inch or bigger monitors are
too high. I need to raise the CD/DVD shelf at the top of the computer
table. :)

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 9.04) Linux 2.6.30.2
^ ^ 13:14:01 up 1 day 21:00 0 users load average: 1.19 1.33 1.38
ä¸å€Ÿè²¸! ä¸è©é¨™! ä¸æ´äº¤! ä¸æ‰“交! ä¸æ‰“劫! ä¸è‡ªæ®º! è«‹è€ƒæ…®ç¶œæ´ (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
 
Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B) said:
I need to modify my computer table as the 24-inch or bigger monitors are
too high. I need to raise the CD/DVD shelf at the top of the computer
table. :)
Click to expand...

I built my own table. There is no shelving on top, so if you
want to give me your 30" monitor, I have room for it. :-)

Paul
 
I need to modify my computer table as the 24-inch or bigger monitors
I built my own table. There is no shelving on top, so if you
want to give me your 30" monitor, I have room for it. :-)
Click to expand...

No way... I am not your President. :)

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 9.04) Linux 2.6.30.3
^ ^ 19:48:01 up 3:14 0 users load average: 1.18 1.20 1.24
ä¸å€Ÿè²¸! ä¸è©é¨™! ä¸æ´äº¤! ä¸æ‰“交! ä¸æ‰“劫! ä¸è‡ªæ®º! è«‹è€ƒæ…®ç¶œæ´ (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
 
Skybuck Flying said:
Me too, I still feel this is somewhat constraining, horizontally and
vertically.

Especially vertically.

Bye,
Skybuck.
Click to expand...


The best is a circular monitor. Expensive to produde because of the shape of
the pixels located at the periphery.
 
I would hope not.

1920x1200 is kinda rectangle...

I would still like to see monitors that are more square possibility...

Something like:

2000x1800

^ More vertical space.

Bye,
Skybuck.
Click to expand...
Sure, for those with limited scope and narrow vision, and for those who wear
horse blinders.


1920X1200 is a widescreen 16:10 standard on "MANY" 24"-28" Monitors from Asus,
HP, Dell, Samsung etc........

there are 1920x1080 that are 16:9 that are primarily for those who intend to
use their pc primarily for multimedia playback.
 
Back
Top