Apple
Apple
Out of context: Reply #1119
- Started
- Last post
- 3,613 Responses
- instrmntl1
I want a Thunderbolt Retina display. WTF!
- that would make sense... but doubt they would announce that as some sort of big dealmonospaced
- ha. what dpi and size is "retina" and why must the connector be thunderbolt?deathboy
- a very flat non glare 1440p 144hz freesync display along with a new MacBook Pro would be ace. The ones on the market are 'gaming' branded and look like crap.mekk
- http://www.neweggbus…deathboy
- I think he means 5K like thi iMacs.monospaced
- I just hope they finally have one with 100%adobeRGB coverage.pango
- @deathboy exactly this panel in a good slim case.mekk
- it's not even 4kutopian
- I've been holding out on getting a new monitor. They need to kick it into high gear.instrmntl
- lol, that ASUS is pretty low resmonospaced
- @deathboy, that ASUS is standard res, but the 27" iMac is 4x the resolution. That requires thunderbolt bandwidth or bettermonospaced
- i was making fun of the marketing terms used by apple and how a lot of consumers dont even understand them. dp or hdmi works for 4kdeathboy
- and 4k is overkill. scaling OS are meh. only real use is to edit 4k video on large display. but to each their own. some people bought 3D tvsdeathboy
- i have a 4k z27 that i run at 1440p and looks perfectly fine for how far i sit from it. same with some 24s at 1080.deathboy
- Trust me, if you have a 5K 27" next to that z27, you'll see a HUGE difference. Plus, scaling is ace. Not sure where you've been. Sorry.monospaced
- The problem is how much stuff is built for 5K viewing? This is where scaling is meh. 4K tvs look great with 4k content. But i wouldnt buy one either.deathboy
- The OS is made for that size. Retina is pretty much standard on all laptops these days so why not on desktop? Even the web has caught up mostly.monospaced
- It looks nice but it isn't for me. I chose a regular 1920x1080 monitor on my laptop for battery life and performance too. Its what i find efficientdeathboy
- i just much prefer stating display sizes than saying retina as an arbitrary marketing measurement.deathboy
- I think the intial point was that a monitor already exists if you only define what is "retina" size and to what end do u need "thunderbolt"deathboy
- and don't be a consumer whore and fall for simple marketing techniquesdeathboy
- like realizing milk with generic label is the same as the more expensive milk next to it with model dairy. same cows same farmsdeathboy
- that monitor you posted is 4X lower resolution than the one Apple uses. 4x the pixels requires more bandwidth. Thunderbolt is a name for a display portmonospaced
- retina isn't arbitrary marketing, it's a term to explain what it's like to view one. Also, even lenovos are going that route, and they all have thunderboltmonospaced
- it's not even an apple thing, so it's hilarious that you would think it was just their marketingmonospaced
- the one i posted was to mekks specs. he defined size. i think he wanted in a laptop or a look which is pure aesetics. retina is arbitary marketing speakdeathboy
- it doesn't stand for a specific dpi, res, or size. Thunderbolt is apples name for there modded display port. It was there universal connector that had xtra banddeathboy
- width. The only problem is the bandwidth was unnecessary at that time and now there is new standards like mini usb3.1 hdmi 1.4 dp 2.3.deathboy
- Right. That basic monitor would not require much bandwidth, certainly not like a 4-5k display would.monospaced