Why 1080p+ monitors are still so rare? Where are the "retina" monitors?

[Throckmorton]

Apple is small fry in the screen business. I am not sure the retina panel is something I would call a true mass produced panel like the 1080 panels for TVs.

Where are all these 24" 1080p TVs though? TVs that size are 1366x768. The only overlap is maybe 27"

 

[imagoon]

Where are all these 24" 1080p TVs though? TVs that size are 1366x768. The only overlap is maybe 27"

You may want to take a look at google considering it took me less than 15 seconds to find a Toshiba 24L4200U 24-Inch 1080p 60Hz LED TV and on that same Amazon page they showed several 24 and 22" 1080p units. There are smaller TVs out there but they are less common or are in automotive.

 

[amitkher]

You may want to take a look at google considering it took me less than 15 seconds to find a Toshiba 24L4200U 24-Inch 1080p 60Hz LED TV and on that same Amazon page they showed several 24 and 22" 1080p units. There are smaller TVs out there but they are less common or are in automotive.

If you have to use Google to find them, obviously they are not popular enough to explain the huge overabundance of 24" and 22" 1080p monitors. Same panels being used for TVs and monitors is NOT the explanation we are looking for here.

"Where are" could also mean, and I would rather ask, "where are the people buying millions of 1920x1080 22" and 24" TVs", that such panels then overflow to computer monitors, even though this is not an great resolution for computers?

 

[imagoon]

If you have to use Google to find them, obviously they are not popular enough to explain the huge overabundance of 24" and 22" 1080p monitors. Same panels being used for TVs and monitors is NOT the explanation we are looking for here.

"Where are" could also mean, and I would rather ask, "where are the people buying millions of 1920x1080 22" and 24" TVs", that such panels then overflow to computer monitors, even though this is not an great resolution for computers?

Because no one uses Amazon? Using google to search Amazon isn't that hard nor advanced.

 

[amitkher]

Because no one uses Amazon? Using google to search Amazon isn't that hard nor advanced.

Reading the full post before replying is hard or advanced?

" "Where are" could also mean, and I would rather ask, "where are the people buying millions of 1920x1080 22" and 24" TVs", that such panels then overflow to computer monitors, even though this is not an great resolution for computers?"

See the sales figures of such TVs.

 

[imagoon]

Reading the full post before replying is hard or advanced?

" "Where are" could also mean, and I would rather ask, "where are the people buying millions of 1920x1080 22" and 24" TVs", that such panels then overflow to computer monitors, even though this is not an great resolution for computers?"

See the sales figures of such TVs.

See which sales figures? You haven't provided any links or support. Obviously it sells or they wouldn't be made by Samsung, Toshiba, Sony, Panasonic or sold by Amazon.

You do also realize that the only difference between a 16" and 24" 1080p panel is a scaled mask used for etching correct? LCD masks are designed some what generically and then scaled based on size. Each size isn't engineered separately, the 19" panel on a laptop is using the same mask and design as a 27" panel and in some cases even the 40" and 50" panels.

Some of the companies such as Sharp are starting to lose money on the larger panels as mentioned here:
http://www.sharp-world.com/corporate/ir/library/annual/pdf/6-13.pdf

These smaller TV's are also much more common overseas than here. Japanese, Korean and Chinese homes don't normally dominate the house with a 65" inch tv like Americans do.

 

[nibunnoichi]

Then there is this problem of cables - nexus has to send video data from its SOC to the screen over a distance of millimeters. At 60 Hz refresh rate, it is gigabytes per second. The problem of sending data at such high rates quickly becomes tough as distances increase. So the problem is 100 times harder to solve for computer monitor cables which need to be about a metre long.
This problem would get solved if windows and legacy software were not playing spoilsport.

Thanks, that was enlightening. I hadn't considered the length of data transmission.

I guess I'll just need to be satisfied with a 1440p screen until they get such issues solved and bring 4k resolutions at a reasonable cost (I'd say within 4 yrs).

 

[piasabird]

Actually I have seen a lot of articles on the new 4k standard for video. The question is whether, as a standard, will 4K be adopted. When you talk about a 1080p monitor or TV, the size of the screen kind of limits the ability to use higher resolutions. A smaller or moderately sized monitor like 18-22 inch monitor can probably easily do higher resolutions. But a larger tv like 40-60 inch or so would have a harder time to operate at higher resolutions than 1080p. Monitors from about 27-30 inches or larger have to be driven by more expensive video cards to get higher resolutions at a fast enough of a frame rate to play a video game at about 30 frames or higher. Often to get better frame rates you have to lower your video quality depending on the resolution and screen size.

 

[piasabird]

When you get older (I am 57) you are lucky if you can even see the TV from the couch. My mother went ahead and got a 60" Samsung Smart TV. The large screen really helps. Don't know if I would try gaming on a screen that large. However, if you have a large room it does make it easier to see the TV.

 

[ZippZ]

Viewing distance is a big factor in perceived resolution. A Nexus 7 is about 300 DPI, and usually held a little more than a foot away from your eyes. A 27" desktop monitor 2560x1440 monitor is about 100 DPI viewed about 3 feet away. The resolution of both displays should appear similar. A roadside billboard printed at 10 DPI would also appear to be a similar resolution. If you are viewing a 27" monitor or roadside billboard at 1 foot, you are way too close.

There is no real need for a higher resolution display, just mere marketing. 4k displays also aren't significantly better compared to current 1080 displays at comparable size and viewing distance. Again, you aren't going to buy a 4k 80 inch screen and sit 3 feet in front of it unless you enjoy sitting in the first row at the movie theater.

 

[fixbsod]

It's not a matter of if but a matter of when.

Actually I have seen a lot of articles on the new 4k standard for video. The question is whether, as a standard, will 4K be adopted. When you talk about a 1080p monitor or TV, the size of the screen kind of limits the ability to use higher resolutions. .....

 

[Wall Street]

There are a few reasons for 1080p vs. higher res:

1. Money. For 1440p or 1600p you need to double the cost of your display subsystem at the cost of hundreds of dollars. Perfectly fine 1080p monitors are available for less than $150. They run perfectly playable with a GTX 760 or similar. Even the Korean monitors are $300 and those high res monitors really need a GTX 780 to perform like a 1080p monitor does with a GTX 760. I know they look nice, but the price difference between the two setups can buy you a boatload or games (or nights out on the town, etc.)

2. I like that I can mirror my 1080p monitor with my TV on my second output. Having a 1080p monitor makes it easy for my PC to double as an HTPC with just a couple of monoprice cables for audio and video.

 

[T9D]

Viewing distance is a big factor in perceived resolution. A Nexus 7 is about 300 DPI, and usually held a little more than a foot away from your eyes. A 27" desktop monitor 2560x1440 monitor is about 100 DPI viewed about 3 feet away. The resolution of both displays should appear similar. A roadside billboard printed at 10 DPI would also appear to be a similar resolution. If you are viewing a 27" monitor or roadside billboard at 1 foot, you are way too close.

There is no real need for a higher resolution display, just mere marketing. 4k displays also aren't significantly better compared to current 1080 displays at comparable size and viewing distance. Again, you aren't going to buy a 4k 80 inch screen and sit 3 feet in front of it unless you enjoy sitting in the first row at the movie theater.

I have my 42" though that is 3 feet away. It's freaking awesome that size playing games. It looks great but would definitely benefit from 4k. 4k would be perfect.

And yes there is a market outside of that. I've seen 4k in person from a couch distance and it's amazing. A 24" monitor is great at 1080p. But at 27" I'm not as happy and can tell a difference. Needs a higher res. But I'd still love a higher res even at smaller screens if I could get it.

People can tell a difference and people do want 4k. Just not you then that's fine. I'll bet a $100 you'll choose a 4k TV and monitor some day when you have the choice though.

 

[dstevod]

A 24" monitor is great at 1080p. But at 27" I'm not as happy and can tell a difference. Needs a higher res.

There are 27" panels (IPS) at 2560 x 1440. They're in the Mac, Dell Ultrasharps, and some other cheaper brands too.

S

 

[Luph]

Viewing distance is a big factor in perceived resolution. A Nexus 7 is about 300 DPI, and usually held a little more than a foot away from your eyes. A 27" desktop monitor 2560x1440 monitor is about 100 DPI viewed about 3 feet away. The resolution of both displays should appear similar. A roadside billboard printed at 10 DPI would also appear to be a similar resolution. If you are viewing a 27" monitor or roadside billboard at 1 foot, you are way too close.

There is no real need for a higher resolution display, just mere marketing. 4k displays also aren't significantly better compared to current 1080 displays at comparable size and viewing distance. Again, you aren't going to buy a 4k 80 inch screen and sit 3 feet in front of it unless you enjoy sitting in the first row at the movie theater.

I'm not sure that 3 feet is the normal distance at which someone would want to view a 27" monitor, but I should point out that your belief that there is "no need" for higher resolution displays and that it is simply marketing is from a vantage point of complete ignorance.

For a long time I used a 21" 1920x1080 display and I, too, felt it was more than adequate. Then I bought a rMBP before going to school, and now every time I go to the computer lab I instantly notice how much grainier and less sharp the screens are in comparison to my rMBP. And these are not cheap screens. The labs at my school are all outfitted with 27" 2560x1440 Apple Cinema Displays.

Go use a high density display as your primary machine--not just your phone--and I guarantee you will have the same experience. We can theorize up and down about perfect viewing distances and display sizes, but the fact remains that in practice a higher pixel density makes a significant difference in screen quality.