Why aren't monitors getting bigger?

[kmmatney]

bring back 4:3

I have a 20" 4:3 LCD, and its awesome. This one:

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics...4/product.html

I've had about 6 years or so, and the PCB just went out. I ordered a new PCB board to fix it, should get it in the next few days. I hope it works - I really don't want to get of this LCD.

The 4:3 ratio is great for productivity - It's a nice step above the 5:4 ratio 1280 x 1024 monitors.

 

[cmay119]

A 21:9 monitor wouldn't lose vertical pixels. You'd still have 1080 vertical, you'd just have 2560 for the horizontal. What would make you think we'd lose vertical real estate? Maybe on a smaller monitor. Make the monitor bigger if that's an issue. After all this would be a niche market so I don't see the resistance. HTPC would benefit greatly for those not wanting the sheer size of a tv but the ability to watch BDs in their native format (for 2.35:1 movies that is). If you're after productivity either have a seperate monitor or use the wider monitor on a secondary htpc/gaming pc.

Hence why I said you'd have to make the monitor larger to accommodate 1080p+. It's all about perception... Sure you can make the monitor display 1080, but the ratio makes the monitor sooooo wide, that the relative height makes it appear very 'short' or narrow.

It works for TV's because of their relative sized in comparison to monitors. But, not so much on anything lower than 30". Just my $.02

 

[velis]

As I said before, it's all about options.
Currently there's 1080p for everyone that's happy with that and nothing for the rest of us.
What this type of threads suggests is some more diversity, that's all.

 

[pw38]

Hence why I said you'd have to make the monitor larger to accommodate 1080p+. It's all about perception... Sure you can make the monitor display 1080, but the ratio makes the monitor sooooo wide, that the relative height makes it appear very 'short' or narrow.

It works for TV's because of their relative sized in comparison to monitors. But, not so much on anything lower than 30". Just my $.02

I can see where you're coming from. I guess that's why I like to use a tv as a monitor. I don't really care if it's above 1080p and if I could get a 21:9 tv to use for htpc and gaming I'd be all over it. One can dream, right?

 

[poohbear]

27" is the sweet spot now, but 30" is def doable!! 27" is only ~$350, love my Samsung P2770 & cant ever go back to 24" let alone 21"/22".

i remember in the CRT days a massive 19" (which took up the entire desk cause of its huge footprint) was about $400-$500!!! that was 1995-96, so in 15 years we went from a massive 19" being $400 to a real gorgeous 27" LCD being $300. That's progress i think (went up 8" using LESS space, costs less, and drains less energy!). Imagine in 15 years we'll have paper thin OLED screens hanging on the wall & they'll be 30"-34" for $350!^^

 

[yours truly]

What happened to the panoramic monitors that Alienware, Nec and Apple were showing a few years back?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsBln1V8MgI&feature=player_embedded#at=29

Maybe a bit weird to use at first, but I could wouldn't mind having something similar in the near future.

 

[cloudzero]

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/...www.eizo.co.jp/products/id/fdh3601/index.html

Pretty expensive!

 

[alcoholbob]

Because desks aren't getting cheaper and real estate doesn't grow on trees (volcanoes only show up once a while).

I wasn't aware volcanoes were involved in the creation process of monitors.


And really, 10 years til we see larger resolutions/monitor sizes? Do most people live in closets or something?

Volcanoes can create real estate. Real fact. Depends on the school cirriculum, but Geology was taught in 8th grade for me.

Anyway, by the time you get to high school you might learn a bit about tectonics and volcanic activity and how it can create new land formations.

 

[Bacstar]

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/...www.eizo.co.jp/products/id/fdh3601/index.html

Pretty expensive!

Hmmm...down payment on house or this? decisions decisions...

[H] reported it at $36,000.

 

[Dark Shroud]

http://www.necdisplay.com/category/large-screen-displays

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Probably been posted already, but here's the monitor you were asking for.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/eizo-industrial-monitor-does-4k-resolution-at-36-inches-start-s/

 

[cmay119]

I can see where you're coming from. I guess that's why I like to use a tv as a monitor. I don't really care if it's above 1080p and if I could get a 21:9 tv to use for htpc and gaming I'd be all over it. One can dream, right?

Absolutely, and I completely agree on an HTPC build/home-theater dedicated screen, sign me up! I just would not care to use something like that for just web-browsing or otherwise general computing.

The anamorphic TV's that I have seen, look pretty awesome. Bring prices down and I could definitely see wider (pun, hehe) adoption on that side.

 

[cmay119]

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/...www.eizo.co.jp/products/id/fdh3601/index.html

Pretty expensive!

Really odd ratio that will be on that particular monitor, it's almost 2:1. Seems like a strange choice, as I'm not aware of any source media that currently accommodates such a ratio. :\

 

[piasabird]

Something like a 40" LCD TV might be nice if it offered a Split screen monitor option. Could probably do that with software or some kind of driver option. Depends on perspective. The problem is often a Monitor usually has better color and less white-out. Some LCD TV's tend to wash out and have less color definition. You cant tell without putting a TV right next to a monitor.

 

[Idontcare]

I remember reading an Anandtech article that made some vague statement along the lines of "if the monitor industry was anything like the CPU industry, there'd be 40" monitors with ~4,000x2560 pixel resolution" which begs the question, why isn't it?

The simple answer here is that they cannot harness the same mechanism in plat with Moore's Law that makes CPU's cheaper or easier to make more complex.

LCD's do not shrink in a way that simultaneously makes them less expensive to produce.

This is a problem for all optical elements.

 

[Voo]

What happened to the panoramic monitors that Alienware, Nec and Apple were showing a few years back?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsBln1V8MgI&feature=player_embedded#at=29

Maybe a bit weird to use at first, but I could wouldn't mind having something similar in the near future.

"weird to use at first"? Apart from maybe gaming (more immersion?) I hardly see any advantages for that shape.

And 40" TV with 1080p resolution on average desktop distance? Ugh, only if I'm allowed to gouge my eyes out beforehand. You can easily have too much screen space and that's especially true if that goes hand in hand with a low resolution. Maybe nice for gaming from some distance, but getting serious work done? Hardly optimal (and that's ignoring the phenomenon that 2 smaller monitors are much more useful than 1 larger one).

 

[Avalon]

Any bigger a monitor and you're going to be sitting a ways back. Not the most comfortable way to play games. The best that's going to happen is that 30" monitors will increase in resolution.

 

[ultimatebob]

Try using a 40" LCD TV as a monitor, and you'll quickly figure out why they do not make monitors that big.

 

[ShadowVVL]

lol 40" is madness for a monitor. for me 20-21 inch is as big as i go anything bigger and i have to move back about a foot.

 

[deimos3428]

Any bigger a monitor and you're going to be sitting a ways back. Not the most comfortable way to play games. The best that's going to happen is that 30" monitors will increase in resolution.

Depends on the game. It's a fantastic way to play racing games. I routinely sit on my couch about six feet from a three-panel display (roughly 51" diagonal, 4992x1080) Much better than sitting too close to the display at a desk, though I do wish I had a wireless controller/headset as the cables can get tangled.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

What we need is a come back of 16:10. That aspect ratio is fantastic for everything. I have been using 3x 1080p monitors, and boxed up my 24" 16:10 ips display. 1080p feels so short/narrow. The 16:10 display is vastly better for anything vertical.

 

[crisium]

Agreed. A 24" 1920x1200 monitor is the perfect size display imo.

 

[toolbag]

I remember reading an Anandtech article that made some vague statement along the lines of "if the monitor industry was anything like the CPU industry, there'd be 40" monitors with ~4,000x2560 pixel resolution" which begs the question, why isn't it?

same reason car tires aren't getting bigger and bigger. not needed.

 

[toyota]

same reason car tires aren't getting bigger and bigger. not needed.

rims and tires are getting bigger.

 

[SlitheryDee]

I honestly wouldn't want to have to turn my head to see the edges of the screen. You're already in that territory with a 30".