Im so sick and tired of 1080p.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
You probably remember my rant about the fact that companies that manufacture computer moniters started making them in a 16x9 aspect ratio vs. the previous 16x10. It was less expensive to produce and they could market it as some sort of "improvement". Less vertical workspace for websites and spreadsheets, lessened ability to view images like "longcat" and all in full HD! :rolleyes:

Longcat.jpg


So I get an email from Best Buy pitching a 70 inch LCD television. I go and check it out and the resolution is still the same, 1080p. My first thought was "when they heck are they going to finally up the ante and take the resolution up a notch"? I dunno, maybe something like 1480p or something like that. As you can see its quite doable:

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

But these manufacturers dont care. They are just interested in making a quick buck and thats it. To hell with progress in the mainstream consumer market. :mad:
 
Last edited:
Wyndru

Wyndru

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2009
7,318
4
76
Everyone knows the term 1080p, if they increase it people won't know what to say when they are trying to sound smart at bestbuy. ;)
 
Modelworks

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
I am more sick of the the letters HD . They print it in bold on everything a person can view, even damn sunglasses.
 
T

tommo123

Platinum Member
Sep 25, 2005
2,617
48
91
a 60" screen with 2560x1600 res would be nice! love that res on my 30" monitor
 
R

RobertPters77

Senior member
Feb 11, 2011
480
0
0
I prefer 16:9 over 16:10.

You gain alot more peripheral vision for the slight loss of horizontal space.
 
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
rcpratt said:
There's no source material for TVs higher than 1080p anyways.
Click to expand...

"If you build it, they will come." Maybe if someone ventures to make source material, the need would be filled. In the meantime, resolution is improved.

Wyndru said:
Everyone knows the term 1080p, if they increase it people won't know what to say when they are trying to sound smart at bestbuy. ;)
Click to expand...

So true. They will have to rewrite the sales scripts. You know they use scripts right? ;)

Modelworks said:
I am more sick of the the letters HD . They print it in bold on everything a person can view, even damn sunglasses.
Click to expand...

That is supposed to impress you. You are a dumb consumer who doesnt know HD is mainstream now. If you see the letters bolded you will be mesmerized into purchasing an endless amount of TVs and moniters.
 
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,742
31,109
146
rcpratt said:
There's no source material for TVs higher than 1080p anyways.
Click to expand...

all 35mm film is miles better than 1080p; this is where 1080p scans originate.

BUT--yes, this would all have to be rescanned. The source material is certainly there--it has been there since the use of 35mm.


OP--we do have this stuff, it is being made, as far as I know, but preposterously expensive to be considered a consumer product at this time of development.

say, $15,000k msrp for a 40" display?
 
rcpratt

rcpratt

Lifer
Jul 2, 2009
10,433
110
116
zinfamous said:
all 35mm film is miles better than 1080p; this is where 1080p scans originate.

BUT--yes, this would all have to be rescanned. The source material is certainly there--it has been there since the use of 35mm.


OP--we do have this stuff, it is being made, as far as I know, but preposterously expensive to be considered a consumer product at this time of development.

say, $15,000k msrp for a 40" display?
Click to expand...
Well yes, but you knew what I meant. And Bluray is just barely starting to get any traction now.
 
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
RobertPters77 said:
I prefer 16:9 over 16:10.

You gain alot more peripheral vision for the slight loss of horizontal space.
Click to expand...

Slight loss of [vertical] space?
emot_laughing_smiley.gif


To each his own I suppose. Increasing the width doesnt help me at all. Gaming and watching movies on my moniter is not its primary purpose, productivity is. And productivity is increased with less scrolling through more vertical screen "real estate".
 
Last edited:
Atomic Playboy

Atomic Playboy

Lifer
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
A 70" TV running at 1920x1200 as opposed to 1920x1080 would be possible but impractical. Typical source material for television monitors will run at 720P/1080I (for most television broadcasts and cable channels) or 1080P (for video game systems or blu-ray). There is no 1920x1200 source outside of a computer. But most consumers will never hook a computer up to their TV set. In the meantime, you're left with either 180 rows of empty pixels on the top/bottom of the image, which consumers will complain about, or you stretch the image vertically, which savvy consumers will complain about. Either way, you're doing the consumer a disservice by providing "additional" resolution that the vast majority are never going to use.

Similarly, having a 1480P set makes no sense. The only thing which can currently run at that resolution is a computer, and, again, most consumers aren't hooking up their PCs to their TV sets. Even if they did, the only thing it's really going to affect is gaming, since no one is getting a 70" screen for web browsing or office work. The only graphics cards that can output that resolution at a reasonable speed in modern games also come with multiple display ports for multi-monitor support, which is increasingly becoming preferred to "more pixels on a single screen." So again, there's no market for a 1480P television set; it's not practical to produce, and would invariably cost significantly more for no substantial benefit.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not seeing the outrage here. It seems like a remarkably petty thing to complain about.

And that image is only 640 pixels high... I don't know what monitor you have that won't let you view the whole thing, but 1080P MORE than covers it.
 
BurnItDwn

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,346
1,858
126
I think they should focus on making 4K displays affordable, ideally focusing a lot of effort on better black levels as well....

Also, 1080P source progressivly upscaled to 4K would look badass....


Look at DVDs... when scaled up with a good player to a good 1080p display, they look magnificent....
 
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
zinfamous said:
all 35mm film is miles better than 1080p; this is where 1080p scans originate.

BUT--yes, this would all have to be rescanned. The source material is certainly there--it has been there since the use of 35mm.


OP--we do have this stuff, it is being made, as far as I know, but preposterously expensive to be considered a consumer product at this time of development.

say, $15,000k msrp for a 40" display?
Click to expand...

I blame greedy manufacturers for this travesty. Mass production and feeding peoples need to "upgrade" would obviously solve that problem and $15k would be more like $1.5k.
 
Last edited:
S

Schfifty Five

Lifer
Oct 20, 2005
10,978
44
91
Why didn't you just look up the TV online to see its specs before you drove to BB? Also, why would an email from BB even make you feel compelled enough to spend the time to go down there?
 
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
Atomic Playboy said:
A 70" TV running at 1920x1200 as opposed to 1920x1080 would be possible but impractical. Typical source material for television monitors will run at 720P/1080I (for most television broadcasts and cable channels) or 1080P (for video game systems or blu-ray). There is no 1920x1200 source outside of a computer. But most consumers will never hook a computer up to their TV set. In the meantime, you're left with either 180 rows of empty pixels on the top/bottom of the image, which consumers will complain about, or you stretch the image vertically, which savvy consumers will complain about. Either way, you're doing the consumer a disservice by providing "additional" resolution that the vast majority are never going to use.

Similarly, having a 1480P set makes no sense. The only thing which can currently run at that resolution is a computer, and, again, most consumers aren't hooking up their PCs to their TV sets. Even if they did, the only thing it's really going to affect is gaming, since no one is getting a 70" screen for web browsing or office work. The only graphics cards that can output that resolution at a reasonable speed in modern games also come with multiple display ports for multi-monitor support, which is increasingly becoming preferred to "more pixels on a single screen." So again, there's no market for a 1480P television set; it's not practical to produce, and would invariably cost significantly more for no substantial benefit.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not seeing the outrage here. It seems like a remarkably petty thing to complain about.

And that image is only 640 pixels high... I don't know what monitor you have that won't let you view the whole thing, but 1080P MORE than covers it.
Click to expand...

Your post is thoughtful, considerate and well written, but I think you are doing too much assuming here. I think a lot of people would be DELIGHTED to have a 16x9 or even 16x10 40 inch TV/Moniter. I know I would. And it would also be cheap if mass produced. Purists be damned. They can stick to their cruddy 70 inch TVs that only render 1080p. :D
 
Dirigible

Dirigible

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2006
5,961
32
91
This is a terrible rant. Just terrible. Talking about pixels? WTF, FDK? Look how far you've fallen. I mean just a year ago you were making awesome threads.

Threads about changing your name to "Dandelion" for money: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2061196&highlight=

Threads about your crappy spelling and also smilies: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2071010&highlight=

Storage locker living: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2072797&highlight=

And not to forget perhaps the most important issue of our day, crackers: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2092890&highlight=



I weep for your fall from grace and pray for your return to glory.
 
FelixDeCat

FelixDeCat

Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
30,867
2,640
126
OrionAntares

OrionAntares

Golden Member
Aug 2, 2002
1,887
0
0
FelixDeKat said:
Slight loss of [vertical] space?
emot_laughing_smiley.gif


To each his own I suppose. Increasing the width doesnt help me at all. Gaming and watching movies on my moniter is not its primary purpose, productivity is. And productivity is increased with less scrolling through more vertical screen "real estate".
Click to expand...

Well if you want more vertical space you could pick out a 16:9 monitor that can rotate length wise...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom