• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Im so sick and tired of 1080p.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
bunnyfubbles said:
if you can hear a difference between your receiver playing CDs and when it plays FM Radio, then no you do not need an entirely new sound system to benefit from HD Radio
Click to expand...

Mostly I was wondering about it for car audio. I don't listen to music much on my home system, when I do its usually the Sirius music from my Dish Network receiver. I run a NAD receiver and Paradigm speakers. Once and a while I play a CD on it but not often.
 
FelixDeKat said:
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! 🙄

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. 😡
Click to expand...

Would you be as pissed off if it was (4:3) 1600x1200 -> (16:10) 1920x1200 -> (16:9) 2133x1200?

To me it sounds like you're just butt hurt over missing vertical pixels and not about the aspect ratio.

In either case of media or work, I can easily argue wider being better, wider even than 16:9

In work flows it's far more natural to have things side by side, particularly when using something like Window's 7 snap feature.

In games wider provides a far more natural FOV allowing for greater immersion and even tactical advantage of being able to exploit peripheral vision without needing to take your focus off-target.

In media, again, more natural to have a wider view and thus more immersive.
 
WaTaGuMp said:
Mostly I was wondering about it for car audio. I don't listen to music much on my home system, when I do its usually the Sirius music from my Dish Network receiver. I run a NAD receiver and Paradigm speakers. Once and a while I play a CD on it but not often.
Click to expand...

Well what I have said before holds true for car audio or any audio. HD radio would just need a new receiver capable of an HD radio signal. If you can hear the difference between your car stereo's CD player and FM radio then yes, you will hear a difference between HD radio and analog.
 
Given a choice between an increase of resolution beyond 1080P and a substantially greater dynamic range I'd choose the latter. Same thing with cameras. I don't want 50 megapixels. Give me 12 mp and 16 stops along with a way to display it, and you can keep pentapixels to yourself 🙂
 
What irks me about the whole "HD" crap is how hard it is to get a laptop with a decent screen anymore. The vast majority of them are "HD" - 1366x768. Utter crap, c'mon my old IBM T41 or heck even my crappy old gateway had a better resolution than that.

It is one of the few reasons I haven't upgraded from my IBM T60, at least it has a screen resolution that's worth something.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Given a choice between an increase of resolution beyond 1080P and a substantially greater dynamic range I'd choose the latter. Same thing with cameras. I don't want 50 megapixels. Give me 12 mp and 16 stops along with a way to display it, and you can keep pentapixels to yourself 🙂
Click to expand...

Yay for high bitrates!
 
Broheim said:
optical media is dying, streaming is the future (as long as ISPs get off their asses and actually upgrade their shitty old network instead of just putting caps on it, cheap bastards).

also, bluray shot itself in the head when they got in bed with Hollywood and their DRM bullshit, it's easier to (on your computer) watch a pirated bluray movie than one you've bought and paid for.
I hope the Blu-ray Disc Association's member's respective bluray divisions go belly up and everybody who had a hand in that clusterfuck gets explosive Diarrhea and dies from the same kind of shit they bestowed upon the world.

on topic: 1080p is good for gaming but bad for productivity, as long as they pass the savings on to the customers I'm not all that bothered.
Click to expand...

you know, people bitch and moan about being easier to watch pirated media. I've rented blu-ray from red-box (don't belive in owning movies) and never had any trouble. pop into PS3. DONE.
 
TanisHalfElven said:
you know, people bitch and moan about being easier to watch pirated media. I've rented blu-ray from red-box (don't belive in owning movies) and never had any trouble. pop into PS3. DONE.
Click to expand...

Historically DRM gets slammed for anti-privacy tactics...but it's also just basic control of content. Some studios are worse than others about it, but it's getting increasingly common for rentals to have half a dozen or so previews at the beginning that are unskippable. You can't go to the top menu. You can't chapter skip. All you can do is fast forward. It's annoying.
 
I've got a 50 inch TV, I don't want its proportions to be any taller. Having it a bit wider than it is tall gives it a comfortable field of view. I might be annoyed with 16:9 on a small screen or if my couch was farther way but currently it's just about perfect.
 
Why do people keep saying its so much worse for productivity? If you need more pixels, buy another monitor, or a mouse with a scroll wheel. Or get a stand that lets you tilt the monitor so that then you gain a whole lot of vertical space. The loss of that little amount of pixels should not make a drastic impact on your productivity.
 
I wouldn't mind if there were displays wider than 16:9, given that it still has a vertical resolution of at least 1080 pixels. I'd take 3000x1080 over 2560x1600—it's really nice to have things side by side.
 
there are. some (very few) 4k vids out there. as a "source", there's PC input as well. meaning whatever you watch on there can be upscaled. then games etc etc etc.

personally, i'm not bothered about higher res movies yet. i'd rather a higher framerate. 24fps is far too low.
 
blurry eyed dopers and joe six pac and all the rest of home viewers simply don't require res.that high. For most viewers 720p on a 55" plasma is plenty.
 
Stop buying cheap. NEC makes IPS's in
5:4 17 & 19"
4:3 19", 20 and 21"
16:10 in 20", 23", 24", 27" and 30"

Has everything just about.

I usually only watch classic movies so I'm used to black bars, vertical ones.😛
 
Last edited:
AyashiKaibutsu said:
Big 16:9 + small 4:3 or 5:4 secondary monitor = best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

No one 30" center and two 4:3 20's in portrait is best. Every bezel lines up perfect and you got massive real estate for text/web/doc content on both sides.

DSC_0111.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top