dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2629
share rss forum feed


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

Dell's New U2913WM 29-inch Monitor

quote:
That new blood is the U2913WM, a 29-inch models equipped with a (likely IPS) panel with a maximum resolution of 2560 x 1080 pixels. Seen below, the upcoming monitor also features four USB ports and D-Sub, DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort connectors.


»www.techpowerup.com/172734/Dell-···tor.html


pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1

2 recommendations

Wow so wide. Who is wanting these?

I am suspicious that the trend towards wider and wider panels is somehow driven by manufacturing costs rather than consumers.

I am looking at the recently released U2713HM, waiting for it to go on sale eventually. I am only willing to go to 16:9 because 2560x1440 it still has more vertical space than my 1920x1200 unit. Going down to 1080 would just be silly.

These super-wide screens would be particularly awkward for RTS games like Starcraft, especially since the HUD is all along the bottom. You'd be left with a very awkward long skinny viewport.



signmeuptoo
Bless you Howie
Premium
join:2001-11-22
NanoParticle
kudos:5
reply to Octavean

And a lot of people use their monitors to do professional things, such as writing and programming, and a 3:4 aspect ratio is still better for many such workers, but sadly...


BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
reply to Octavean

I purposely have two monitors, and would still prefer to have two separate monitors instead of that widescreen monstrosity.

Some games might be ok on that however, giving you super peripheral vision provided they even will support anything over standard resolutions.



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

Well, there is more where that came from:

quote:
Philips Monitors, is going to launch a series of new Philips displays with new technologies at this year’s IFA consumer-electronics show in Berlin, Germany. Highlights include the world´s first UltraWide 21:9 format with a big 29” screen, ‘Gioco’- the world’s first Ambiglow display for immersive 3D gaming, IPS display with Smart MHL technology that connects and mirrors your Android smart phone, and an 27” crystal clear high resolution PLS display. Additionally, MMD will show a Philips’ glasses free 3D display.

»www.techpowerup.com/171612/Phili···012.html

I don’t know where the industry is going with this but it might become more prevalent then some people might be comfortable with. Right now I personally prefer 16:9 and don’t much care for 16:10 which seems too close to the antiquated 4:3 IMO.

I don’t yet know what to make of 21:9 and would like to experience it first hand but I suspect I would like it. I’ll try to reserve judgment until I actually have a chance to use it though.


pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
reply to BlitzenZeus

said by BlitzenZeus:

Some games might be ok on that however, giving you super peripheral vision provided they even will support anything over standard resolutions.

I think 1st person games could look pretty good, but since I am not that into shooters anymore many of the games I play are 3rd-person or overhead (diablo, starcraft). For the latter especially it seems awkward, especially a game like starcraft with a HUD along the bottom which will narrow the view even more.


koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23
reply to Octavean

What an awful, AWFUL resolution for standard use.

The only use I can see these having is if physically rotated (res becomes 1080x2560) and then placed side-by-side with another monitor of the same type (thus resolution becomes 2160x2560).

Otherwise I just don't see the point. I mean seriously, just look at the thing.

This 1080 vertical resolution thing needs to end already. pnjunction See Profile's suspicion that this ordeal is driven by manufacturers is the same opinion I've had for many years now. I'm still happily rocking my Dell 2407FPW, have tried other monitors (including those from Dell), and I was just horribly displeased in general. It'll be a cold day in hell before I give up those 120 pixels -- they make a huge, huge difference.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS
reply to Octavean

The only thing I find 16:9 displays good for are for movies. Everything else should be 16:10 or 4:3. This is especially true for photography where the images captured from SLRs are litereally 5:4 for the professional cameras like the Nikon D3 or 3:2 for prosumer models like the D90. Interestingly, this may be the reason why the original iBook G4 and PowerBook G4 were also 3:2 aspect ratio.

16:9 was originally developed solely for televisions because of the fact that it's 1.78:1 ratio closely matches a cameras 1.85:1 ratio, and elimiates the letterboxing from earlier days. The problem with that lies in the fact that manufactures found that it was cheaper to manufacture ALL the panels in that size, and have switched over to that. 16:10 was to "ease" the transition I believe, and to allow manufactures to subtely change over to 16:9, because if you remember about the time that 16:10 came out, we started eliminating CRT TV's, which are also 4:3 aspect ratio.



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

said by Octavean:

29-inch models equipped with a (likely IPS) panel with a maximum resolution of 2560 x 1080 pixels.

And I thought 16:9 monitors sucked....

While they are good for watching movies, for most everything, I much prefer 4:3 or 16:10.

I guess I should've gotten a couple more 2709Ws while they were still available.
--
Wacky Races 2012!


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL

said by aurgathor:

And I thought 16:9 monitors sucked....

Strangely enough this is my preferred resolution over all else, but, I can't imagine anything wider, in a single monitor.

I have two 16:9 monitors and they work nicely.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


signmeuptoo
Bless you Howie
Premium
join:2001-11-22
NanoParticle
kudos:5
reply to Octavean

Forgive me, but I have to say this again. A LOT of professionals NEED 4:3 or 16:10 or even more height and less width. This is yet another move by companies (like Micrsoft's Metro) to blow off the working people and just appeal to consumers. Very bad thing, this bodes very badly for programmers', writers, scientists, and many other computer based workers. Quite frankly, this sort of pisses me off. And I thought Win 8's Metro was the worst thing to happen this year...
--
Join Teams Helix and Discovery. Rest in Peace, Leonard David Smith, my best friend, you are missed badly! Rest in peace, Pop, glad our last years were good. Please pray for Colin, he has ependymoma, a brain cancer, donate to a children's Hospital.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS
reply to Octavean

It's on the heels of Toshiba's ultra-wide notebook, which has a ridiculous 21:9 aspect ratio (14.4 in wide, but the same height as the 11in Macbook Air).

»www.cnet.com/laptops/toshiba-sat···824.html

So it appears that there is a general shift in this direction, and companies are testing the waters per say.



koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23

That laptop is making me LOL. The only advantage I can see isn't that the screen is stupidly wide -- it's that since the screen is wide, they can fit a more natural/standardised keyboard on it.

Then again, I hate laptops in general. Guaranteed to overheat, break down, impossible to repair aside from easily-accessible parts (e.g. often mandates sending it back to the vendor), and tend to break shortly after warranty period (which is usually 1 year) causing the vendor to tell you "well we don't support that model any more, pay us more money and you can have the newer model" rinse lather repeat. Absolute 100% cash cow.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.


Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
kudos:3
reply to sk1939

Actually all standard SLRs, Digital or Analog (Film), cameras are based on the 3:2 ratio 36mm x 24mm. Doesn't matter if it is what they cal Full Frame or not. The mm dimensions of all of them are at the 3:2 or very close to that.

As to this monitor. No thanks, Way to Wide and not tall enough for anything do on a computer.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ********



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

The industry doesn’t always move in the direction that we would like.

Having said that, 16:10, 16:9, 4:3 are still on offer. Just because something new is available doesn’t mean the older standards are completely gone,....at least for now.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10

It's the "for now" that concerns me.

16:10 screens are getting harder to find, as are good IPS displays that aren't LED backlit.