Imagine if a >300dpi LCD/LED monitor came onto the market, at a reasonable size and price, and you needed a new monitor.

Would you be willing to pay extra for this high DPI monitor over a "current gen" monitor?


Advantages of high DPI:
- higher resolution
- more detail in smaller space
- won't need to use font smoothing

Disadvantages:
- many current applications do not scale well to high DPI displays (ie, minuscule text on screen) unless you run the screen at sub-native resolutions
(let's make an assumption that there won't be a solution to the above problem any time soon, although in reality, the presence of a high DPI screen would cause people to come up with solutions)
- more expensive (but here, wee'll assume this isn't a considerable factor)

(This post was last modified: 11/08/2010 05:02 PM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)

Imo, unnecessary.  Maybe slightly better, but after that, pretty much pointless.

It's not like my eyes are so good I can see the individual pixels anyway.

Zinga Wrote:- more expensive (but here, wee'll assume this isn't a considerable factor)

You mean that's the only considerable factor?

If it costs the same, I want one with 9001 DPI with 1 million DPI (way better than my eyes can ever perceive, btw... but humans are inherently greedy, and always wants more).

---

The PSP needs more DPI.... but then that would make the games and videos far more resource intensive, so I guess that won't work.

---

On a related note... when is OLED going to come out.

(This post was last modified: 11/08/2010 06:21 PM by Assassinator.)

(11/08/2010 05:12 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  If it costs the same, I want one with 9001 DPI with 1 million DPI (way better than my eyes can ever perceive, btw... but humans are inherently greedy, and always wants more).

And you won't be able to see anything on screen all, since so many applications work on a pixel basis.
It's why some people prefer to work at sub-native resolutions.

(11/08/2010 05:22 PM)ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:  

(11/08/2010 05:12 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  If it costs the same, I want one with 9001 DPI with 1 million DPI (way better than my eyes can ever perceive, btw... but humans are inherently greedy, and always wants more).

And you won't be able to see anything on screen all, since so many applications work on a pixel basis.
It's why some people prefer to work at sub-native resolutions.

Actually... yeah.  it was foolish to miss that.

No hardware in the world would currently be able to render anything at that resolution.  Imagine playing your video at 16000000x9000000.

GPU capability is one thing, but being able to see nothing is another, considering that a window will probably consume a few milimeters on screen.

(11/08/2010 05:35 PM)ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:  GPU capability is one thing, but being able to see nothing is another, considering that a window will probably consume a few milimeters on screen.

I'm sure that wouldn't be all that hard to fix.

The hardware side would be way harder than the software side.

(This post was last modified: 11/08/2010 05:41 PM by Assassinator.)

(11/08/2010 05:41 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  I'm sure that wouldn't be all that hard to fix.

Wee're assuming there's no fix for that, which is the case right now.
I don't think it's as easy to fix as you think it is either.
Which is why I run my 1280x1024 monitor at 1024x768 - because I struggle to read text at the higher resolution.  And this certainly isn't a new issue either.

I would have to see it in action and it must have HDBaseT. I never buy a monitor without seeing it running the way I will use it. So, 20 screens attached 1 source will not due.