The potential of a super hi-res Alienware screen

Since Apple just announced that the new line of apple book pros will have "retina displays" (a resolution of 2880 x 1880) that got me to think about Alienware's screens. I don't want to start a flame war but I don't like the idea of Alienware having inferior screens to apples.

I think for one, Alienware would highly benefit from having a higher resolution screen. Perhaps it would behoove Alienware to also bring back that RGB screen (or a screen with at least 90% gamut). Or how about also offering a screen that reduces glare enough that you can use it outside in the sun?

I guess it would be cost prohibitive for such a screen, and perhaps there's nothing more to this thread than to wish Alienware would make better screens. More to the point, this is me venting a bit and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the matter.

 

I hate to think what an option like that would cost, but I'm always a fan of more options. Considering the 120mhz 1080p 3d screen option on the m17x is a $400 option, I could easily see such a high rez display being a $600-800 option.

 

Probably won't happen till they mass produce screens with that kind of resolution at a size other than the 15", hence why only the 15" Macs have that kind of resolution, otherwise like YAYTech said, will be very expensive.

It'll be cool if Alienware brought back a 15" laptop like the m15 and can get a deal with the manufacturer of those high res display, then I think we will see high res screens on alienware

 

The other thing we can hope for is that this will push the standard of high-res displays up (you know that's the only direction they're going to go), and within 3-4 years it'll be the new standard res.

 

Maybe this will make dell bring back the 1920 x 1200 screens. Was silly they got rid of them to begin with but, now would be a good time to bring them back. Just my two cents.

 

This isn't happening but 4k screen are coming soon, at least according to the Intel roadmap. But until they come down in price, it'll be a pricey upgrade. And hardware will definitely need to catch up, 3820x2000 has 4x pixels of 1920x1080, you'll need some serious hardware to play games at 4k resolutions.

 

I don't know maybe its just me, but my 1920x1080 15.6'' screen suits me fine. Never have I really noticed pixels or anything like that. I mean higher resolution screens are the next logical step, but its not like what we have now is so bad.

 

Why do you say they won't bring back the 1920x1200 screens? I'm sure it had something to do with cost but, honestly fans of alienware would love something like this. And honestly 1920x1200 is so widely supported it can't hurt to have it as an option.

 

Because the benefits it offers over a x1080 display are not profound enough to justify the costs to Dell. They've already switched production of all their high-res displays from the x1200 to x1080, if they were to switch back it would mean millions of dollars would have been wasted and they'll have to spend millions more switching back. Once these "Retina" displays become the normal resolution for high-tier screens, then Dell will switch over because the cost to them will be justified.

 

Sure I love 1920x1200 too, but no other competitor offers it, so why should Alienware offer 1200p. It's going to cost more than a 1080p LCD, and Alienware is about making money. And everything now barring Apple is 16:9, so they aren't just going to change back to 1200p. Hence the rise of 4k screens will take care of people who miss WUXGA.

 

Is it too much to ask for a 1200p-4000p 3D capable (with eye tracking vga 1080p vid camera(s)) screen running at 240hz? But seriously, Alienware hasn't really updated their screens besides having it run 3D at 120hz. Even backwards since the R2.

 

At leastthe m18x should get a higher than 1080p screen, because 680m SLI can handle the games good enough for a 2880x1800 or something bigger.

Or at least give us an 1080p IPS 120Hz screen or something. The normal TN screen is good but how about different options that one can choose ?

That would definetly be a plus.

 

I definitely agree! I'm currently viewing NBR and typing this post from a 1366x768 screen and it doesn't affect me as much. A 1920x1080 resolution screen would indeed be sweet! All in all, it's becoming like the "megapixel race" that was started off with Nokia's N-Series phones and everyone was comparing their e-pen!s. In the end, if I don't see any pixeleration or poor imagery with whatever resolution I've got, then I'd say that resolution is good enough, no matter the general opinion of others. Suffice to say, looking and opting for more will only invite more problems including and especially what was stated before - the need for some serious hardware to play games at that high a resolution.

 

hmm..



a comparison

30" 2880 x 1800 = Pixel Density: 12815 pixels / sq. in. - Retina display
27" 2880 x 1800 = Pixel Density: 15819 pixels / sq. in. - Retina display
27" 2560 x 1440 = Pixel Density: = 11845 pixels / sq. in.
30" 2560 x 1600 = 10658 pixels / sq. in.

all hugely expensive and perfectly crisp and ultra hd requiring DP++ or dual DVI / thunderbolt ^

ok then..

17.4" laptop display @ stock full HD = 16043 pixels / sq. in !!

wins out on all.

ok so you say you want a retina display still, and what your actually saying is that you want a 15" display with a Pixel Density of 48644 pixels / sq. in. ! E-PEEN activated.

4 X worse game graphics @ console level but just more pixels of the same rubbish and with absolutely no chance of improving the actual perceived quality unless your an Owl sat 2 inches from the screen.

can most people tell the pixels out on a 24" 1080p monitor a 8k per sq. in ?

 

I think you're right, we're going to see a sort of megapixel race, or at least a start to a shift toward a new standard. I could see an LCD manufacturer splitting the difference and doing very well - making something in a res between 1080 & retina. Perhaps if it's cost effective they could revive the 1920x1200, but I suspect if they've already moved away from that, they'd be just as well off to go with something like x1400 or x1600. But it could be that the savings aren't worth it, and everyone just starts moving to x1800.

I think we'll at least see the x768 screens essentially phased out in the next year to year and a half. (I'm a bit surprised they haven't already in favor of x900s as the budget screens.)

 

I see your points. There is a point when some specs are just overkill. For sure, especially if you're on a budget.

But this is Alienware.

 

I don't see the possibility of that happening, since that shift was more about aspect ratio than resolution itself. With the shift from WUXGA (1920x1200) to the current Full HD defined as 1920x1080, there was an aspect ratio change from 16:10 to 16:9 which has become the new standard "widescreen". If anything, I bet this is what will be maintained for years to come!

 

Exactly - overkill should be an option. lol Though I wouldn't be surprised to see Dell push an ultrarez screen on the XPS line as soon or sooner than on the Alienware, since the new XPS looks to be aiming straight at the macs.

The aspect ratio is an excellent point - they'd probably go with something that maintains that.

 

First a question what's the big deal about the RGB screen compared to the 60hz 1080p screen that comes now ?

Oh it would be nice to have a 4k screen on the m17x haha but I thought the ppi in "Retina" screens were 336 not in the thousands?

Sent From My Rooted EVO 3D

 

knock off the m14x and bring back the m15x with this screen and a high powered graphics card and were in business! Then make an m12x to replace the m11x. that way you have something for everyone.

 

You'll have to ask some of the R2 owners on these boards, but RGB is supposedly much better in color representation. The current R3 and R4 screens have about 70% gamut vs 100% gamut on the R2 (perhaps someone correct me if I'm wrong).

The new 15" MBP have a ppi of 220 from which is considered "Retina" by apple. A 4k (4096x2160) res screen on a 17.3 inch laptop would have a ppi of 267.

 

Oh ok and the ppi in laptop screens is lower than the "Retina" display on the iPhone 4/4s and the 4th Gen iPod then haha as they are 336

Sent From My Rooted EVO 3D

 

i think the issue is most games dont even support higher resolutions. A display with that res is more aimed towards the video/photo crowd imo.

On the other hand I would love to see it on the m18x. then i can finally see the need for dual gpus.

 

What he said.

Where the res comes in is in text display and some multimedia edits. We are much closer now with apples screen offering of doing away with "native" res restrictions for viewing quality. When the display is scalable without loss you have zero downsides to having MORE as an option when running a lower res.

The MBP will likely game at lower res and you would never notice... but then not as many game on the MB in the first place.

 

Good points. I'm not too much into photography... perhaps when games support quad HD screens and movies are released in higher resolutions than 1080p. Until then, 1080p should be fine... or can we at least get RGB back Alienware? Thanks.

 

Lack of support for new hardware standards is no reason for manufacturers not to move forward with them. Should we have stayed with 32bit processors because very little software supported it? (heck, a lot of programs still don't take advantage) As long as the lack of support doesn't mean a brick wall in the way of usability, I don't see this as a worthwhile argument against a new better technology.

 

Good point I'm flip flopping.

 

Well, if we talk about Apple who are a true innovators in mobile business, their release fo a high-res laptop is sure quite a step forward! But the users don't get the full space of 1800p screen just more precize picture. There was a photo (anandtech) of New Macbook Pro running Win8 with 2880x1800 res and the text looked way too small... All i want to say is that of course we will see (100% sure) new panels in the future, but it's at least 1-2 years from now, cause:

- it's compatibility issues users might face (as stated above) like games, progs and video content;
- and while AW is a gaming brand on the first place, there currently is no such hardware (may be M18xR2) to run games at that resolution fluidly, so no reason to claim 650M powered laptop - gaming!

I can only imagine how hames like Crysis 3 could look like on a 3K-4K res 17-18" display. Awesome) We just have to be more patient, time will come...

 

I think the idea was to get clearer display at the same "res" such as text. The exceptions are certain apps where if the res is accounted for, can have menus and components scaled while other regions do not - like vid/pic edit.

If it works it means we get something much more scalable than our current native res limitations. Want to run 2880? Go ahead! 720? Sure. It should look as clear as any res, even those at a fraction of that. I think this is a cool idea... hope it works well.

 

I think 1080p in a laptop screen (18.4" or lower) is more then enough.
But when you talk about external monitor I can definitively see the pixels of my 23.6" IPS screen (or even more easily on my older 27" that was 1920*1200 (s-pva panel)).
So For laptop I dont think its needed, but bring on the super hi-res display for standalone monitor!

 

I suppose but these points are like saying the iphone doesn't need more than 480x320 and that higher resolutions will make the icons look small. Just check the ipad. wow.

More about the density not the res (as xmadror noticed)
Chrome being optimized for high-density displays - The Tech Report
MacBook Pro with Retina display review | The Verge


Can't believe I'm defending apple though. I do not own nor ever have a MBP

 

Well in regards to the first link, I wish they'd shown what the pixels looked like at 100%. Because for me, I'm currently typing from a 24" monitor with a 1680x1050 resolution and I cannot discern pixels unless my eyes are like less than an inch away from the screen, which I should never be anyways.

Thing is, that it's nice to have a super high resolution on a screen like a phone or a tablet, because it is quite easy to simply zoom in and get nice crisp text, but you really shouldn't want to, nor have to do so on a laptop. Point in case is that most applications and web-browsers are having to adjust for the new macbook so that the text defaults to a larger typeface, which in some ways negates the point of having a high rez screen. Sure, even the scaled up text looks pretty nice, and you do have more screen real estate with which to work with but...why would you have a super high rez screen just to have everything scaled up to what you would normally see anyways?

Apple also made a comment that showed they didn't know how screen resolution works, saying that when working with photos, with a higher resolution you can now see more pixels of which you're working with (so pretty much saying 10 pixels turned into 20 pixels) which is completely bogus since it's bottlenecked by the resolution of the document you're working with. You see more of an area when zoomed in, but not more pixels... Having worked with photoshop and the like quite a lot, I can say that it is a plus having a higher resolution, but I feel like they took it a bit too far on a 15" model personally. Like others have said, it would be nice to have a higher resolution on like a 30" monitor or something, but for me higher resolution on a small monitor doesn't really help me too much, because now if I am working in detail on something I will have to zoom in further than I normally would. I might not have to scroll around as much but honestly in most cases I'd rather do that.
Not to mention that photoshop isn't quite ready for use with retina display until later this year since icons and text is just wayyy too small.

I have to admit that being able to play back a full 1080p video while doing video editing does look quite handy though, it's a shame that most of the updates for that came to final cut pro, since in most cases anyone who is serious about doing video editing will likely be using premiere pro anyways.

tl;dr long winded post about everything that's been pent up within me about Apple's new retina mbp. I see the high rez being quite good, however I'm not quite sold on it being on a 15" screen. Also that pesky osx.