Display Resolution Race to 4K: Retina-like Displays of the Future

Far from being an Apple fanboy, it seems that Apple's business model is to provide premium components and tech, and over-charge you. Like Steve Jobs said: "We don't make junk"

 

This is because PC's in general are for mass consumption. If you want a business end PC they are available but then they also go for a substantial premium as well. It would be nice to see a PC manufacturer lead the innovation in this respect, the screen that is, rather than play follow the leader (or the current economic trend)..............

 

Planned obsolescence is intricately designed into EVERY consumer grade product exactly because of the way the economic system works. Some consumer products will be better than others of course, since its all relative, but bottom line is, they break down or become obsolete sooner or later because they were designed with profits in mind (there is no profit in designing a product that can be simply upgraded far into the future, last a lifetime or be 'the best technology has to offer' - that's simply NOT done because if a company wants to stay competitive and in the game, they need to design such products - if we were actually designing things to last and be 'the best of what we can do', silicon would not even be used as a base material in electronics and we wouldn't have small revisions every 2 years and 4k retina based displays would already be in use for years). You can use 'premium' materials and still have a vastly inferior product that will easily break down because of our (very old) ability to manipulate materials.

They DO make junk (one way or the other) - Apple just has a good PR service and you must cough up a premium price-tag because of the brand in question because they convince you (and others) to get them.

 

there is some truth in that but not entirely. Companies want the competitive edge in tech but there is a limit to competitive edge. They could have made 4k screens ages ago...or lets say they have but the problem is they would cost 10 grand....only a few places have those kinds of budgets. NASA and a few others. I forgot who made those screen but they required special power supplies and also a video card attachment or whatever. Also as in cpus I know intel is working on a new kinda of cpu with a different material but i dont know if they had the ability 10 years ago or new of the material back then. I don't know how intel works and what their R&D team knows and can do but for someone to speculate on that i question if they really even know.

 

I reckon Samsung could lead the PC market they just I dunno fiddle around with releasing too many products.

The series 9 is so close to being the ideal laptop imo. I have a samsung notebook and it's been the perfect travel companion.

 

On the other hand, it doesn't take much thinking to make a quality product if you dump enough money into it. The trick is high quality while maintaining a reasonable price.

From what I've gleaned so far, I would guess they have at least a 5 year plan of release. I'm sure thats true with software manufactures who trickle out their advances at regular intervals to keep their pockets full.

My the cynicism. But what of Toyota?

 

are you referring to the new material? It should be released after 10 nm from what I have seen...there development line ends at 10nm so 22 14 10...so maybe 4/5 years? I think your right on 5 after i thought about it more. 1 year haswell 2 year broadwell 3 skylake 4 year skymont 5 year new thingy?

 

skylake, skymont, SKYNET!

 

Hardly cynical, merely realistic.
Car manufacturers don't want you to die, but they do want you to spend loads of cash on maintenance and plethora of other problems that can (and do) pop up over the years (maybe not for everyone, but for a lot of people, yes). Toyota is no exception.

Cost efficiency = technical inefficiency

Very simple.
You yourself noted that certain software manufacturers have a 5 year plan during which they release their 'upgrades' in order to keep their pockets full.
There would be little to no profiteering from releasing an excellent piece of software in the first year after all.

 

Panasonic 4k 20in LCD screen and forward-thinking domestic gear demo at 2012 CES Las Vegas

Why on earth would anyone want to put so much effort into squeezing 3840x2160 pixels into a 20in screen?

Dutifully, though, the day after the CES press conference, went to a curtained-off area of Panasonic’s CES stand to have a quick look at the 20in 4k2k LCD panel in action. And by the time we emerged, our earlier cynical smirk had turned into a smile of happy disbelief. You probably won’t be surprised to learn that Panasonic is currently only seeing its 4k 20in screen as a ‘commercial’ device aimed at business that need to be able to see an exceptional amount of detail onscreen at once.

Of course, if you need to get within feet of it to appreciate the level of detail, the number of applications gets a bit more limited. We have our fingers crossed for 4K computer monitors, which would dwarf even the
2560 x 1440 resolution found in high-end displays like Apple’s 27-inch Thunderbolt Display.

Will those laptops that had 20” LCDs return: Acer, HP HDX, or Dell XPS M2010?
What about the physical connectivity for 4K? Will HDMI be the way or perhaps optical toslink, full payload audio + video and running full duplex?

 

This is not how manufacturing and software development works. Software companies don't write an excellent piece of software and then artificially limit its capabilities, and the same goes for manufacturers.

1) Making parts that can withstand years of mechanical and thermal stress cost research money. Product management sets the requirements based on market research, and engineers fulfill those specifications. For example, if the requirement for an SSD is to handle 100,000 write cycles, then engineering will keep improving their product until they meet the target but will not spend further resources to develop a longer lasting drive. They can, but it will take longer and cost you - the consumer more money. Pulling some numbers out of thin air - would you pay 30% more an SSD if the manufacturer claimed it can last for 10 years of use? I would not unless I had some specialized needs.

2) Delivering smaller incremental improvements is not a way to fleece the customer. Quite the contrary - customers get value from having features sooner, and the manufacturer decreases risk because they're not trying to change too many things at once. The manufacturers are not sitting on secret piles of designs. They have engineers that are working every day to improve the design. That research doesn't pay off until you productize it. If intel tries to keep some discovery under wraps for too long, sooner or later one of their employees will go to a competitor and make a similar design there. They strike while the iron is hot.

Just look at what Intel and AMD have done in the past 5 years. AMD bought ATI in 2008 and announced they will create a CPU/GPU combination on a single chip. Here we are 5 years later and Trinity is finally here ready to challenge Ivy Bridge. Meanwhile they lost the Macbook Air Llano contract because they couldn't manufacture both a new architecture and a new process in sufficient quantities, and Bulldozer was big flop as well. Instead AMD has been stacking cores on top of cores in the old Phenom design trying (and failing) to keep its market share.

During the same time, Intel did an incremental tick-tock release every year. The releases were timely and stable and customers who wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest could do so. You had the option to wait for 5 years to upgrade with Intel and go from Penryn to Ivy Bridge. Nobody forced you to buy Arrandale or Sandy Bridge CPUs.

Vote with your dollar, I will vote with mine, and the manufacturers will choose the route that generates the most customers.

 

Also the 5 year plan is needed because no one would want to buy a program that cost 2 grand because they spent 5 years making it and needed to recuperate the costs. Part of it is the need to keep a slow cash flow to keep the programmers working. Now it is unnecessary charging what they charge though....it leads to pirating. Who is going to pay hundreds of dollars for photoshop besides a company? No one....hence pirate bay lol. The beauty of supply and demand. There is plenty of supply but not enough demand at that price. They have not figured out the price ratio for maximum profit. Or at least i dont think so. I'll use paint or some other program if i have to....i'll save all that money for a computer lol....since some how a program costs more then a stupid computer hahahha

 

I agree with your post for the most part, but artificially limiting chips is exactly what hardware manufacturers do.

Intel, AMD and Nvidia all currently or in in the past, disable (or have disabled) parts of an otherwise fully functional chip so they can created high end and low end SKUs. Like how Intel disables vt-d (and other extensions)/cores/cache/hyperthreading/turbo/etc. on certain chips but not on others so they can sell the enabled ones for higher prices.

This is also why in the past people were able to unlock cores or shaders on CPUs and GPUs. But nowadays manufacturers physically fuse off parts of the chip so it can't be unlocked via software.

But that said, I don't think it fits into planned obsolescence in the sense that Deks is describing because Intel just releases a new architecture next year anyway so all the current gen chips, including the high end ones, become obsolete. And also, there's no way to design something that lasts forever in electronics market. There will always be something better that is in development or hasn't even been invented yet that. So there's obsolescence, but it's not exactly planned.

 

I happily await a 4k 13" notebook.

If Asus can do 1080p in an 11"... it's not much to ask is it?

 

Umm, no! If you don't think these things are planned you're sadly mistaken. As far as the big boys are concerned they know long before what they're going to give you and how they're going to give it to you.

Lets take the auto industry for example; Despite various cosmetic changes we can see every year, your car is basically the same car it was over a 10 year period.

Just think, when Ford invests a billion dollars to update to a new design, they're not going to redesign it in a year or two--they'd would go bankrupt. Rather, this is the car you will be driving for the next ten years or more. They have to know that much.

In computer terms, think of the updates that at minimum double (or more) your capacity or half your power draw. These are the true innovations; and they take years to get to market. These don't come out every six months.

 

this is about info on higher res displays guys haha

 

I was talking about computers. How is time to market evidence of planned obsolescence? Stuff like die shrinks (i.e. power draw reductions) take tie to develop. There's no way Intel had 22nm ready and "planned" to release 32nm in 2010. Likewise, if Intel had their Core architecture ready back in 2000 they would have never released the massively inferior netburst Pentium 4s.

 

R3d is absolutely correct.

 

11 inch laptop with a 1080p screen.

ASUS bringing Zenbook Prime UX21A, UX32A and UX32VD to the US, prices tentatively start at $799 -- Engadget

A STORM IS COMING!

 

Three cheers for ASUS!