LG Intros World's First 21:9 UltraWide Monitor

[vittau]

[citation][nom]WS Gaming[/nom]I don't understand the backlash... I use dual monitors all the time and to have this ratio would bring me a lot of happiness. I can finally use one monitor for gaming, unless of course the price is dumb. I don't like spending more than around $250 for a monitor and I really have no reason for a 2560 * 1440. I love my widescreen gaming.[/citation]Yeah I don't get it either. Triple monitor setups are fine, but this is not? Am I missing something here?

This monitor would be fantastic for games (I suppose any game supporting Eyefinity should have no problems with this), though I would've preferred a slightly higher resolution...

I'd buy it if the price is right.

 

[samwelaye]

[citation][nom]Razor512[/nom]I wish they would go back to 16:10, the extra vertical space was great for most applicatiosns and also anime since the subtitles cound be pushed onthe the black area so it doedes not cover any of the other visuals of the anime..[/citation]

THIS is why I miss 16:10!! Even though there's never anything important that the subtitles cover up... I still like having it separated

 

[10tacle]

[citation][nom]samwelaye[/nom]THIS is why I miss 16:10!! Even though there's never anything important that the subtitles cover up... I still like having it separated[/citation]

What are you guys talking about? There are still many, many options in 16:10 ratio starting at 1680x1050 resolution with a 22", then moving up to the 24"-26" range at 1920x1200, and then topping off with the macdaddy 2560x1600 30" monitors. There are several manufacturers to choose from in all ranges: Asus, Dell, Doublesight, HP, LG, NEC, and Samsung.

Go to NewEgg and search under those specific resolutions and check it out. I've got two 16:10 monitors and wouldn't trade them for a larger monitor in 16:9 ratio for anything.

 

[DRosencraft]

[citation][nom]vittau[/nom]Yeah I don't get it either. Triple monitor setups are fine, but this is not? Am I missing something here?This monitor would be fantastic for games (I suppose any game supporting Eyefinity should have no problems with this), though I would've preferred a slightly higher resolution...I'd buy it if the price is right.[/citation]

Because people tend to react before understanding. Personally, however, I don't have an interest in this at all. I've become too used to widescreen (16:9). But using this in dual-screen mode even ruins that. So while I can see why someone who likes 4:3 aspect ratio would be interested in this simpler setup, but it's not for me.

 

[lp231]

I believe 21:9 was used in theaters?
And Philips already came out with a 56" 21:9 HDTV
http://www.philips.co.uk/c/cinema-21-9/30849/cat/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philips_Cinema_21:9_TV

 

[panini]

[citation][nom]Razor512[/nom]if it were learger, it would be useful for people who use applications such as adobe audition which generally requires dual displays to get a workflow that is not frustrating to use.I wish they would go back to 16:10, the extra vertical space was great for most applicatiosns and also anime since the subtitles cound be pushed onthe the black area so it doedes not cover any of the other visuals of the anime.PS most websites are designed around 4:3 low res displays, eg tomshardware is formatted for 1024x768 displays, imagine using this site on that monitor, it will be just a thin stripe in the center of the screen.[/citation]

Doesn't Apple use 16:10 on their notebooks and cinema display? Should they ever make a TV (which people are saying they will) it most likely will be 16:10 as well.

 

[therabiddeer]

[citation][nom]gabrielspcs[/nom]I guess nobody remembers that NEC and Alienware tried this in 2008 ? Nobody wanted it! http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/ [...] 1378.shtml[/citation]
That is listed as BEYOND ultrawide. That one has an insane 3.2:1 aspect ratio. To give you an easy number to compare to, a 21:9 is roughly 2.33:1

 

[jankeke]

What is this sorcery ... ?

 

[sna]

all the people who are saying"YUK" and "NO" here are idiots.

for LONG time we wanted Borderless 2 monitors for Games.

and when They give you one , you say YUK

idiots.

THIS IS A DREAM COMES TRUE FOR MULTI MONITORS GAMES

 

[sna]

[citation][nom]Thunderfox[/nom]No. Such an extreme aspect ratio is not desirable. In order to get something of reasonable height, you'd have to buy a monitor a mile wide.[/citation]


how about looking at it as 2 Monitors for gaming? and border less?

this is a MUST for multi monitor gaming. will giove you wide Angles playing experience WITHOUT the NEED for Powerful Graphics in SLI...

 

[chewbie]

[citation][nom]likeanoldhat[/nom]I miss 4:3 and 16:10 like all of you. But all of you naysayers are going to be disappointed when this becomes industry standard. The whole visual media industry has been slowly over time moving to 2.39 (or scope) aspect ratio for decades. It's going to happen, just be prepared.[/citation]
i doubt we'll see this ratio on laptops. Maybe tablets

 

[Guest]

Don't forget humans have much more viewing horizontal resolution than vertical. You could get much more info from the hole screen in a glance.

 

[Guest]

would need a server of gpus to get 30 fps on minesweeper on that resolution

 

[army_ant7]

They need a 50+" version of this.
I would buy one immediately assuming that one that size was at least 4K resolution (or whatever 4K is to this ratio)

My REASON for wanting a 50+" version is for a home-made cinema (that isn't using a projector).
I could use one of these monitors for my video editing actually. I hate zooming in and out of tracks to get to the end so I can add a song in etc..

Just a heads up (hopefully a useful one and not saying that you didn't already know), a screen with this aspect ratio would be 46" wide and 19.4" tall, by my (rounded off) calculations. (Just in case, I'm not criticizing your taste and it sounds nice.) I also heard that the wider the monitor gets, the less screen area it has for a specific diagonal measurement. A 50" screen of this AR would have a screen area of 895.34sq.in. while a 16:9 for example would have 1,068.25sq.in.

Eventually the monitors would need to be slightly curved if they keep getting bigger, otherwise anything on the edges of such monitors would appear warped.

I believe Alienware did something like that in the past, as was referred to by some people above.

It's basically a 4:3 dual screen setup, but in one unit so you don't have the edge of the monitors running through the centre of your desktop.
I presume it's designed to be an alternative to having dual 1280x1024 monitors.

It's aspect ratio (2560x1080 or 2.37:1) is closer to two landscaped 5:4 monitors (1280x1024, like you said) which have an aspect ratio of 10:4 or 2.5:1 rather than two landscaped 4:3 monitors which have an AR of 8:3 or 2.67:1. Just felt like pointing that out and I mean no insult.

i doubt we'll see this ratio on laptops. Maybe tablets

Actually... Hands-on with Toshiba's Ultrawide 21:9 14-inch Ultrabook Hehe...


Now, when I saw this, what came to my mind pretty much at once was portrait Eyefinity setups (just something fun to think about)! 😀 To come up with the aspect ratios, I'll use the aspect ratio of 2560x1080 since it isn't really exactly 21:9.
3x1 portrait of these would = 3240x2560 which has an AR of 1.265625:1 which is pretty much...OMG! a 5:4 (1.25:1) screen! :lol: Imagine a 5:4 screen with that much resolution. (For all I know there may have been already.)
5x1 portrait of these would = 5400x2560 which has an AR of 2.109375:1 which is almost...itself except with 5 times the resolution. :lol:
Well, bezel compensation (added resolution) may be considered as well...

But anyway, just some trivial facts and figures I came up with. Hehe... (Yes, I know. I'm weird. 😛)

 

[dvo]

lol to those of you saying theres nothing out htere to use this screen properly. try looking at a blu-ray disc some time. 90% of movies are filmed in 2.35:1 which normally have black bars on your 16:9 TV. those movies would be full screen on this monitor. Vizio has released a cinemawide TV with hte same aspect ratio, and i believe one or two other TV manufacturers have similar TVs out now. this is intended for those who use their displays primarily for watching movies.

 

[wanderer11]

[citation][nom]Prescott_666[/nom]I hope this is a total failure. I hope they lose so much money on it that it pushes them back to 4:3 (which is the aspect ratio of the monitor that I'm using).[/citation]
How's Windows 98 working for you?

 

[ccovemaker]

They just need to take it a step further so we can run no bezel Eyefinity setups and they would sell these like mad.

 

[velosteraptor]

[citation][nom]ccovemaker[/nom]They just need to take it a step further so we can run no bezel Eyefinity setups and they would sell these like mad.[/citation]

Thats esentialy what this is

 

[LukeCWM]

I could see this catching on in businesses as a cheaper alternative to dual monitors. Assuming it is, in fact, cheaper than dual monitors.

 

[TeraMedia]

This adds 33% more horizontal image than a 16:9 for the same given vertical height. Might be nice for editing side-by-sides.

For movies, I think they unfortunately missed the target. If I am getting a display to use for movies and video, I want it to be large, and I want it to have excellent color, contrast, and black levels. To get the same vertical size as a 55" 1080p screen (~27") you would need a 70" diagonal one of these. And to match a 65" (31.9" v), you would need a bit more than 80" diag. That in a plasma or super-high-quality LED/OLED with 240 Hz and passive 3D would be perfect for my movie room and I could get rid of my projector. A 16:9 screen with the same width (and hence the same area for 2.35:1 movie images) would need to be 84.6" diagonal. They need to stop thinking small, and go big.

If they want to make something small, they should make something 24:9 (4*2:3) such as 3200x1200. That would support all of the Wx1200 resolutions, and allow two full 4x3 pages side-by-side.

 

[Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer]

You know what might sell me on this idea (if we're talking wide gamut IPS): 3072x1280. It would be exactly like three 1280x1024 monitors in portrait.

The ????x1080-ness of this is just kind of...meh. At work I'm using a 1600x1200 monitor next to a 1920x1080 monitor...guess which one is my primary monitor? Vertical resolution matters.

 

[army_ant7]

this is intended for those who use their displays primarily for watching movies.

Not only that , but also like others have mentioned (and maybe even the article itself).

I could see this catching on in businesses as a cheaper alternative to dual monitors. Assuming it is, in fact, cheaper than dual monitors.

They just need to take it a step further so we can run no bezel Eyefinity setups and they would sell these like mad.

It wouldn't really be a "no bezel Eyefinity setup" per se since it's just one monitor, but I get what you're saying.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]gabrielspcs[/nom]I guess nobody remembers that NEC and Alienware tried this in 2008 ? Nobody wanted it! http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/ [...] 1378.shtml[/citation]

that had a resolution of 2880 x 900 and cost 8000$
care to take a guess why no one wanted it?

[citation][nom]sna[/nom]all the people who are saying"YUK" and "NO" here are idiots.for LONG time we wanted Borderless 2 monitors for Games.and when They give you one , you say YUKidiots.THIS IS A DREAM COMES TRUE FOR MULTI MONITORS GAMES[/citation]

yea, we are moving away from monitors altogether in games.
look at it this way, once hmd gets popular, and many companies are working hard on head mount, would you ever want to use a monitor again?
you would have a seamless surround vision without the extra processing requirements that a multi monitor setup currently has, and if you wanted it, in 3d (ever play a game made for 3d and you know why that is a big deal.

basically all i'm saying is that outside of a movie (i know of a few that black bar on a 16:9) really wide monitors are going to die soon, especially if we can simulate a multi monitor setup on a hmd.

with that said, if this comes in at 4-500$, this will have a place in may peoples setups.

 

[metriccook]

Dell is already selling this version on their site, yes I want it for $700, and I now have the Vizio Cinemawide, which is awesome to watch movies on. You can keep your 4k...

 

[metriccook]

'You can keep your 4k...' ok if they had passive 1080 3D, I think about it...