[citation][nom]Marcus52[/nom]Well then you are happy with what's out there now, because there is plenty of cheap going on.Okay, I get it, you are saying you want the price of 30" 2560x1600 monitors to come down, and you don't want a 16:9 display (2560x1440). I want those things a too, but for me, the 30" display, even at 2560x1600, has too large a pixel pitch; I want better displays with a higher pixel density, and better "refresh" rate than 60Hz.Making them better doesn't necessarily mean making them more expensive; if Samsung and LG - and the rest of the panel makers - would concentrate on higher quality and mass-selling that, instead of the low-grade stuff they've been selling, prices would indeed be much lower for the kind of displays that cost more today.Tablets and smart phones prove that higher pixel densities don't have to be expensive; true 120Hz monitors prove that 60Hz is simply a cheap standard arbitrarily agreed upon, not a real technological limitation. Let's get some 200+ DPI, 120Hz 30" panels going. Please.[/citation]
they sell those phones at over 3x the base cost.
if a screen is better than what is already out, and its a specialty item (2560x1600 is specialty at this point) they charge more than whats already out there.
the quality increase will come from either crystal displays (i believe thats what the displays that use actual leds are called) or oled going out of the phone market.
i dont need lcd to increase in quality, as i just see them as a stop gap at this time, just give use the 30 inch 2560x1600 monitors for under 600$ and i will be happy.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram