Finally, some good stuff is coming to the desktop! And of course it's not coming from Microsoft, since they think a Surface Pro with its terrible display scaling is what we all will use to work. While Microsoft is busy implementing a start button and NSA backdoors into their OS, Apple ships a 27" iMac with a resolution of 5120x2880. That is fucking 14.7 million pixels. 67% more pixels than 4k! And since it is running OSX it is not just a number that makes text so smale that you can't read it anymore, no, it makes text appear as sharp as on printed paper. It starts at 2500€ (ouch!) but hey, considering what the Dell 5k display costs, that is actually a good deal. http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/ This seems to be the perfect machine for anyone working with text, from coders to writers. If I had the money I would go for it.
There is no display cable standard that manages the bandwidth a 5K monitor needs. This thing is only possible exactly because it is an all-in-one. We also need to inquire our resident high-res porn expert Trickster for the possibility of 5K porn. Thing of all the details you would see!
Ah, that's a good reason. I really don't keep up with monitors and stuff like that, I only have a basic idea of whats happening pc component wise.
You still need a cable between the PC and the monitor even if it's an aio. I think the industry recently switched over to a displayport derivative built for internal connections (laptops, aios, etc), but it's still displayport. There's no magic... ...except with Apple. Somehow they did it. They likely used two of the connectors and a little bit of Jobs' leftover sweat.
Yay. I can see an ugly OS and hijacked software in higher resolution. This is a totally useful idea that is worth investing in. Seriously, if you have that much money to throw away then give it to the Red Cross or something.
Forgive my ignorance, but can't you buy it then just format/install windows or linux if you wanted to? Or even dual boot? As far as I know all the hardware underneath is the same shit.
Of course you can, but why would you? Running OSX is essential for getting good scaling on this monitor.
Couldn't you run many games at 2560x1440 and have no loss in quality compared to a regular 27" iMac? Of course, the Retina iMac costs more, but anyone who gets it is probably not going to use it primarily for gaming. The Retina iMac also has the BTO option of a R9 M295X, which is reported to be a Tonga part. Going from the 3.5 TFLOPS number on Apple's website I'm going to guess that it has performance similar to that of the R9 285.
I don't really like high-res porn. You see too much. Porn stars are not attractive in high resolution. I do however, recommend using SVP for faking 60fps. That's pretty cool. As for 5K, I'm not sure how I feel about us going to a non-industry standard res again. I've got a 2560x1600 monitor and I've generally found it annoying sometimes when it hasn't entirely been supported by everything. For a long time, anything past 1080 (or at least 16:10 1080p) was kind of wishywashy. Now 4K is out, I'm not really having any issues, but the same might happen to 5K until 8K or someshit starts coming around. As for supported OS, I'm going to take a wild guess that MS will have rectified resolution issues in Windows 10. I haven't gotten round to installing it on my laptop yet, but I'm looking forward to it. I'm in this weird situation with my main PC where even at 3+ years old, it plays everything pretty easily at my resolution, but if I want to go to 4/5K, I'm going to have to spend a lot of money. Seems kind of silly when all I play 90% of the time is Dota.
I expected ms to have their shit together in Windies 8. Then again in Windows 8.1. At this point, I'm pessimistic. Oh and 5k is a standard resolution. It's just quad quad 720p. It's not a TV broadcast resolution, but fuck that. My computer isn't a television.
Yeah but not being a broadcast resolution is going to hold it out. High res monitors were out for years, but it took the whole "720p HD", "1080p FULL HD" to really take off. Once 1080p really took hold, 1920x1200 monitors just vanished, with only 1920x1080 being available. My point is, being an early adopter in these things is great and all, but I kind of want to see what direction the TV industry goes before I settle on a new monitor. If they head towards 5K then that's great, but I imagine it'll be 4K they settle on.
So you're saying that you want your computer monitor to be roughly equivalent to upcoming TVs in pixel count? If so, then that's easy. You go 4k all the way. There's no question. TV makers call it "UHD". But I would say that you really don't need to match your tv. I'd take a 1920x1200 any day. I watch plenty of movies on my computer, but I don't really care about 1:1 pixel scaling. I'm pretty chill when it comes to that sort of thing.
