The Best Monitors

Ok fine your monitor (it's not really a monitor more like a projector) is better. However, it's completely unaffordable. Tell me what the best monitor/projector/vr-headset/whatever is that costs 1k USD or less that exists now or might be coming out soon.

I have multiple mouses and very high quality. Also what is wrong with browsing sites? All I do is shitpost on imageboards and make memes all day.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
amazon.com/AOC-AG352UCG-Curved-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B06X9CBRTP

amazon.com/Acer-Predator-UltraWide-Widescreen-X34/dp/B016GNX4SE

And these here are better than your meme monitor also, if you want so much a ViewSonic
amazon.com/dp/B01A0ZRQTM?ref=emc_b_5_t

amazon.com/dp/B075D1B4SV?ref=emc_b_5_t

And this is better than both these:
amazon.com/dp/B071DTCPP3?ref=emc_b_5_t

BUT THE LASER IS THE BEST, POORFAG, YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE LASER, HM? BAD FOR YOU, PUSSY

It's 12 thousand dollars. I can afford it but other people I live with would shoah me for spending so much on a monitor.

ctrl + f
"TN"

Why would I want a shitty washed out colours TN panel?

do not want

It's sad that TN monitors are still made at all.

...

No top quality monitors have ever cost < $1K in history.
Save your goddamn money. You don't have to be rich to afford a $1.8K monitor.

...

Sony FW900

...

If your interest is only in binocular vision then that image makes it quite clear that the optimal ratio is even narrower at ~1:1.

How good are these things? Are they good as CRTs?

Ultrawide is a meme. You want 4:3 for computers since you can move the camera unlike a screen in a movie theater where you have to move your eyes. You can't even see most of those pickles in the corners you're rendering, as seen by the acceptance of multiresolution shading.
As for monitors, I've got two Acer Predator XB271HU 1440p 144hz IPS gsync monitors and they're pretty fuckin' great, would recommend. The main issue is backlight inconsistency which is enough to cause some minor trouble for photo work. 1440p isn't necessary but there are no good 1080p 144hz IPS gsync panels.

>lawsuits delayed it until the banks robbing us blind market crash killed it
We always end up with inferior tech because of Jews.

Laser is probably the best technology ever, I don't think there's anything that can surpass it, it's the peak.
Of course, with time, they'll become cheaper, more reliable, better materials, simpler construct, etc etc - refined.

We have to go through 50 years of marketing based (((improvements))) to lcd/led based tech until you can have that. No point in jumping straight over that many consumer upgrade cycles.

Laser is shit. It's just DLP with DLP's problems, now with marketing from chinks wanting in on the high-end monitor market.

Funny enough, I've got a TN panel that's got better colors than the old IPS panel it replaced. Sure it made not be the best, but it was a massive upgrade in every way so I'm quite pleased with it.

Did you calibrate it? Non-professional monitors have garbage color from the factory.

Yeah, I've got a colormunki so that's the first thing I do. A modern TN's biggest problem isn't vivid color, it's the the viewing angle which can alter color. I personally don't notice it or have a need to care. Obviously if you sit a TN and IPS screen from the same year next to each other, it's not going to be a contest which one is better.

I wouldn't get a 1440p monitor for gaming due to the fact that a lot of games only support up to 1080p and the scaling from 1080 to 1440 isn't integer like 1080p to 4k.

Yeah, you're shit. Laser is pure light, no pixel shit.

So why don't you already own a DLP system, user?

Do you know what memes are? TF and IPS, OLED, QLED, Plasma
Laser will be the future for large screens, and for smaller ones/digital paper it will be OFET/OLET.

What's Holla Forums's favorite 4:3 monitor?

My vote is for the Dell 2007FPb.

You really did fall for it. Huh. So yeah, the "laser" being presented is just a brighter DLP projector. It has the same problems that made DLP not viable, just brighter. It's not a revolution or the future, it's a minor tech refresh with a lot of marketing to make it look like something fundamentally new.

It uses Lasers, not lamps. Do your research, lazy fuck.

Absolute garbage, native DisplayPort PC gaming OLED displays when?

Shouldn't it be the responsibility of software developers to do vector scaling GUIs, and not the responsibility of users to stick with low-rez displays that pander to their laziness?

Like >>808135 said
THESE ARE NOT TRUE LASER PROJECTORS
Instead, they merely use lasers as lightsources, or even just to boost the output of LEDs, instead of using (typically xenon gas arc) lamps. This light is then, just like any non-CRT projector, sent into a reflector (DLP, LCoS) or shutter (LCD). Even worse, most of these aren't prism-based "triple-chip" but "single-chip" systems, meaning only one primary color (red, green, blue) is projected at a time, creating rainbow artifacts.

A true laser projector uses a laser similarly to a CRT, scanning the beam a pixel at a time, a line at a time, across the entire screen, usually by reflecting it off motorized mirrors.

A good comparison would be quantum dots, which, while also the name of a very promising new direct-emissive pixel technology that has yet to even produce laboratory prototypes, is primarily the name being abused as yet another false advertising campaign by the LCD industry, referring to filters used in LED backlights.

All this said, projectors of any technology are easily superior to anything else for movies, since their primary weaknesses (low brightness so they need a darkened room, laggy) aren't relevant in that application, and they equal or surpass every direct-view technology (even CRT) in every other metric.

True, see third pic.

>silicon LED displays mysteriously never seriously attempted in spite of the technology's overwhelming maturity lead
Just lie down and accept it, user, this purgatory will never, ever end.

Are TFT LCDs really so much cheaper to produce? Is this due to scale of production, patentscum or marketing hogwash?

Sheer inertia.

As for "why LCDs?", it's because they were the only production portable display technology back in the '90s, and the industry wanted to shill portables to escape the low margins standardized interchangeable components (ATX, ITX) imposed on the desktop market, and the advent of relatively cheap TFT gave them just enough performance for LCDs to be bearable in general use. As part of this push toward portables, CRTs were phased out of production, and the "newness" of flat panels in the desktop and (especially) TV markets created a period of hype among ignorant sheeple. Having consumed CRT's markets, and with plasma still attempting to attack from the "premium" segment without the pixel density needed for smaller/desktop models (plus good old fashioned FUD about durability), LCD rapidly eliminated all space for alternatives to exist, and achieved unbreakable monopoly on every direct-view video market.

Not too much different from x86, DOS/Windows, or JS, really.

Thanks for providing me with motivational anger. Is there any chance of reviving these technologies via Massdrop-like services? No faith at all?

Here's my two, incredibly vain hopes:
1. Some random faggot makes a low-latency, high-refresh-rate, high-resolution, high-throughput, variable-sync, deep color, native-DisplayPort OLED controller optimized for gayman, and uses TV or tablet panels to Frankenstein a good OLED monitor. There is already one such project for 4K LCDs hacked together by a talented autist:
zisworks.com/

2. Believe it or not, there are still some brand new CRTs being built in 2017. These are, of course, trashy tubes intended for 3rd-world consumers in Asia/South America/Africa, built using leftover toolings in the few fabs that have yet to close down. I have the fantasy of a Kikestarter campaign involving the final generation of retired CRT engineers from the greats (Sony, Mitsubishi, Hitachi, etc.) banking on the retro craze to use modern technology (and whatever now-inexpensively-licensable dark magic those corporations were hoarding before they threw in the towel on CRTs, plus whatever crazy ideas said engineers have been mulling over all these years) in creating a small run of ultra-high-quality CRTs for gamers and professionals, using these last surviving factories, whatever mothballed equipment hasn't been scrapped yet, and some entirely new.

that's not needed. most monitors are too bright, not too dark

amazon.com/Dell-Ultrasharp-1600x1200-Monitor-Height-Adjustable/dp/B000UVDONY
people seem happy with this monitor, and the fact that it is 4:3. But now there are no 4:3 monitors
Why the (((free market))) doesn't provide customers what they need?

Windows is a bad example. Windows achieved monopoly because it was superior to all other OS, and still is.

...

The standard printed brochure is printed at 300dpi. A 26 inch monitor (studies show that this is the ideal size for productivity) at 4k has 170dpi. Reading comprehension on monitors is worse than print (sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035512001127). Coincidence? I think not.

The real meme was HD. We've had 4k monitors since 2001 but, because of the focus on making the PC a "multimedia device" we've gotten a shitty, arbitrary resolution at a weird compromise aspect ratio.

When I get a cheap 26 inch, 4:3, 8k monitor that doesn't give me bloodshot eyes I will be happy to call any further advance in monitor technology superfluous. Until that time we have a long way to go and all the booty bothered gay men can go play with their joysticks and weep.

Whoa wrong thread

Microsoft was not a monopoly in the days of Windows 1-3
It became later, when Windows was superior

They were already a monopoly thanks to IBM's blessing of MS-DOS, which as the default option kept alternative DOSes out of the IBM-compatible market. Alternate DEs for it (still garbage compared to anything else, but generally superior to Windows) were rapidly strangled by smoke & mirrors FUD, so that by the time of Windows 3.x, they were obscure niche products incompatible with most software. While it's true the other platforms I mentioned prevented Wintel from having the 90-95% monopoly it's enjoyed since the mid-'90s, IBM and its clones achieved a >50% monopoly position just a few years into the '80s that it viciously abused.

america is oligarchy