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.
The Best Monitors
Camden Price
Logan Morgan
It uses Lasers, not lamps. Do your research, lazy fuck.
Blake Lewis
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.
Thomas Ross
Are TFT LCDs really so much cheaper to produce? Is this due to scale of production, patentscum or marketing hogwash?
Zachary Perry
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.
Matthew Bell
Thanks for providing me with motivational anger. Is there any chance of reviving these technologies via Massdrop-like services? No faith at all?
Julian Nguyen
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.
Austin Roberts
that's not needed. most monitors are too bright, not too dark
amazon.com
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.
Jordan Walker
...
Bentley Bell
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
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.