521–530 of 576 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad someone brought up the aspect ratio. That display looks so much more productive than 16:9.
As a side note, I've actually never understood why the industry converged on 16:9. It's pretty much only good for watching movies. I really miss 4:3.
Love it. It even has a version of their ergonomic keyboards, something that I cannot really understand with Apple, how can one even manage to program in such flat keyboards. Apple, one of the first companies to introduce ergonomic keyboards to the world.
Even worse is that horrible Magic Mouse - it's an ergonomic nightmare. Of course there a good alternatives from other brands but none seems to feature a good touch surface. I hate scrolling in steps like it's common with non-Apple mice. So, it's either good ergonomics or touch scrolling in any direction.
I've had "ergonomic mice" for a while before and, yes, they felt perfect in my hand. The issue is that I move the mouse with my fingers and not with the whole arm, so my palms stops touching their _oh so ergonomic surface_ pretty soon, defeating its purpose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The form and function aren't replicable. When you work on a cintiq, the cintiq is on your table and you often have to keep looking up and down at the screen on your monitor. It's not the optimal way to work. The engineering is in the hinge and the form factor. You're not the target market if you want a beastly computer that can run a bunch of games. It's the same people who use a cintiq and an iMac that they're targe…
I can buy a cintiq for my workstation - hell I would love to buy the screen from this separately.
That looks pretty awesome, and it makes the iMac seem even more tired which I assume was intended. It is startling to have a story about IBM extolling the virtues of Macbooks for business and Microsoft launching a platform targeting designers, it really is amazing. But setting all of that aside for a moment.... The screen. Clearly that is the thing which makes this announcement. For me, the 3:2 aspect ratio is so mor…
"The screen. Clearly that is the thing which makes this announcement. For me, the 3:2 aspect ratio is so more reasonable for computers than 16:9. And having a zillion pixels is wonderful although my CAD package (TurboCAD) still doesn't deal well with the high DPI screen off the Surface Book, I'm sure it would look silly on this machine." It may interest you to know that there is a reasonably priced 1:1 aspect ratio m…
It's still an order of magnitude less than doing that with 2048x2048 ATC displays...
Maybe we could do a Kickstarter or something to make a batch of 1920x1920 screens. Maybe we can even start a fashion - square is the new widescreen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a side note, I've actually never understood why the industry converged on 16:9. It's pretty much only good for watching movies. I really miss 4:3.
4:3 only useful for single-task, one app per screen. Most of my tasks opening 2 apps side-by-side. Wider would be better. 16:10 is the best.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just installed macOS Sierra and have up-to-date iOS 10.1. I still cannot get handoff working. From reading the reports this is not just me. At least Chrome still syncs.
Similar experience here. I use iPhone, MBP and iPad. Originally thought that having everything under one umbrella would be a huge help, but the reality is the syncing is such a pain that I never do it. Took me many, many months to even get AirDrop working between my own devices. iTunes is very frustrating to use in managing iOS devices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work in an office of graphic designers, and they all have overpowered hardware that they bought thinking they needed the latest and greatest to run Photoshop and Illustrator. They don't need a breakneck GPU - they need a device like this that gives them new, intuitive input options. That said, for any kind of 3D development this hardware isn't up to snuff. Anyway, the device seems more targeted at 2D graphic design…
I'm no graphic professional - but I've just recently started playing at drawing on my i5/8gb Surface pro 4. It's great fun, and there are lots of options. But trying to draw on an 1200 dpi A3 canvas (unsurprisingly) doesn't really work very well. But if I were to use it professionally, some of the things I'd want to do was draw high resolution A2 to A0 prints. I've yet to play much with photoshop, so I'm not sure how…
For me using Clip Studio Paint seems best so far, as it has dedicated tablet mode UI and is responsive enough, thought 1200 dpi A3 will might be too much for it at times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The value proposition is the responsive touch-screen. The closest responsive touch screen you can buy today is a 27" Wacom Cintiq, which is $2,299 without a computer, and both lower-resolution (2560x1440 vs 4500x3000) and smaller (27" vs 28") than the Surface Studio. So if you assume that about $2,300 of the device's costs go to the display and touch screen, you're paying ~$700 for the actual machine driving that dis…
> "you're paying ~$700 for the actual machine driving that display" ~$700 gets you a pretty basic computer with 965m, you can build a desktop with gtx 1070 for 700$ to power a wacom display. And you will be able to upgrade it in the future, with Studio you are stuck with a 965m for $3000. And if you are getting a 980m for $4200 that leaves you with a $1900 to build a computer for Wacom, which can be way more powerful…
As someone owning a full tower I don't think it's wise to cram all that desktop power in a stupidly small box, it's really adding cost and heat for the sake of looking good at the expense of performance, but that's what MS chose to do so comparisons should be kept fair. (I wouldn't buy the Studio for this very reason though, only the display itself).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you know if MS have improved the stylus? As far as I know surface's pen technology is inferior than Cintiq's pen.
Sadly no, I'm consistently reverting back to my 21ux, the jitter of slow stylus movement drives me nuts on the surface pro 4
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry but unless this is a glorified exec office decoration, professionals care about the specs very much, especially at that resolution and price tag
I'm a pro. I'm an experienced programmer, amateur photographer, edit home videos a lot and do a bunch of computationally expensive tasks on my workstation. Whilst I'd like to have the absolute latest, cutting edge GPU from AMD/NVIDIA I also appreciate that sometimes last gen parts are cheaper, more reliable (having benefitted from refinement over the manufacturing run) and sometimes cooler running than what's new. I…