Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

dell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 212 posts

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#111

Post by patriciaecastro »

btian wrote: post #36
bhauer wrote: post #9

Awesome. I say this is a sign that the incumbent manufacturers are finally adapting to the heat brought on by Korean and Chinese newcomers. "Industry's most affordable Ultra HD monitor" is semantics. The Seiki 39" is still substantially cheaper, now at less than $500 on Amazon. Technically, that is a television, so I suppose "monitor" is a clever use of words by Dell. If Seiki drops an HDMI 2 version of their monitor…

But the Seiki 39" TV has its framerate capped at 30Hz while on 4k resolution, which makes it inadequate as a monitor.

my best friend's aunt makes $86 hourly on the computer. She has been unemployed for 8 months but last month her pay was $12133 just working on the computer for a few hours. you can try here======> http://www.jobs25.com

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#112

Post by robomartin »

bhauer wrote: post #9

Awesome. I say this is a sign that the incumbent manufacturers are finally adapting to the heat brought on by Korean and Chinese newcomers. "Industry's most affordable Ultra HD monitor" is semantics. The Seiki 39" is still substantially cheaper, now at less than $500 on Amazon. Technically, that is a television, so I suppose "monitor" is a clever use of words by Dell. If Seiki drops an HDMI 2 version of their monitor…

You do realize that the guts in all of these monitors are either Korean or Chinese, right? All display manufacturers feed off of just a handful --quite literally a handful-- of OEM panel manufacturers. There is no real special sauce except in cases where an OEM, like Apple, pays for a run on a certain spec panel in exchange for exclusivity for a period of time and a guaranteed purchase of an agreed-upon volume of panels. After that the panels become available to anyone who wants to use them.

My point is: Don't fall into the false idea that a company like Dell is doing something unique coming out of their R&D labs. Consumer displays are commoditized to hell and back. Just look at this weekend's flyers from companies like Walmart: 70 inch full HD TV's for less than $1,000.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#113

Post by djtriptych »

mvitorino wrote: post #62
crazygringo wrote: post #42

Does anyone know, are there any Macs that can drive this in Retina mode? Does OSX on Mac desktops support retina mode for arbitrary monitors, or does OSX tie Retina mode exclusively to Macbook Pro Retina screens?

This macbook pro spec page says hdmi port can output 4k at 24hz. http://www.apple.com/uk/macbook-pro/specs-retina/

I own the Seiki 4K 50" The launch version of the retina MBP is artificially limited to, I believe 16hz. There are firmware hacks floating around to get this number to 24Hz (and above, IIRC).

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#114

Post by bhauer »

aheilbut wrote: post #104
bhauer wrote: post #9

Awesome. I say this is a sign that the incumbent manufacturers are finally adapting to the heat brought on by Korean and Chinese newcomers. "Industry's most affordable Ultra HD monitor" is semantics. The Seiki 39" is still substantially cheaper, now at less than $500 on Amazon. Technically, that is a television, so I suppose "monitor" is a clever use of words by Dell. If Seiki drops an HDMI 2 version of their monitor…

So a quad 24 Ultra HD setup would be just right..

That would be quite agreeable, yes! The bezels would then be the target for elimination by the next generation.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#115

Post by joosters »

majormajor wrote: post #99
selmnoo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Inadequate" for gaming, yes. Inadequate for computing? Hardly. How about for watching movies? High framerates would obviously seem very important for gaming, but it's not clear how important they are to movies/shows. Your thoughts?

Displaying 24fps content on a 60fps screen repeats frames. If you repeat half the frames of the 25fps stream twice, and alternating half of the frames three times, then you get 60 frames per second, with a stream looking like: AABBBCCDDDEEFFF... This isn't perfect, since really each frame should be on the screen for exactly the same amount of time, which is why 120hz TVs came about -- 120 is evenly divisible by each…

Drop the screen refresh rate to 24hz to match the video then...

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#116

Post by crassus »

majormajor wrote: post #99
selmnoo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Inadequate" for gaming, yes. Inadequate for computing? Hardly. How about for watching movies? High framerates would obviously seem very important for gaming, but it's not clear how important they are to movies/shows. Your thoughts?

Displaying 24fps content on a 60fps screen repeats frames. If you repeat half the frames of the 25fps stream twice, and alternating half of the frames three times, then you get 60 frames per second, with a stream looking like: AABBBCCDDDEEFFF... This isn't perfect, since really each frame should be on the screen for exactly the same amount of time, which is why 120hz TVs came about -- 120 is evenly divisible by each…

Is this also the source of the ultra-real "soap opera" effect that ruins movies on new televisions?

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#117

Post by underwater »

crassus wrote: post #116
majormajor wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Displaying 24fps content on a 60fps screen repeats frames. If you repeat half the frames of the 25fps stream twice, and alternating half of the frames three times, then you get 60 frames per second, with a stream looking like: AABBBCCDDDEEFFF... This isn't perfect, since really each frame should be on the screen for exactly the same amount of time, which is why 120hz TVs came about -- 120 is evenly divisible by each…

Is this also the source of the ultra-real "soap opera" effect that ruins movies on new televisions?

No. That's the TV interpolating frames. The effect described would introduce a stutter.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#118

Post by r00fus »

seiji wrote: post #75
nitrogen wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't feel the same. Unless one is nearsighted and/or crosseyed, it's easier to focus and converge on a more distant object. It also provides for a lot more desk space in front of the monitor.

I'm holding up 27" monitors with this cheap little thing: http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10828&cs_id=... Plenty of free desk space! (Also, in the pro-sub-30" argument: it's difficult finding affordable movable arms and mounts for 30"+ monitors)

I have 2 24" monitors at work in portrait mode and bezels are my bane. I would much prefer a 30" (or hell, 50") with no bezel.

With my main MBP display as a good 2nd screen (great for telecons where you share one screen - you can keep your side-channel chats and email private on the other), one large main screen is perfect.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#120

Post by foolrush »

isomorphic wrote: post #82
publicfig wrote: post #5

I'm a bit curious why both the 24" and the 32" are priced over 1k, yet they are able to get the 28" down below that mark. That's not to say that I'm not incredibly excited to see how this ends up! I've been looking for a sub-1.5k 28" monitor with high resolution for a while, and though I love my Apple Thunderbolt Display I use at work, I am hesitant that if I buy one for myself, I'll be buying right before a refresh.…

The press release is saying that the 24"/32" will support 99% of AdobeRGB. So, better gamut on the 24"/32" means more money than the 28".

It would be a heck of a coup if it was the same gamut. One can dream...
Post reply on HN