I know, right? I could understand increasing the resolution on cameras so you can zoom in, crop and similar things. But displays? I think we're getting to the point of diminishing returns.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DisplayPort 2.0 Supports Up to Two 8K Displays or One 16K Display, Rollout Expected to Begin in Late 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In COBOL, there was an instruction DECIMAL-POINT IS COMMA, created for use in Europe.
In other words: If you're, let's say, from Germany, then 200.000 means "two hundred thousand". We separate the thousands with a "." and the decimals with a comma -- just the opposite of how you do it in the US.
Don't mind us Americans. We're a bit bonkers. Fortunately, some of us are a bit less than others.
It's not just a question of the cost of the monitor, but also the graphics cards. It's great that they've figured out how to push so many pixels through a pipe, but it still takes a lot of power to drive those pixels. Most of us are not going to even come close to pushing this envelope.
All the comments asking "why 16k"... why the bugger not have a standard that will take a lot longer to outgrow? And even then its 16K at 60hz or we can get a nice 8k screen at 240Hz or something daft like that with HDR. I would much rather the room for growth than exactly what we need today.
I guess this means Tim Apple & co are giving up on high-density displays for AR & VR. Such a shame.
Combined with a touch screen, 16K is great for business applications like multi-user whiteboards, conference hall displays and digital dashboards, because why not.
I could see whiteboards, but, for me, conference hall displays & dashboards are a bit overkill. Conference hall displays are too far away for people to really see the detail. Dashboards are too small, and probably too distracting. But that's just me. Your mileage might vary.
I have to agree....it's like having a set of home theater speakers that will reproduce 1Hz to 80,000Hz....what good is all that extra range if humans can't hear it anyway?
It’s wonderful. Fact of matter 16k may be good for video editing details post production. However, the typical “anyone” in their living room will not care about a gnat on an iguanas nose shot at 100’ or 30 meters.
This is good for tech and maybe will bring prices down on more upcoming 8k sets but I fail to see, as another poster commented, how this is a value for a TV consumer. Beyond 4K what is the value. I do not watch TV/“sit in movies” with my nose to the screen.
Additionally, if youstreaming you’re post-production product what matter does it make, feasibility, for those not on a 1 Gbps connection? Only product I can see this working on is media products (blu Ray, etc.) Then we are back to the screens they are viewed on.
Please all-knowing-ones explain the revolution.
This is good for tech and maybe will bring prices down on more upcoming 8k sets but I fail to see, as another poster commented, how this is a value for a TV consumer. Beyond 4K what is the value. I do not watch TV/“sit in movies” with my nose to the screen.
Additionally, if youstreaming you’re post-production product what matter does it make, feasibility, for those not on a 1 Gbps connection? Only product I can see this working on is media products (blu Ray, etc.) Then we are back to the screens they are viewed on.
Please all-knowing-ones explain the revolution.
8K is about as much as you need on a desktop and likely overkill for anything smaller than 42". 4K is about is much as you need on a TV from typical viewing distances and display sizes less than 120" sitting more than 6ft away. Nobody will personally ever need a 16K display. Not even for movie theaters. Maybe for IMAX, but even that is up for debate. I think I read somewhere that the most you would ever really need for the most advanced VR/AR experience is dual 8K 120Hz displays for each eye, so I suppose this would be good for that.
This might sound short-sighted like how Bill Gates or somebody said you'll never need more than 640K of memory, but unlike memory needs for apps, human eyes have an absolute limit that you can't go beyond. I'm far more interested in reproducing human vision in terms of color gamut, dynamic range, high frame rates, etc. Resolution at this point isn't really as important, but I think the marketers will keep pushing this idea as it's the easiest thing to upgrade and has been a primary driver of upgrades in years past. You could stand in front of a 4K display at the store and see a real difference. 8K? Not so much. Consumers will see little reason to upgrade unless other improvements to picture quality are made.
This might sound short-sighted like how Bill Gates or somebody said you'll never need more than 640K of memory, but unlike memory needs for apps, human eyes have an absolute limit that you can't go beyond. I'm far more interested in reproducing human vision in terms of color gamut, dynamic range, high frame rates, etc. Resolution at this point isn't really as important, but I think the marketers will keep pushing this idea as it's the easiest thing to upgrade and has been a primary driver of upgrades in years past. You could stand in front of a 4K display at the store and see a real difference. 8K? Not so much. Consumers will see little reason to upgrade unless other improvements to picture quality are made.
Yeah, the only function of that is IMAX-size screens. There's no point AT ALL for anything smaller.
When is MacOS going to properly support MST for daisy chaining DisplayPort monitors and using MST hubs:
https://www.amazon.com/DisplayPort-Multi-Monitor-Splitter-MSTDP123DP/dp/B00JLRBB8I
Standards associations need to tighten their standards. Make key features mandatory so lazy manufacturers can't claim compatibility based on half-assed implementations.
https://www.amazon.com/DisplayPort-Multi-Monitor-Splitter-MSTDP123DP/dp/B00JLRBB8I
Standards associations need to tighten their standards. Make key features mandatory so lazy manufacturers can't claim compatibility based on half-assed implementations.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
