Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Double the dpi and then take my money!

Then you would have to scale the display. I have the 34 inch version and the dpi is as high as it could get without having to scale. The 15-inch MacBook Pro is 2800x1800, but most users scale to 1920x1200 or less to be able to read the text.
 
1. They really need to start describing monitor resolution either by ppi or vertical pixel count. With the widely varying aspect ratios of monitors these days, horizontal pixel count is the least useful description.

2. It’s great this monitor exists, but the impractical aspects of it really make me hope AR monitors get here soon.
 
That is one big mother of a monitor.
It’s yuge!
[doublepost=1548285400][/doublepost]
They really need to start describing monitor resolution either by ppi or vertical pixel count. With the widely varying aspect ratios of monitors these days, horizontal pixel count is the least useful description

It wouldn’t be any clearer if they referred to it as a 1440p monitor. You’d need both horizontal and vertical resolutions, or one plus aspect ratio.
 
It’s yuge!
[doublepost=1548285400][/doublepost]

It wouldn’t be any clearer if they referred to it as a 1440p monitor. You’d need both horizontal and vertical resolutions, or one plus aspect ratio.

By knowing the vertical resolution, the pixel density would be clearer because the vertical height of monitors doesn’t vary greatly.
 
Better be an IPS panel. Is it? Why did Macrumors miss the most critical aspect of the specs?

Come on. It's twice the area and half the pixels of an iMac or iMac Pro. I have terrible eyes and I can tell the improved quality of retina iMacs...

I think if you're willing to accept this pixel density, you've already given up on visual quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ploki
Two at a time?

Two videos at a time, I mean.

(Incidentally, this is a 32:9 display).

Oh yeah I was thinking of my LG Ultrawide, which is 21:9 and great for watching Hollywood cinema movies but not so much for TV shows (16:9). But this Dell 32:9 display would be cool for multitasking.
 
Come on. It's twice the area and half the pixels of an iMac or iMac Pro. I have terrible eyes and I can tell the improved quality of retina iMacs...

I think if you're willing to accept this pixel density, you've already given up on visual quality.

Not really. But that may be your priority. Perhaps you don't work with anything that colour critical, and that's fine, but you can't just assume that will apply to everyone.
 
Interesting but ultimately wouldn’t work for me since at my job we swivel the monitors back and forth to the people beside us to show what we have on the screen.
 
It's Dell. It will never be class leading or revolutionary. Simply garbage to mediocre like all they make.

LOL, please. Are you saying that because it doesn't have an Apple logo on it? Dell makes some really good monitors. Check out the Dell U2717D... solid monitor for real work (only thing it's missing is a faster refresh rate for gaming).

Stop lying.
 
It would be nice if Dan understood the KVM feature... his next comment about wireless keyboard and mouse makes no sense in the video.
 
I like where this is going, just need a higher pixel count. I'd pick one up when it drops below 1K.
 
Dell recently unveiled the first 49-inch ultrawide 5K monitor with a 32:9 aspect ratio, the result of which is a wide, immersive display with an impressive resolution.
I already pointed out how misleading it is to call this kind of resolution / aspect ratio "ultrawide 5K" when LG released their version last year. Even Dell doesn't seem to call it a 5K monitor, but rather "dual QHD"...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.