Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

I want to buy a 3D monitor

I won't settle. If they don't make anything adequate, I will buy nothing.

This is also the reason why I haven't bought a 30" 2D monitor, because I really need 3D.

Given that RDZ is coming out next year, I will also demand that now.

And it should have all the connectivity like in the top Dell monitors.

1200 is really bare. I don't really want as little.
 
cube said:
I won't settle. If they don't make anything adequate, I will buy nothing.

This is also the reason why I haven't bought a 30" 2D monitor, because I really need 3D.

Given that RDZ is coming out next year, I will also demand that now.

And it should have all the connectivity like in the top Dell monitors.

1200 is really bare. I don't really want as little.
Click to expand...

Well I think you should wait, because there doesn't seem to be a monitor to your liking currently
 
cube said:
I won't settle. If they don't make anything adequate, I will buy nothing.

This is also the reason why I haven't bought a 30" 2D monitor, because I really need 3D.

Given that RDZ is coming out next year, I will also demand that now.

And it should have all the connectivity like in the top Dell monitors.

1200 is really bare. I don't really want as little.
Click to expand...

Well thats tough as i don't think there will be anything for the next couple of months at least, also what webbrowsing activity requires 3D? Are there even 3D websites?

Or you could find somebody techy and get your monitor custom made using a 3d engine from a tv and fix the resolution somehow... expensive but it could work...
 
1200 and higher is for the computer. 3D is for connecting a Blu Ray player (as Macs can neither play Blu Ray nor display 3D).

But are there monitors which work in 3D when connected to a Blu Ray player? When there's finally an acceptable monitor, it should be capable of this.
 
cube said:
I won't settle. If they don't make anything adequate, I will buy nothing.

This is also the reason why I haven't bought a 30" 2D monitor, because I really need 3D.

Given that RDZ is coming out next year, I will also demand that now.

And it should have all the connectivity like in the top Dell monitors.

1200 is really bare. I don't really want as little.
Click to expand...

Demand all you want. If it doesn't exist you can't buy it. I guess you'll be waiting, then. Get comfy.
 
It doesn't exist because manufacturers make what they want, not what people need.

To demand is essential.
 
Don't the vendors realize that if they don't make at least 1920x1200, people are buying neither 2D nor 3D monitors?
 
Manufacturers make 1920x1080 3D LCD panels because the vast demand for those panels is for television sets and they only need 1920x1080.

I'm not familiar if the panels are manufactured at 1920x1080 or if a larger panel is sub-divided into multiple panels. If the former, you'd have to build an assembly line around 1920x1200 panels. If the latter, then cutting it to 1920x1200 as opposed to 1920x1080 would result in significant wastage, driving up the production costs.

The higher production costs means a higher retail price which dampens demand so that is a disincentive for companies to offer such a panel.
 
I think the fault lies with going for damned Thunderbolt instead of DP 1.2
 
I have to agree with CWallace. Television resolutions are popular since the same lines can be used for computer monitors or televisions.

1920 x 1200 (16:10) and higher 16:9 resolutions carry a significant premium. This is where you get 27" 1080p computer displays. Unless you are looking for WQHD 27".

Though bandwidth limitations does so promise...
 
But they do make higher resolution displays.
The problem is with companies focusing on the lowest common denominator.

Now they are cutting back LCD production because there is not enough demand.

They should not complain.
 
cube said:
I won't settle. If they don't make anything adequate, I will buy nothing.

This is also the reason why I haven't bought a 30" 2D monitor, because I really need 3D.

Given that RDZ is coming out next year, I will also demand that now.

And it should have all the connectivity like in the top Dell monitors.

1200 is really bare. I don't really want as little.
Click to expand...

3D is complex and demanding. Even if there were such monitors in 1920x1200 res., it most likely would only be functional (at least properly) with a more powerful GPU. Any resolution beyond 1080p when considering 3D is not possible right now. It's something for the future, for sure.
 
Destroysall said:
3D is complex and demanding. Even if there were such monitors in 1920x1200 res., it most likely would only be functional (at least properly) with a more powerful GPU. Any resolution beyond 1080p when considering 3D is not possible right now. It's something for the future, for sure.
Click to expand...

What I need is to display 2D at least at 1920x1200 from the Mac via DP 1.1, and 3D 1080p via HDMI from a Blu Ray player with black bars. No problem there.
 
cube said:
The problem is with companies focusing on the lowest common denominator.
Click to expand...

They're actually focusing on the most common denominator, which is why the retail prices continue to drop year after year as yields improve and production costs become lower.


As Eidorian noted, there are companies making 3D LCD panels with a native resolution of 1920x1200, but because demand is low, so are production rates and yields, which raises the production cost and therefore, the retail price. The first 3D 1920x1080 televisions were very expensive, just as the first 2D 1920x1080 televisions were very expensive for these same reasons.

Should 1920x1200 prove to be a desirable and popular format, demand will increase and more production capacity will be built and prices will start to fall.
 
CWallace said:
They're actually focusing on the most common denominator, which is why the retail prices continue to drop year after year as yields improve and production costs become lower.


As Eidorian noted, there are companies making 3D LCD panels with a native resolution of 1920x1200, but because demand is low, so are production rates and yields, which raises the production cost and therefore, the retail price. The first 3D 1920x1080 televisions were very expensive, just as the first 2D 1920x1080 televisions were very expensive for these same reasons.

Should 1920x1200 prove to be a desirable and popular format, demand will increase and more production capacity will be built and prices will start to fall.
Click to expand...

I don't know any 1920x1200 3D monitor besides a professional Panasonic which costs like $10000 because it has HD-SDI.

You cannot say demand is low if the products are not offered.
 
I don't really understand the op's requirements and his obsession with 3D, since I think it's a gimmick, I do agree that 16:10 monitors are preferable for work stuff. I am not so obsessed about 1200 pixels either, but I hate the way we are being forced into 16:9. I have 2 x 24" 1920x1200 monitors (not 3d, sorry) and I love them.

Luckily the tv manufacturers are starting to realise that consumers are not jumping for joy at this 3d nonsense and the stupid detour seems to be coming at an end so that we finally get real innovations: OLED and 4K.
 
CWallace said:
The Hyundai W240S evidently did passive 3D and it was 1920x1200.
Click to expand...

- This monitor was never clearly specified if it was 1920x1200 or 1080p.
- It is not generally available.
- Because it's passive, it is not FullHD 3D.
 
I had no choice but to get a 1080p for the olympics.

But I'm still looking for more resolution and the offer is even drying up.
 
Coming back to this subject, there are a few more TN panels on the market at 1080p. Though I am glad to see more IPS and PVA options available. 3D is effectively dead at this point and the only market left is catering to gamers that want high refresh rates.
 
So, now there's at least a 27" 2560x1440 ASUS, which is expensive being a TN panel with NVIDIA sync useless for me, only one DP 1.2 connector and no additional HDMI and VGA. And I don't even know if it supports side-by-side and top-bottom regular signal 3D modes, and "HDMI" 3D mode.

If people are not buying PCs, why not selling the kind of monitors nobody offers?

And I am really looking for 30" 2560x1600. I don't have a 4K computer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back