We could see entirely new display technology this time around. That is if Sharps IGZO tech is truly ready to go. Of course new technology means new characteristics. We are a long way from perfection in LCD displays.
In certain specific aspects they're just leveling off when comparing to CRTs that sold into similar price ranges. An example would be controllable contrast. Ideally you would have one of high bit depth to proof corrections for other device ranges. Some of the display manufacturers have tried this. Prior to that black and white points shifted simultaneously as a display was dialed up or down, which is still the case with almost all of them. Getting away from the backlit concept in general would be a big help. It would eliminate backlight bleed which is often solved by spreading out whatever can't be directly blocked (especially around corners) and using secondary panel blocking to capture some of the remainder. It's not very cost effective, and I don't think Apple does anything like that. Some of the imac photos I've seen have looked kind of bad in this regard, but it's difficult to determine accurately. When things are photographed to where the black now looks whatever off shade of dark grey, things are not really as you would see them sitting in front of the display.
Just hunting down whatever is causing the current image persistence should be sufficient for the rmbp. Imacs have used LG panels for many years. The last ones to show significant image persistence in typically in the second year or beyond were the 24" models, or at least that hardware era. I haven't seen image persistence on other display brands in years. It's just a revival of an old problem that has been solved before on similar technology..
In certain specific aspects they're just leveling off when comparing to CRTs that sold into similar price ranges.
This is true but LCDs have one big advantage, that maddening flicker is gone. Maybe I'm more sensitive than others but my first LCD screen was a massive relief. Frankly that old LCD was rather pathetic compared to what is available today. The thing is before the LCD I thought the low resolution was causing me the problems with the CRT.
An example would be controllable contrast. Ideally you would have one of high bit depth to proof corrections for other device ranges. Some of the display manufacturers have tried this. Prior to that black and white points shifted simultaneously as a display was dialed up or down, which is still the case with almost all of them. Getting away from the backlit concept in general would be a big help. It would eliminate backlight bleed which is often solved by spreading out whatever can't be directly blocked (especially around corners) and using secondary panel blocking to capture some of the remainder. It's not very cost effective, and I don't think Apple does anything like that. Some of the imac photos I've seen have looked kind of bad in this regard, but it's difficult to determine accurately. When things are photographed to where the black now looks whatever off shade of dark grey, things are not really as you would see them sitting in front of the display.
Speaking of CRTs, do you know how hard it is to even find black and white CRT based video monitors these days? An application in the plant requires the operating features of a CRT tube and you just can't find them any more. At least not in the quality required.
Just hunting down whatever is causing the current image persistence should be sufficient for the rmbp. Imacs have used LG panels for many years. The last ones to show significant image persistence in typically in the second year or beyond were the 24" models, or at least that hardware era. I haven't seen image persistence on other display brands in years. It's just a revival of an old problem that has been solved before on similar technology..
True again but Sharps screens would offer other advantages for any portable device especially for power savings.
This is true but LCDs have one big advantage, that maddening flicker is gone. Maybe I'm more sensitive than others but my first LCD screen was a massive relief. Frankly that old LCD was rather pathetic compared to what is available today. The thing is before the LCD I thought the low resolution was causing me the problems with the CRT.
I hated that stupid flicker, although quality ones were better than cheap ones. Some of the early LCD displays gave me headaches. The early Cinema displays Apple used performed poorly at low brightness settings, and the high brightness settings were ridiculous in a moderately lit environment. The other thing I disliked was the resolution of older ones. At that time just a 1600x1200 display was still extremely expensive.
Quote:
Speaking of CRTs, do you know how hard it is to even find black and white CRT based video monitors these days? An application in the plant requires the operating features of a CRT tube and you just can't find them any more. At least not in the quality required.
I would guess that whatever businesses needed them stockpiled as many as possible. Even specialty hardware, which tends to be extremely conservative, switched a few years ago. I mean things like dicom conformant (medical use) displays are lcds. Broadcast monitors switched over. Adoption is typically slower in those areas due to extreme cost and lower quality for early adopters. Some of the earlier broadcast quality lcds started in the $10k range. Much of the higher end reference hardware like Barco has been out of production for a number of years, so I am unsurprised you would have trouble locating one new or at least within spec.
Quote:
True again but Sharps screens would offer other advantages for any portable device especially for power savings.
It reminds me of thunderbolt when it was still called Lightpeak in that when something isn't in current use on a familiar product, it gets hyped a lot. Sharp has shown off IGZO hardware at a lot of trade shows. It looks impressive, but I have yet to see it show up in anything. I don't know the advantages or disadvantages compared to what is already on the market, and trade show offerings tend to involve favorable reference implementations. If the power savings is really there, it could be useful beyond just notebooks. Heat is a major factor in color stability of lcds. I knew a couple white papers on the topic, but they don't seem to be there anymore. Anyway the power savings is huge in a lot of areas beyond just notebooks. It would be great if they live up to the hype.
This is about the MacBook Pro and not to argue though I don't care about the failures in government engaging in blatant hypocrisy on both sides. I care about processors and graphics. End of story.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
We could see entirely new display technology this time around. That is if Sharps IGZO tech is truly ready to go. Of course new technology means new characteristics. We are a long way from perfection in LCD displays.
In certain specific aspects they're just leveling off when comparing to CRTs that sold into similar price ranges. An example would be controllable contrast. Ideally you would have one of high bit depth to proof corrections for other device ranges. Some of the display manufacturers have tried this. Prior to that black and white points shifted simultaneously as a display was dialed up or down, which is still the case with almost all of them. Getting away from the backlit concept in general would be a big help. It would eliminate backlight bleed which is often solved by spreading out whatever can't be directly blocked (especially around corners) and using secondary panel blocking to capture some of the remainder. It's not very cost effective, and I don't think Apple does anything like that. Some of the imac photos I've seen have looked kind of bad in this regard, but it's difficult to determine accurately. When things are photographed to where the black now looks whatever off shade of dark grey, things are not really as you would see them sitting in front of the display.
Just hunting down whatever is causing the current image persistence should be sufficient for the rmbp. Imacs have used LG panels for many years. The last ones to show significant image persistence in typically in the second year or beyond were the 24" models, or at least that hardware era. I haven't seen image persistence on other display brands in years. It's just a revival of an old problem that has been solved before on similar technology..
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
This is true but LCDs have one big advantage, that maddening flicker is gone. Maybe I'm more sensitive than others but my first LCD screen was a massive relief. Frankly that old LCD was rather pathetic compared to what is available today. The thing is before the LCD I thought the low resolution was causing me the problems with the CRT.
I hated that stupid flicker, although quality ones were better than cheap ones. Some of the early LCD displays gave me headaches. The early Cinema displays Apple used performed poorly at low brightness settings, and the high brightness settings were ridiculous in a moderately lit environment. The other thing I disliked was the resolution of older ones. At that time just a 1600x1200 display was still extremely expensive.
Quote:
Speaking of CRTs, do you know how hard it is to even find black and white CRT based video monitors these days? An application in the plant requires the operating features of a CRT tube and you just can't find them any more. At least not in the quality required.
I would guess that whatever businesses needed them stockpiled as many as possible. Even specialty hardware, which tends to be extremely conservative, switched a few years ago. I mean things like dicom conformant (medical use) displays are lcds. Broadcast monitors switched over. Adoption is typically slower in those areas due to extreme cost and lower quality for early adopters. Some of the earlier broadcast quality lcds started in the $10k range. Much of the higher end reference hardware like Barco has been out of production for a number of years, so I am unsurprised you would have trouble locating one new or at least within spec.
Quote:
True again but Sharps screens would offer other advantages for any portable device especially for power savings.
It reminds me of thunderbolt when it was still called Lightpeak in that when something isn't in current use on a familiar product, it gets hyped a lot. Sharp has shown off IGZO hardware at a lot of trade shows. It looks impressive, but I have yet to see it show up in anything. I don't know the advantages or disadvantages compared to what is already on the market, and trade show offerings tend to involve favorable reference implementations. If the power savings is really there, it could be useful beyond just notebooks. Heat is a major factor in color stability of lcds. I knew a couple white papers on the topic, but they don't seem to be there anymore. Anyway the power savings is huge in a lot of areas beyond just notebooks. It would be great if they live up to the hype.
Apple better worry about the tax problems they are confronted with which is under investigation by Senator Levin.
Originally Posted by marvfox
Apple better worry about the tax problems they are confronted with which is under investigation by Senator Levin.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the thread whatsoever and is nonsensical false concern, particularly since they have zero tax problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
This has absolutely nothing to do with the thread whatsoever and is nonsensical false concern, particularly since they have zero tax problems.
Zero taxes != zero tax problems.
This is about the MacBook Pro and not to argue though I don't care about the failures in government engaging in blatant hypocrisy on both sides. I care about processors and graphics. End of story.
What are we going to get from Haswell and nVidia?