Hmmm. I really like the option to rotate to portrait, as I have a portrait monitor myself, but I think it looks really strange to have the option, then put a largeer bezel on the "bottom" of the screen, so when it rotates it on one side
From the brief bits I’ve tried, I’d say Windows and Linux need at least another year or two to really work well with 4k+ screens: some applications work okay, but others have their UIs break in various unexpected ways.
Apple's 5K is a hack at the moment. Not yet supported by displayport they put an additional chip to drive it (by ATI I presume, since it makes no sense the choice of an ATI card at this time). I would honestly wait the next revision for the 5K iMac when the DP standard will be rectified.I don’t think it’s fair to call Apple’s implementation a “hack” really (or at least not in a negative way); the internal bus used to schlep pixels from the graphics card to the display’s chips and then on to the physical pixels is an implementation detail. For an all-in-one computer, it doesn’t really matter too much what the bus is, from a user perspective, as long as it works.
32" IPS 4K monitors have been as low as $700 already, so that might be a pretty good options for those who have a bit more money to spend.
I don’t think it’s fair to call Apple’s implementation a “hack” really (or at least not in a negative way);
it’s been working pretty much flawlessly
With pixel doubling, I'm spending a fortune for a screen that provides NO ADDITIONAL USABLE SPACE than a 1080p panel. It just looks nicer.What do you mean by “no additional usable space”? With a double-resolution panel, the text size can be bumped down substantially and the text is still crystal clear. 4x as much of a large phototograph can be seen on screen in its native resolution. Tiny details on maps and diagrams are easy to see. In practice, the extra “usable space” is very noticeable.
32" IPS 4K monitors have been as low as $700 already, so that might be a pretty good options for those who have a bit more money to spend.
One thing I forgot to mention (apologies for the double post): Good review, though apart from the mirror effect I personally find 28" a bit too big for a monitor. My largest is 25" and I find it too large to view comfortably.
Edit: Oh, maybe I'm confused.
Scaling apps destroys subpixel text rendering with ClearType, or ClearType-ish text rendering under Linux.
BTW. Apple never did subpixel text rendering... or hinting for that matter. In other words, scaling works on Mac because everything was blurry to begin with. :rolleyes:
it's not that it's too large.. .you're sitting too close..Show Image(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/embarrassed3-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862502)
BTW. Apple never did subpixel text rendering... or hinting for that matter. In other words, scaling works on Mac because everything was blurry to begin with. :rolleyes:Pretty much every part of this statement is wrong.