News World's First True HD Monitor Unveiled

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07/26/worlds_first_true_hd_monitor_unveiled/

 

While the idea of HDMI on a consumer level LCD monitor is nice, I just don't see how this will ever be worth anything other than "my monitor has HDMI and yours doesn't"

Ehh...

Maybe I'm just jealous...

 

With an HDMI port, I was so close to finally seeing the perfect monitor to have . The Dell's 2407WFP has a brightness of 450cd/m² and a contrast ratio of 1000:1, whereas this one only has 300cd/m² and a contrast ratio of 800:1.

 

Multiple outputs? eh?

 

:drool: me wants.....

/me looks at 17 inch CRT.

 

i dont really see the point, a 24" screen should have a higher resolution then that (shouldnt it ?) so really this is just a way of making the 24" screen look cheaper then the rest, when the resolution is lower

 

What, the 2407WFP isn't HD? It's 1080p plus HDCP, albeit over DVI rather than HDMI, but seeing as they're two shapes for the same thing (minus audio), no real difference. They sell converter dongles, and AFAIK they just rearrange wires, no circuitry.

Bit of a stupid headline imo. HD is anything of a high-def resolution. HDTV is HD plus HDCP-compliant, and given the 'TV' I assume it requires a tuner of some sort to be integrated as well.

I won't be buying any new screens until we have the Brightside HDR available in consumer-level panels. There's not much upgrading you can do from a 24" LCD, and seeing as I neither watch TV nor ever want to again (HD or not), I've got no use for an HDMI port, and there certainly haven't been any movies recently worth buying, let alone paying a massive premium for to get on HD-DVD.

But that's me. I understand you have decent programming over the pond.

 

Firehed: you totally stole my ideas!

I would like to add, though: as you pointed out, HDMI port would include audio. But this monitor has no speakers, as far as I can tell. So....in order to use the monitor with HDMI, you would HAVE to go out and buy another piece, to extract the audio and send it elsewhere? And that seems strange...since you'd go from HDMI out on the back of your player, hit some sort of splitter to send Dolby audio one direction, but send HDMI without audio to the monitor. Seems like it'd be nicer just to replace the HDMI port with a second DVI port. Still only requires one extra part to go from HDMI-out to the DVI in...and the DVI port will be more flexible for current computers and such. DVI, as I understand it, can support HDCP too. No real point in an HDMI port on something that doesn't do audio? or is there?

And thanks for mentioning Brightside -- ever since I saw the original Bit-tech article, I was amazed by their work. I, too, anxiously await Brightside's goodness.

 

...But now you can have the flexibility of HDMI (not just physically). And yes, the 2407WFP is 1080p too, but with better quality visuals, which is why I'm having a hard time choosing between the two.

The article never said anything about a TV... it said HD monitor.

So you're willing to wait that long until next decade which is when HDR displays should be for sale at consumer-level? That's a long time.

 

There are actually differences in the way colour is transmitted between HDMI and DVI that may result in strange artefacts. HDMI and DVI are mostly identical, but there are subtle differences between them.

Benq are going to launch a 30" screen with all the inputs and a resolution of 2560x1600 which strikes me as a little tastier than the 24". However where are the 3840x2400 displays? A 30" screen with a 9 megapixel resolution would yield a screen with a ppi of around 150, certainly clear without being microscopically small.

 

To actually get HD certification I thought a screen had to have other things as well, like two ports, and a 16:9 aspect ratio.
So this screen isn't proper HD, it's just got a HDMI port.
What's the point? The 2007 is better.

 

Not quite true

Well, if you wanna be accurate, a PC monitor with those specs, isn't actually 1080p (1920x1080=16:9 aspect ratio), they are 1920x1200, hence 16:10 aspect ratio. And by the way, the Dell 2407WFP ISN'T fully HD compatible, because, as Chris (a Dell employee from the Dell forums) stated, it WON'T support a 1920x1080p resolution when playing videos (blu ray or HD DVD), it supports that resolution for normal DESKTOP and games situation, but not over HDMI or anything HDCP related, like those 2 new video formats. Hopefully the Benq will fully support that.

Those are my 2 cents

 

That would be awesome...except it could be 3840x2160. Why? Because that is the perfect monitor for dealing with both 720 and 1080 resolutions with perfect integer interpolation. Multiply 1920x1080 resolutions by 2 or 1280x720 by 3, and you get perfect scaling to 3840x2160. 16x9 format, tons of real-estate. 3840x2400 would be a 16:10 aspect ratio...but as long as there were skinny black bars on the top and bottom when playing 16:9 content, it'd still be perfect with a little extra real-estate when not watching 16:9 movies.

If you want 720 content on a 1080 monitor, every pixel has to expand to 1.5x1.5 pixels, which could create problems. Likewise, scaling down 1080 content to 720 is iffy. Probably not anything you'd notice with a decent scaler in the TV...but with integer scaling, you don't have to pay extra for a good quality chip. Cheaper is always better (although, it'll be many moons before 3840x2160 at any size is cheaper than 1920x1080...but I'd rather pay for pixels than for a processing chip thats only needed because there's not enough pixels...and I'm gonna be too poor for either option for at least a few years anyway.).

 

Yes... of course it's got a widescreen aspect ratio... Every LCD monitor of that price range is widescreen now. And also, it wouldn't be able to do HD resolution in the first place, if it wasn't widescreen.