4 ms·

Are you saying that it is a shame companies are selling 110ppi monitors?! 110ppi (27 inches/16:9 at 1440p) has been the standard non-retina resolution for a lon

Are you saying that it is a shame companies are selling 110ppi monitors?! 110ppi (27 inches/16:9 at 1440p) has been the standard non-retina resolution for a long time. It's what I have on my desk right now as an ultrawide -- I'd be interested in getting a higher-res one but there isn't really one that has a high enough refresh rate.

naoqj 5y ago
Non-retina is a thing of the past. It should be relegated to monitors that cost 200€.
- ubercow13 5y ago
  Just like non-VRR is a thing of the past, non-120+Hz is a thing of the past, etc.
- howinteresting 5y ago
  I can claim equally without evidence that non-120+Hz is a thing of the past.
- nick__m 5y ago
  Non-curved 60Hz monitors are a thing of the past they should be relegated to monitors that cost 200$. That was an easy comment to make! Do you realize that other peoples have different preferences than you do and they are equally valid.
- noahtallen 5y ago
  Maybe it should be, but it’s not actually a thing of the past. I would bet hard cash that a higher number of recently released expensive monitors ($1000+) don’t have retina than those that did. There is still a massive market for people willing to make the trade off in another direction (like higher refresh rate or going ultrawide) rather than retina. Obviously it’d be amazing if what you said is true, because both retina and HRR are very nice to have
- account42 5y ago
  There are so many other dimensions that can be more important. 110 dpi is fine for me now - my next upgrade will focus on contrast and black level instead.
alwillis 5y ago
My 2017 4K iMac has a DPI of 219 and supports Display P3, a color gamut that's 50% larger than the standard sRGB. For most of what developers and even graphic designers do, 120 MHz refresh rates aren't required. People who need high refresh rates on large screens already know that and are prepared to spend the money necessary.

naoqj 5y ago

Non-retina is a thing of the past. It should be relegated to monitors that cost 200€.

ubercow13 5y ago
Just like non-VRR is a thing of the past, non-120+Hz is a thing of the past, etc.
howinteresting 5y ago
I can claim equally without evidence that non-120+Hz is a thing of the past.
nick__m 5y ago
Non-curved 60Hz monitors are a thing of the past they should be relegated to monitors that cost 200$. That was an easy comment to make! Do you realize that other peoples have different preferences than you do and they are equally valid.
noahtallen 5y ago
Maybe it should be, but it’s not actually a thing of the past. I would bet hard cash that a higher number of recently released expensive monitors ($1000+) don’t have retina than those that did. There is still a massive market for people willing to make the trade off in another direction (like higher refresh rate or going ultrawide) rather than retina. Obviously it’d be amazing if what you said is true, because both retina and HRR are very nice to have
account42 5y ago
There are so many other dimensions that can be more important. 110 dpi is fine for me now - my next upgrade will focus on contrast and black level instead.

alwillis 5y ago

My 2017 4K iMac has a DPI of 219 and supports Display P3, a color gamut that's 50% larger than the standard sRGB. For most of what developers and even graphic designers do, 120 MHz refresh rates aren't required. People who need high refresh rates on large screens already know that and are prepared to spend the money necessary.