4 ms·

At $500, there are FAR better monitors. Bad contrast, bad brightness, bad everything. If you buy your programmers this, buy them a years supply of pills to de

At $500, there are FAR better monitors. Bad contrast, bad brightness, bad everything. If you buy your programmers this, buy them a years supply of pills to deal with the headaches it will induce. Again, this isn't like a "bad for picky art professionals" type of bad. Just awful, I wouldn't even sell it to anyone I knew personally because I knew it would come back to bite me.

shiven 13y ago
At $500, there are FAR better monitors. You keep repeating this as if it is some magic mantra. You have not defined any what "better" really means in manner that can be quantified and compared without introducing subjective opinions of a user. Also, care to link to these "better" monitors, including sellers that sell these for the $500 price, as well as non-subjective reviews?
- f00_ 13y ago
  Better monitors very easily be objectively conceived. Latency, refresh rate, contrast ratio, brightness, input options, are all easily measured. "Better" monitors are easily found through a simple search, and how do you exactly determine a review to be "non-subjective"? http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ http://thewirecutter.com/leaderboard/tvs/ http://thewirecutter.com/leaderboard/tvs/ http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/a-great-27-inch-lcd-monitor/ http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/a-great-27-inch-lcd-monitor...
  - randallsquared 13y ago
    What latency is better than what brightness?
    - f00_ 13y ago
      I can see where you going with that, and I'll agree it's subjective, as to which suits your needs, but I think you can find TV's that are all around better.
mcv 13y ago
Better monitors in terms of brightness, color and other monitor-specific features. But not in resolution. And personally I really don't understand who in their right mind might want this kind of insane resolution for a TV. The resolution only makes sense for a monitor. Fix the issues, turn this thing into a monitor, and corner the market for big monitors.

shiven 13y ago

At $500, there are FAR better monitors. You keep repeating this as if it is some magic mantra. You have not defined any what "better" really means in manner that can be quantified and compared without introducing subjective opinions of a user. Also, care to link to these "better" monitors, including sellers that sell these for the $500 price, as well as non-subjective reviews?

f00_ 13y ago
Better monitors very easily be objectively conceived. Latency, refresh rate, contrast ratio, brightness, input options, are all easily measured. "Better" monitors are easily found through a simple search, and how do you exactly determine a review to be "non-subjective"? http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ http://thewirecutter.com/leaderboard/tvs/ http://thewirecutter.com/leaderboard/tvs/ http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/a-great-27-inch-lcd-monitor/ http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/a-great-27-inch-lcd-monitor...
- randallsquared 13y ago
  What latency is better than what brightness?
  - f00_ 13y ago
    I can see where you going with that, and I'll agree it's subjective, as to which suits your needs, but I think you can find TV's that are all around better.

mcv 13y ago

Better monitors in terms of brightness, color and other monitor-specific features. But not in resolution. And personally I really don't understand who in their right mind might want this kind of insane resolution for a TV. The resolution only makes sense for a monitor. Fix the issues, turn this thing into a monitor, and corner the market for big monitors.