View Single Post
  #57 (permalink)  
Old June 13, 2012, 05:31 PM
geoc geoc is offline
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJThomp View Post
I'm not saying these screens shouldn't be developed... I'm saying that if you are going to charge people for these screens put some balls into your laptop so it can drive the resolution. I can invent a toilet that will flush upside down and that you can mount on your cieling to save floor space. But until I can reverse gravity in your bathroom so your crap will stay in it, it's pretty useless. Technology isn't about charging people for things they don't need, it is about innovating and pushing boundaries. It's not like these displays are made by Apple and they are the only ones with the technology. Apple is just the only company who will charge people the money for something almost entirely useless.

My issue is not with the screen itself it is with the marketing of the screen. The screen won't make your facebook look nicer and it really isn't going to be doing anything until it is time to buy a new laptop. The marketing is dishonest just like the rest of their business model which consists of pumping out decent products charging premiums and then burying all the competition in litigation until they are the only ones left. Apple does not innovate, they take other peoples stuff, put it in one package and then sue anyone else who tries to make a package that is similar in any way.

The RAM has nothing to do with illusary correlation I just added it in there to show that the newest ideas aren't always the best which is how I also feel about the screen.

Edit: and to go along with what AKG said I would buy it as a standalone monitor as well because my computer would actually be able to drive it in some games (although still my desktop which is much faster than an MBP would not do it justice).
How would it be useless? Those who edit large photos (12gb+ RAW) would definitely find it handy as it allows them to see more detail with less real estate. Architects can use it since it can handle more detail with it's much higher DPI. This is just 2 quick examples where screen real estate is important but doesn't need a rendering powerhouse to use. Regarding 'facebook'ers they are already over spec'd with any laptop right now, a laptop from 2001 can do the same of what they want. But if someone decides to buy a caterpillar to dig a small patch for a flowerbed in their front yard, it's their choice.

The soldered RAM isn't there to 'set a bar' nor is it a new idea (Dell XPS 13 has had soldered ram for a couple years, but no one complained), it's just something the company decided to do (so they can make the laptop thinner, or because they're money grubbing baby eaters). I agree that it is not a good idea, but to share the same sentiment about something that is clearly detrimental to the customer to something that you feel brings trivial benefits to the customer is a little weird.

I think everyone here is too dead set on using gaming as a standard for driving displays. Just because it can't handle games at a certain res doesn't mean it's useless.
Reply With Quote