Recent content by Senn

No network is the best way with these ad-ridden spyware TVs. Can't even turn the ads off on mine. Even if I want to upgrade the firmware, it gets the USB stick treatment.

Nah you're doing it wrong. You don't have better images if you're not staring at 1000+ nit HDR all day long. :woot:

This sort of concern, even for what some would consider not worth worrying about, is precisely why I won't use current self-emissive tech on the desktop. Gorgeous for entertainment purposes, undeniable. But for all other purposes I really don't want that constant thought of burn-in holding me...

Which is unfortunate, as you either suck up the burn in risk on OLED or the pixel interference flaw on all 43 inch VAs.

Sounds like an awesome setup already. But yeah, completely get the desire to reduce the number of bezels, preferably none. I've been on 43-50" 4k for a couple of years now and don't currently feel the need (or have the space o_O) for anything more. I'd maybe go down in size and up in DPI to...

That rtings 444 test image isn't being shown at 1:1. It's got some scaling on it for sure, and even if it's integer scaling there are suggestions in areas that it's not playing ball with 444. Diagonal pixels in particular look mangled. Edit: There's a real lack of understanding that this test...

Is that involving "AI" generated frames? Call me a purist but I don't want to see that anywhere outside of videos and gaming, and even then it can go too far and introduce lag and artifacting. Kinda hoping you mean something else. :D

Well said.

See you all in the "Where are the 16k monitors?" thread in a few years I suppose. ;)

I'm plenty happy to see advancements in video and games upscaling, but the desktop? Not really. I thrive on pixel level accuracy there, I don't want "AI" making weird decisions about where my pixels end up.

Heh, true. It has to end somewhere though. Each quadrupling of pixel count will get harder to justify. 16k? 32k? 4k at this point hits that "high end" sweet spot for me. 8k is overkill and would potentially harm rather than help. Maybe I'll reconsider once display tech has moved on a little...

Back on the topic of 8k, looking up RTINGS reviews of 8k TVs and then the same-gen 4k TVs, the 4k panels have better specs (contrast, response). For both PC use (which would either require scaling or the desktop be overwhelmingly large, plus 60Hz only) and TV/console use (too distant, 4k is...

And lack of burn in. People can say what they want about mitigation, I'm not interested in babying a display and burn in is the sole reason I refuse to use OLED as a PC monitor.

I have fond memories of the CRT days but I'm not looking to return to a display that doesn't have pixel level accuracy of image.

It's a logarithmic curve though, is it not? The visible difference between 2000 and 10000 wouldn't be as big as the absolute value would suggest. Not to say a display that can pull it off wouldn't be great to have. I'd still like to see progress on the lifespan of individual LEDs/OLEDs before...