Dell U3014 News

[Snowdog]

Broken apps won't get fixed until high DPI displays get available. And you'd still have the benefit in non-broken apps.

Yep, I fully support other people jumping on 4K bleeding edge, paying the high price and dealing with scaling issues or other gotchas, so it will be sorted out by the time the price comes down in a couple of years after that for me.

For myself, I would be more than happy with a 30" 2560x1600 for a long time. It has about the smallest pixel pitch I can handle without scaling.

 

[xoleras]

Except that DPI scaling is broken in the majority of third party windows applications.

You get your fancy 4K monitor and then turn on 150% scaling so you can read text and instead of lovely high dpi text, you end up low DPI text given the blurry zoom treatment.

So in essence the previous reply was correct, you really don't get the benefit of high DPI monitor in most applications.

This is not correct since windows 7 SP1, assuming you have GPU drivers that properly support it..

Higher DPI does not merely give text a blurry zoom treatment. It uses different typefaces and fonts altogether, anyone who has actually used it properly would know this. It also works in all apps that use the native, organic windows 7 interface. What doesn't work are fullscreen games and applications that use their own, non windows interface such as photoshop.

 

[jolli]

I wish I could justify upgrading my U3011 to this. The lighter anti glare would be very nice, as the sparkly/dirty effect of the current coating does bother me somewhat.

I would advise anyone who buys this to both wait for a later revision (I had two A00 U3011s and neither worked with custom color) as well as pick up the extended warranty. I really wish I had, as Dell is incredible about doing overnight replacements with minimal questions. I got my first A00 replaced with another A00 after a few days of ownership due to horrible tinting and uniformity, and recently exchanged that A00 for an A06 to correct the custom color bug. It can't be cheap to have paid overnight shipping twice on these big screens, as well as standard return shipping, but Dell didn't even bat an eye.

 

[Snowdog]

This is not correct since windows 7 SP1, assuming you have GPU drivers that properly support it.. Of course, since you're infatuated with CRTs if I remember correctly, you wouldn't know.

Higher DPI does not merely give text a blurry zoom treatment. It uses different typefaces and fonts altogether, anyone who has actually used it properly would know this. It also works in all apps that use the native, organic windows 7 interface. What doesn't work are fullscreen games and applications that use their own, non windows interface such as photoshop.

I am using Windows 7, SP1 and I tested it. It works as I described in most 3rd party apps.

No change in the OS can update apps that are not written to take DPI scaling into account.

 

[xoleras]

I am using Windows 7, SP1 and I tested it. It works as I described in most 3rd party apps.

No change in the OS can update apps that are not written to take DPI scaling into account.

It works in all applications that use the native windows 7 interface -you are correct that non native UI elements by 3rd party apps (these are fewer than native UI elements) don't scale DPI properly. Since most apps are using the organic UI elements, they will work properly with the higher or custom DPI settings - every application does not have to be updated to take advantage of it, contrary to what someone else stated. Where it does work, It does not merely zoom and blur fonts. It uses different typefaces/fonts across the entire UI.

If a panel maker wants to release a 30 inch 4k panel, i'm all about it. Too often in the PC world, manufacturers are obsessed with "cheap" instead of "quality". Shit like acer comes to mind, i'm sick of their bargain bin low quality products. If the PC industry has learned anything from apple, it is that people will pay for higher quality. That especially applies to displays.

 

[Snowdog]

It works in all applications that use the native windows 7 interface

Which is the minority of applications. I just set 150% scaling.

I checked Web Browsers:

IE: Proper Scaling.
FF: Does not scale, everything stays small
Chrome: Blurry Zoom
Opera: Blurry Zoom

I checked text/office apps:

Libre Office: Blurry Zoom
Notepadd++: Blurry Zoom
Gvim: Blurry zoom

Media Apps:
Paint.NET: Proper Scaling
IrfanView: Blurry Zoom
Video Redo: Blurry Zoom
Handbrake: Blurry Zoom
Audacity: Blurry Zoom

In Short. Most third party applications don't scale properly, so it is untrue that you simply set DPI and all is well.

I get really tired of people making false claims, that the latest version of Windows Fixes DPI scaling, when really it is an application problem, that is very far from fixed.

 

[kache]

If the PC industry has learned anything from apple, it is that people will pay for higher quality. That especially applies to displays.

Especially on monitors, which normally last 5+ years...

 

[rudy]

Except that DPI scaling is broken in the majority of third party windows applications.

You get your fancy 4K monitor and then turn on 150% scaling so you can read text and instead of lovely high dpi text, you end up low DPI text given the blurry zoom treatment.

So in essence the previous reply was correct, you really don't get the benefit of high DPI monitor in most applications.

Well the only way DPI scaling will get fixed when is when lazy ass devs are forced to fix it. This is exactly why apple made the walled garden. DPI scaling has been in place at least since XP and these devs have still not got off their ass and implemented it in over 10 years?

We are stuck in a loop of devs not fixing, there fore hardware vendors put 720p displays on laptops and therefore devs don't fix it. It is stupid. Half the time all they have to do is change one line of code in their program and it will work.

Also you can enable xp style scaling to all programs that support it to look fine and others to stay small. But I for one am not afraid of high DPI displays because well if FF and opera dont want me to use their browser I will just not use it. screw them.

 

[Snowdog]

Well the only way DPI scaling will get fixed when is when lazy ass devs are forced to fix it. This is exactly why apple made the walled garden. DPI scaling has been in place at least since XP and these devs have still not got off their ass and implemented it in over 10 years?

We are stuck in a loop of devs not fixing, there fore hardware vendors put 720p displays on laptops and therefore devs don't fix it. It is stupid. Half the time all they have to do is change one line of code in their program and it will work.

I agree, but it isn't the walled garden that Apple has going for it, as much as it is the HW/SW integration within one company, that and marketing high DPI as a feature.

They can say Macs are going Retina, build a Retina Macbook, and now developers get the message and start updating their applications to support Retina Macs.

Microsoft really should have teamed with HW makers and announce a High DPI standard together to get things running.

Unfortunately I don't see that happening. I think MS plan is now Metro, which I believe requires scalability and let the desktop languish.

 

[xoleras]

Well the only way DPI scaling will get fixed when is when lazy ass devs are forced to fix it. This is exactly why apple made the walled garden. DPI scaling has been in place at least since XP and these devs have still not got off their ass and implemented it in over 10 years?

We are stuck in a loop of devs not fixing, there fore hardware vendors put 720p displays on laptops and therefore devs don't fix it. It is stupid. Half the time all they have to do is change one line of code in their program and it will work.

Also you can enable xp style scaling to all programs that support it to look fine and others to stay small. But I for one am not afraid of high DPI displays because well if FF and opera dont want me to use their browser I will just not use it. screw them.

As was mentioned earlier, the vast majority of apps use native windows 7 UI elements and DPI works in all of those applications. Firefox, chrome, MS office, (I could literally name 100 more) custom DPI works in all of those because they use a windows interface. What doesn't work are fullscreen applications that use a non windows interface, such as steam, photoshop or full screen games.

And to correct whoever stated it, it does not merely zoom and blur. It completely changes the fonts and typefaces UI wide.

Again - most apps work just fine with windows 7 DPI. It is even better in windows 8 - all metro apps work with increased DPI (yeah yeah yeah insert random nonsense about how much metro sucks). So this is really a non issue.

 

[Snowdog]

As was mentioned earlier, the vast majority of apps use native windows 7 UI elements and DPI works in all of those applications. Firefox, chrome, MS office, (I could literally name 100 more) custom DPI works in all of those because they use a windows interface. What doesn't work are fullscreen applications that use a non windows interface, such as steam, photoshop or full screen games.

Clearly you are just guessing. Quite the opposite of this working in the Vast majority, it in fact FAILS in the majority of third party applications.

I just tested this and I posted a list above. DPI Scaling does NOT work in Firefox/Chrome/Opera/Libre Office and a whole bunch more I tested and listed above.

Here are 4 Browsers. IE from Microsoft scales properly. But none of the 3rd party browsers does. FF doesn't scale, Chrome/Opera blur zoom:

 

[RadXge]

The biggest temptation for me to resist will be buying one upon release. I usually wait for the 3rd revision so the bugs can be ironed out.

Wise man.

 

[rudy]

I agree, but it isn't the walled garden that Apple has going for it, as much as it is the HW/SW integration within one company, that and marketing high DPI as a feature.

They can say Macs are going Retina, build a Retina Macbook, and now developers get the message and start updating their applications to support Retina Macs.

Microsoft really should have teamed with HW makers and announce a High DPI standard together to get things running.

Unfortunately I don't see that happening. I think MS plan is now Metro, which I believe requires scalability and let the desktop languish.

How could MS team with HW makers? I dont get what you are saying, they have had support for high DPI for 10 years+ Software devs just havent done shit to support it because they don't give a rip. No one is willing to move until competition becomes an issue. Even apples retina had plenty of problems with software not working and surely still does.

MS says these exact things to devs every time a new OS comes out, they say it to the hardware makers too, they all blow MS off or fight progress in the name of the lowest price point. Remember the vista capable crap?

Look at chrome, when the mbpr released, well everyone knew it right, apple had an initiative right? So why wasnt chrome ready? it wasnt till bad publicity threatened their browser that they went and said oh shit we gotta get this running.

the specific motivations of the walled garden are obviously many and selfish but one nice side effect is that apple can tell a dev to screw off if they don't support high DPI or any other specific feature.

MS clearly releases the information to their devs, but those devs just dont care. This is why on multiple levels MS has been pissing off HW and SW makers because they are sick of companies ruining their name. MS office itself was just exactly that case. Lotus wouldn't update fast enough to support a new OS so MS decided to get into the office game to protect their OS.

HW makers don't need an initiative or an announcement they need a kick in the ass that hurts them financially that is the only thing that motivates them. One way is for MS to create a competing product, another way is to just push the product out and watch as customers start turning in trouble tickets to companies, or they start losing market share. Look at chrome and the mbpr, its not like google didnt know it was coming and its not like there was not plenty of hype / initiative, but they didnt have ti working, wasnt till the device released and google started catching bad publicity that they went oh shit we gotta fix this. of course they never bothered to say that maybe they should do it for windows while they are at it, but thats another story we cant expect them to try to support windows very well chrome has lots of broken support issues with windows and google probably likes it that way.

 

[carch]

I was hoping for something more innovative than this, meaning 4k. It seems just more of the same. I use it for photography, video, first and then gaming. If they don't lower the price it does create a decision point to wait awhile longer for 4k pricing to reduce. I'm wondering what apple may release in the next 12 months in regards to displays or if the Sharp 32inch at 4k will go down.

 

[Zorachus]

Since the U3014 will not be a 4K display, still 1600p, and now LED backlit, isn't that cheaper to produce than the older U3011 ? Can we expect a cheaper price at launch, compared to current $1300 price of the U3011 ?

I mean when the 1440p 27" monitors first came out, they were pretty pricey at $1000, now brand new can be had for like $400-$600.

I just hope the U3014 doesn't launch at some crazy $1500 price, 30" today should be in the $1000 range, this is till a 60hz and 1600p monitor, it's not a ground breaking brand new tech.

 

[Snowdog]

Since the U3014 will not be a 4K display, still 1600p, and now LED backlit, isn't that cheaper to produce than the older U3011 ? Can we expect a cheaper price at launch, compared to current $1300 price of the U3011 ?

If it had standard White LED backlight it would likely be cheaper.

But it will almost certainly have the new wide gamut B-G LED backlight, so the price will be about the same.

 

[Snowdog]

How could MS team with HW makers? I dont get what you are saying, they have had support for high DPI for 10 years+ Software devs just havent done shit to support it because they don't give a rip. No one is willing to move until competition becomes an issue. Even apples retina had plenty of problems with software not working and surely still does.

MS says these exact things to devs every time a new OS comes out....

Imagine if some time before Win7 was released, Microsoft started the Fovea "Invisible Pixel" initiative.

Then they went to HW makers (AMD/NVidia/Samsung/LG) and told them a major feature of Win7 was going to be the Fovea invisible pixel feature. They ask them if they want to develop a product(Video Cards/Monitors) to be featured during the Windows OS Keynote/release info. They do the same for top tier SW makers.

You just need to get partners to create enough parts for an end to end system. Then you start letting the Tech press try out the pre-production Fovea systems and they all go nuts about invisible pixel tech....

You don't see how this would kick-start high DPI support?

Just including support in the OS does squat as we have seen. A feature like this needs a push or it can drag indefinitely.

 

[rudy]

lol I am telling you MS does this shit the hardware partners just dont care, partly because MS has to be fair to them all then they all know not to bother. I repeat remember vista capable.

You are right just providing support in the OS does not matter because you need the hardware in place, but half the people in this thread are fighting the solution, which is to get the hardware out in the wild. That will be what forces companies to move forward. Apple didnt wait for chrome to have scaling support they just moved ahead, a rare ability a company which does hardware and software can do, and to that affect MS has moved ahead, they have built most of their in house programs to support it. This is important for HTPCs and so on already and will be important as more high dpi screens come into the main stream. But only the existance of hardware will push it, not any MS initiative or anything else. So your solution should be to tell the people in this thread to can it and push for high dpi, then we will get software that supports it. Instead half of them are saying I dont want it because it doesnt work right now.

 

[Snowdog]

lol I am telling you MS does this shit the hardware partners just dont care

Clearly they have never done this for High DPI. They made no public push on High DPI, like Apple did with Retina.

But they do it for other things they are pushing. So you see Micrsoft showing a bunch of brain-dead WinRT HW that they convinced HW partners to build during Win8 keynotes/advertising. They could do the exact same thing for High DPI screens if it was a priority.

Instead half of them are saying I dont want it because it doesnt work right now.

Which is an eminently sensible approach to take as a consumer. I am in that camp myself. I happily let other people deal with the grief/glitches/bugs of being an early adopter.

 

[RogueTadhg]

Especially on monitors, which normally last 5+ years...

^ This. A good power supply, Monitors, Keyboard and Mice. They'll last through several hardware changes and numerous video cards.

It's hard to justify the cost of quad-sli 680s while they'll become outdated in less than a year. If there was money to burn, I might see it.

 

[rudy]

Clearly they have never done this for High DPI. They made no public push on High DPI, like Apple did with Retina.

But they do it for other things they are pushing. So you see Micrsoft showing a bunch of brain-dead WinRT HW that they convinced HW partners to build during Win8 keynotes/advertising. They could do the exact same thing for High DPI screens if it was a priority.




Which is an eminently sensible approach to take as a consumer. I am in that camp myself. I happily let other people deal with the grief/glitches/bugs of being an early adopter.

Well then you reap what you sow, really did people cry about the fact half their programs didnt work on a mbpr? Nope they complained to the companies. Its a double edged sword,

Second even apples own push which was pretty big did not solve the problem there are still tons of programs and issues with web pages on the MBPR, which AFAIK only offers blury scaling if you dont support it unlike windows which will let you do blurry upscaling or will allow you to revert to what they call xp style scaling.

I stand by my point, you never hear any mactards saying OMG dont buy the MBPR not everything works right on it. Now they buy it and just use what does work well. Until we see these high resolution displays made and sold to people we wont see a fix, no MS initiative will do it.

 

[darkvivo]

4k monitor is too much for human eyes. Also windows 8 is not built for 4K resolution.

 

[Pylon]

You have a Nexus 10 tablet with a 2560x1600 screen that costs $400, and you have Apple laptops coming in with 2880x1800. Why not go higher resolution on the desktop?

 

[Snowdog]

You have a Nexus 10 tablet with a 2560x1600 screen that costs $400, and you have Apple laptops coming in with 2880x1800. Why not go higher resolution on the desktop?

Because most people buy cheap ass, tiny low resolution monitors.

Are you in a hurry to drop $3000 on a 4K 30" desktop monitor? Most people aren't.

IMO anyone whining for these things had better already be using the highest resolution monitors we already have available, like 2560x1600 30" displays. Because this is how they determine if they will build the next rung up the ladder. If these don't sell, don't expect them to bother with 4K screens for the desktop.

 

[Murzilka]

Because most people buy cheap ass, tiny low resolution monitors.

Are you in a hurry to drop $3000 on a 4K 30" desktop monitor? Most people aren't.

IMO anyone whining for these things had better already be using the highest resolution monitors we already have available, like 2560x1600 30" displays. Because this is how they determine if they will build the next rung up the ladder. If these don't sell, don't expect them to bother with 4K screens for the desktop.

There is some common sense in those words.
Anyone complaining about the lack of 4k monitors today and typing that message on a tn/ips/pls 1080p monitor is a funny person. -)

 

[blade52x]

I would rather see a well supported 120Hz at 1440/1600P IPS before going to 4K.

 

[BLUNTED_CHEIF]

I would rather see a well supported 120Hz at 1440/1600P IPS before going to 4K.

+1for sure

 

[rudy]

Because most people buy cheap ass, tiny low resolution monitors.

Are you in a hurry to drop $3000 on a 4K 30" desktop monitor? Most people aren't.

IMO anyone whining for these things had better already be using the highest resolution monitors we already have available, like 2560x1600 30" displays. Because this is how they determine if they will build the next rung up the ladder. If these don't sell, don't expect them to bother with 4K screens for the desktop.

This is not a good way to think there are lots of times companies half ass a job or do something terribly wrong and then draw a false conclusion out of it. Hardly anyone uses the 30 inch panels because there is so much wrong with them, mainly they are slow for games usually come with horrible AG coating and are very expensive. There is simply no value in them. You can often buy 2x 27 inch monitors for the price of 1 30 inch.

So if dell execs are stupid enough to draw the false conclusion that people do not want high resolution that is their own short coming.

BTW I have 27 inch 2560x1440 monitors on both my laptop and desktop in addition to the primary display which is faster for gaming. 1080p 120hz on laptop and FW900 on desktop.

 

[RTbar]

So I assume we are not going to get any new monitors to match alongside this in PLP, right?

 

[Zorachus]

So I assume we are not going to get any new monitors to match alongside this in PLP, right?

PLP is pretty much dead, sad to say. Even if there are new monitors to make a PLP setup, there are no drivers from AMD or nVidia that support it.

I have a 30" Dell U3011, and would love a PLP setup, but it's not the cost or availability of monitors holding me back, I can buy the Dell 2007FP on e-Bay for like $150. But with no drivers to support gaming, I see no point now in going PLP.

 

[kamm]

PLP is pretty much dead, sad to say. Even if there are new monitors to make a PLP setup, there are no drivers from AMD or nVidia that support it.

I have a 30" Dell U3011, and would love a PLP setup, but it's not the cost or availability of monitors holding me back, I can buy the Dell 2007FP on e-Bay for like $150. But with no drivers to support gaming, I see no point now in going PLP.

I don't see how you need any more driver support than current one... it's resolution independent as far as I know...

 

[XTF]

Current drivers don't support mixing portait and landscape...

 

[RTbar]

PLP is pretty much dead, sad to say. Even if there are new monitors to make a PLP setup, there are no drivers from AMD or nVidia that support it.

I have a 30" Dell U3011, and would love a PLP setup, but it's not the cost or availability of monitors holding me back, I can buy the Dell 2007FP on e-Bay for like $150. But with no drivers to support gaming, I see no point now in going PLP.

I don't game, but I would want to go PLP for productivity reasons, as I find multiple wide screen monitors too straining to look at, but the old side panels would probably look terrible compared to the new u3014

 

[kamm]

4k monitor is too much for human eyes. Also windows 8 is not built for 4K resolution.

I almost spit the morning coffee across my laptop - this post just made my morning, I love these hilarious posts, out of the blue...

 

[geok1ng]

That is not true at all. The issue is that default windows DPI was designed for archaic 4:3 screens and isn't really good for modern screens. Obviously the benefit to higher DPI is to increase readability to suit your preference - if you look at a retina macbook pro, if you used the default windows DPI it would clearly not be usable at all. What does OS X do? It increases DPI so that fonts are actually you know, readable.

This is probably wrong. What OS X does is treat the 2880x1800 screnn like a normal 1440x900 screen for purposes. doubling/tripling resolution ensures a fast upscaling with no quality loss, but you lose desktop space by going half resolution:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6
"Apple draws everything at 4x the size to make the desktop behave exactly as it would on a 15.4-inch 1440 x 900 display - this is the backing scale factor (2.0) at work. This approach provides the best image quality as there’s integer mapping from pixels on the panel to pixels on the desktop. No interpolation or filtering is necessary."

there is no magic at work on the retina MBP: its either native resolution or half resolution. everything else looks like blurred shit. The same is true for a 30" 1600p- Run it at 1600p or 1280x800, everthing else and one must accepted blurriness and artifacts

 

[Strafe]

there is no magic at work on the retina MBP: its either native resolution or half resolution. everything else looks like blurred shit. The same is true for a 30" 1600p- Run it at 1600p or 1280x800, everthing else and one must accepted blurriness and artifacts

This is not exactly true either. As a retina MacBook Pro owner I can tell you OS X and Windows 8 have much improved non native scaling. I'm not sure what kind of wizardy is going on under the hood but OS X looks beautiful in many resolutions. I'm using Win 8 most of the time and while I'm not sure it scales as well, it's still very, very good. I'm currently running @ 2304x1440, a custom resolution which I'm told minimizes scaling issues (though I haven't done the math myself) at 150% DPI scaling. The days of horrible scaling seem to be coming to a close.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=16665599&postcount=41

#2. Run the laptop at 2304x1440 resolution (custom resolution using nVidia control pannel).

Some applications disable windows scaling so they will appear extremely tiny at native resolution. Steam and all Adobe products come to mind, and many others.

Other applications will scale but appear extremely blury as they are going to be rendered at the scaled resolution and then upsized.

So run it at 2304x1440 and set the scaling to "150% XP style scaling" in custom resolution. This is a limited type of scaling that prevents upressing.

All google applications use upressing so chrome for example will look completely blured with non-xp style scaling.

This configuration allows for all possible content to be displayed at it's best regardless of how it's set up.

This resolution is also exactly 4/5ths native resolution, meaning that every 5x5 pixel block is displaying 4x4 pixels. The end result is that this setup results in the absolute least amount of moire, with little or no artifacts. It's much better than 3/5ths 3/4ths 5/6ths 6/7ths etc.

 

[xoleras]

This is probably wrong. What OS X does is treat the 2880x1800 screnn like a normal 1440x900 screen for purposes. doubling/tripling resolution ensures a fast upscaling with no quality loss, but you lose desktop space by going half resolution:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6
"Apple draws everything at 4x the size to make the desktop behave exactly as it would on a 15.4-inch 1440 x 900 display - this is the backing scale factor (2.0) at work. This approach provides the best image quality as there’s integer mapping from pixels on the panel to pixels on the desktop. No interpolation or filtering is necessary."

there is no magic at work on the retina MBP: its either native resolution or half resolution. everything else looks like blurred shit. The same is true for a 30" 1600p- Run it at 1600p or 1280x800, everthing else and one must accepted blurriness and artifacts

Uh, you just confirmed what I already stated. OSX does DPI scaling at a 2.0x increment for their rMBP screen by default.

Windows can also do 2.0 scaling increments, although by default it does so in .8 increments instead. Anyway, DPI scaling still requires application support (for both OSX and windows 7/8) for programs that don't use native UI elements.

 

[RadXge]

Is this thread about the upcoming u3014 or the 4K resolution??

 

[isp]

Anyone complaining about the lack of 4k monitors today and typing that message on a tn/ips/pls 1080p monitor is a funny person. -)

Not necessarily...

Pixel density is the other factor involved. I'll pass on extra desktop real estate if it means 100ppi like most 30".

 

[RogueTadhg]

I think he was aiming at that the cost. If you're looking to goto a 4k monitor, you've probably got some experience with what's currently the highest main-stream resolution. 2560x1600. It takes a bit of graphical grunt to get eyecandy and fps at the same time.

They're not cheap monitors to game and buy.