POST A COMMENT

16 Comments

Back to Article

  • yik3000 - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    Look at the thin bezel for this one...hopefully this is not like some of the LG model that has a "fake thin bezel".. Reply
  • zanon - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    Good 2560x1440 27" IPS panels are now firmly into the $400-500 range, with the super budget ones even getting below $400 (like Monoprice's), albeit at the cost of some features. Even 30" 2560x1600 panels are starting to hit <$800. Given general VESA compatibility an included stand isn't worthless but not it's not a massive feature either, and that seems to be about all this has going for it.

    So I'm having trouble seeing how cutting off 360-520 vertical pixels and raising the price a lot makes for a "very compelling product". If it was a lot cheaper as part of the bargain then maybe, if it was wider then 2560 then maybe, but less screen real estate with the same display quality doesn't particularly seem like a positive.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    As someone with a 2560x1600 display, there are times when taller isn't necessarily better. Home theater enthusiasts might prefer the 21:9 aspect ratio. I linked Chris' review for a reason, as that's basically going to cover most of the questions of "is this good for me". Personally, I'm sticking with my 30" display(s) until they go belly up. Heh. Reply
  • zanon - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    I did consider home theater enthusiasts, but I then discounted it too, because this isn't a big TV. In a 60"+ display sure, the argument that it's for the living room and oriented around video is clear. But this is for the desktop, and there the argument seems a lot more dubious. Unless the black levels are awful, black bars are not a problem (if anything they can be useful in circumstances like watching foreign video with subtitles).

    This is ultimately still a cut down resolution desktop display. I could see the extra 2" diagonal combined with the edge use case justifying the same price as a 27" 1440 panel, but *double* the price? Seems like pure, direct gouging and another in a long, long string of cases where manufacturers have tried to justify margin padding as "features". I'm not mad at them for it, but we don't have to let them get away with it without comment either.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    I'll probably retire my 30" display from primacy in a year or two. 4k monitors are still a bit more than I'm willing to spend. Once I get my new big toy, the question becomes: Do I try to smuggle it into my office because I can't convince corporate IT to buy me one (This would be interesting; not least because NEC's box is so big it won't fit into my car.); or just push it off to the side and use it in place of one of my 20" screens as an ancillary display Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    "Personally, I'm sticking with my 30" display(s) until they go belly up. Heh."

    You and me both. 16:9 is bad enough; I can't fathom trying to use something even shorter.
    Reply
  • RocketChild - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    I kinda think this is more targeted at the crowd that uses two screens. Like, a spread sheet for work and personal web browsing when the boss isn't around. Or, Skype on one screen while the GF doesn't know you have StarCraft open on the other. Kinda just saving the footprint space by combining the two together. lenovo must feel there is a niche market for this thing, especially since it has a camera. Maybe we don't see it here in the States, but overseas, in smaller apartments it has significant value. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Also consider laptops which mostly have only 1 digital output, or the power consumption penalty of multiple monitors on all but the most recent GPUs. Obviously an ultra vide angle screen still has to be significantly cheaper than existing offerings with the same width but more hight. Reply
  • agent2099 - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    It's amazing how slow PC makers are to introduce Haswell into their current generation of laptops. What's even more confusing is that they hardly ever post battery hour specifications. Or are they failing to do so because the battery life is that bad compared to the new Macbook airs? Reply
  • GTRagnarok - Tuesday, September 03, 2013 - link

    Wrong article? Haswell ultrabooks are already coming out and they've gotten good battery life. Not as good as the MacBook Air, but then again the Air is still using a low resolution TN screen while everything else is on 1080p IPS panels. Reply
  • dishayu - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Has anyone tried using two 1440p displays, 1xlandscape and 1xportrait orientation? One is perfect for movie watching/wide spreadsheets, the other is perfect for web browsing, tall spreadsheets and so on. Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    I've occasionally used my 2560x1600 display in portrait mode when I needed something really tall for some reason; but in general I found it way too tall to be comfortable to use. Unless I slid my chair back it was sticking out above and below my field of view. If it was bezelless and I had 20 grand burning holes (monitors, GPUs, next years GPUs, etc) in my pocket 5 of them in portrait to make a full field of view surround system seems like a cool idea but it just didn't work well for general use. Reply
  • piroroadkill - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    So uninterested in wide displays.

    Give me some screens with the AR of the Chromebook Pixel. Large ones.
    Reply
  • CSMR - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Low res screen (for the size) with an odd aspect ratio. No good as a computer monitor. Could be good for an HTPC setup _IF_ it supports appropriate framerates. Then the low res would not be a problem, sRGB would be an advantage. But who would buy a 29" TV for $799? Reply
  • jaydee - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Good idea, but terrible price. AOC's 29-inch IPS widescreen is only $450 regular, $370-400 on sale. Makes the price on-par with cheaper 27-inch IPS screens. At $700 for the LG and $800 for the Lenovo, it's more expensive than the "quality" 27-inch IPS's (Dell, Asus), which is a bad deal. Reply
  • HisDivineOrder - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    If this were cheaper than most 1440p displays, I'd say it'd be a great alternative. When it costs more, I say this has a very limited audience. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now