<![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> @raleel: It will run off 1 dual-link DVI cable, through a converter box which then goes to a LHF-60 into the T221. The connector is only slightly larger than a DVI connector.

I was fortunate enough to get ahold of an unopened T221-DG5 recently and it is glorious. PDF's and photos look better than prints. It truly is the world's finest monitor: [www.theinquirer.net]

wlcrm

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> @quig: The non-client areas of Vista are drawn by the DWM, so they're resolution independant. As for the client areas, I believe that the DWM will do bitmap scaling based on your DPI if the application isn't "DPI-Aware", but I've never actually tested it out.

Mio

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> @TYPE-E:
A 22" WUXGA monitor does exist: [gizmodo.com]

@MIO:
It's a pity that resolution of LCD screens has not improved for so long. Even the T221 was discontinued.

I would like to see a resolution independent OS and the release of reasonably priced high DPI desktop monitors, at decent refresh rates and without as much energy consumption and noise as the T221. There seems to be little information on whether Vista and Leopard are actually resolution independent as was promised. Size isn't everything, and it is disappointing that when the megapixel count of digital cameras is increasing (which is not always improving the resolution of the images they take) the resolution of monitors is staying the same.

quig

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> Very very nice.

I've said I'll never take anything less than 1920x1200 on a 15.4" Laptop screen. This beauty is how I hope to see things going in the very near future.

Mio

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> Apple's 23" cinema display is 1900x1200 resolution, but pretty pricey.

Kaiser-Machead's Chips Ahoy!

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> How about 22" that does 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 that will match my tv? What the hell is every 22" on the market 1650x1200

Type-E

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> @Jason:
No. Medical displays are almost always preferred in 12-bit grayscale -- and yes, with much higher contrast ratios.

@raleel:
Yep, IBM's display has been around for quite a while now. And I think it's cheaper than this one.

packetsniffer

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> Old news. IBM had one of these back in 2001. I saw the beta at Supercomputing 1999 and it truly was amazing stuff. They demonstrated that the dot on the "i" of a particularly high resolution map was 1 pixel. It requires a beast of a video connection in the back

[en.wikipedia.org]

raleel

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> 1080p x4!

Galley

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> would this be a medical display? For X-rays and MRIs and such? Maybe that contrast ratio is not good enough...

Jason

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> As you said, that contrast ratio is more befitting a $9 calculator. For 18 large, you could buy a dozen Samsung SyncMaster 305T 30-inch (2560x1600 apiece, 1000:1 ratio) monsters, yielding a 10240x4800 desktop. Can you say BIGASSXGA?

Colonel35

]]> <![CDATA[Toshiba Rolls Out 22-Inch 3840x2400 Monitor]]> [www.teu.ac.jp]

Here are the specs for the ADTX monitor. Contrast ratio apparently is 400:1

Dearhaw

]]>