Slashdot Mirror
LG Accidentally Leaks Apple iMac 8K Is Coming Later This Year
An anonymous reader writes LG accidentally revealed in blog post that Apple is planning to release a 8K iMac later this year. This news comes as a surprise as the leak came from a different company rather than Apple. LG is one of Apple's biggest display partners and has already demonstrated 8K monitors at CES in Las Vegas. They note that the panel boasts 16 times the number of pixels as a standard Full HD screen.
Seriously, 4k is already overkill in most situations. 8k is just fetishism. And it may well be worse, as all those pixels have to be controlled somehow.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I thought the "retina" display already has a higher resolution than the human eye can discern. Are these new Macs for cats?
Apple have a history of shutting out suppliers who have loose lips.
Maybe they'll start buying their panels from Samsung...
This sig left unintentionally blank.
Keep in mind that if proper scaling ever gets implemented, there is still a long way to go for displays to equal the quality of text compared to paper. I saw noticeable improvements in text quality from laser printers all the way up to 1200dpi, and people back in the day were saying we'd never need anything more dense than 300dpi, then it was 600dpi, etc. If we can get displays to 1200dpi, and especially with near-zero reflectivity, then I'll say we've gone far enough - but we're nowhere near that yet.
But we need GOOD scaling. I've read that Windows 10 will have proper scaling. We'll see.
Silly Apple, my Commodore had 64k way back in 1983!
Try it! Library of Babel
8k iMac: depending on the specs of the iMac, that might means that they have managed to increase the pixel density (high DPI).
8k in it self doesn't mean anything. You have to factor in display size, viewing distance, etc.
And there is ONE FIELD that is going to benefit immensely from higher densities: VR!
VR is typically a field of application where you are viewing a relatively small screen (Occulus tend to use typical smartphone displays. Older VR headsets like eMagine 3D visor had even smaller display, like a finger's nail per eye) from a very short distance. (Just next to the eye ball).
Even at the current ultra-high resolution/pixel densities, that are over kill for a normal smart phone screen (1080p FullHD in a smartphone is more than 300DPI), when looked that close still is very pixelated (this FullHD is blown up to cover your *entire* field of view. That end up being not that many pixels per angle of view, even if keeping into account the varying resolution due to the simple len's distortion). (= Unlike older VR headset that used simple rectangular screens to convey a simple rectangular picture and relied on complex and expansive optics to keep the rectangle distrosion free, Occulus rift use a very simple (and cheap len) that completely distrorts the picture and compensate using a shader that draw a "pre-distorted" picture on the display. They don't convey a rectangular picture, but a pin-chusion picture with more pixels spent at the center than the periphery - thus higher resolution in front of you. Still pixels are visible).
So even if it ends up being overkill for the iMac, increasing production of high density displays has nice side effects on the occulus rift.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I'm a photographer and and constant user/developer of image manipulation software. I edit every shot. I don't need 5k in a monitor; if I need a full-image overview, I can have that, zero perceptible time. If I need to look at pixels, same thing. Or anywhere in between. I do *not* need to be squinting at a monitor in order to resolve detail. I value my vision too highly. And at these resolutions, you don' t squint, you can't see it. And I have extremely high visual acuity.
Higher (and higher) resolution makes sense in data acquisition. Once you have it, you can do damned near anything with it. Even if you exceed the MTF of the lens, you get the advantage that while the edges are smoother, they now start in a more accurate place, geometrically speaking. It can be thought of as like old TV luma; the bandwidth is limited, so the rate of change has a proportionally limited slew rate, but the phosphor on an old B&W monitor is continuous, and you can start a waveform anywhere (horizontally) with luma, to any accuracy within the timing of the display, which can be pretty darned high. So things tend to look very, very good as opposed to what you might expect from naively considering nothing but the bandwidth. It's not like a modern color display, where the phosphor/pixel groups serve to sub-sample the signal no matter how you feed it in. But that advantage goes away when the subtleties exceed your eye's ability to perceive them. Or you have to strain/hurt yourself to do it.
So anyway... any single one or combination of these three things would motivate me to buy more new Apple hardware. Nothing else:
o A Mac pro that is self-contained -- installable, replaceable drives, lots of memory, replicable display cards. The "trashcan" Mac pro is an obscenity. All it did was send me to EBay to buy used prior model Mac Pros. The trashcan isn't so much a wrong turn as it is a faceplant.
o A Mac mid-tower that can have hard drives installed+replaced and at least 16gb of RAM. 32gb would be better. Doesn't have to be that fast. Real gfx. I know, mythical, not probable. Still want it, though. Actually, I want several. :/
o A multicore Mac mini with a real graphics card, 8gb or better ram, network, USB, HDMI and audio ports.
I have uses for all those. Failing that, and in fact that's my expectation, more fail -- I'm done with them. And I have no use whatever for "integrated" graphics.
What's annoying is that just about when they finally managed to a get a stable OS with most of the features I like and want (and the ability to get around the stupid features like "App Nap"), they totally borked the hardware side. I just can't win with Apple. Sigh.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
An ASA 25 slide projected in a dark room looks *awesome*. A VCR on a CRT looks crap.