Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Eug · May 26, 2003, 03:57 PM

I haven't checked it out yet, but it's supposed to be some sort of IBM screen in the 20+" size, with a 9 Megapixel resolution, for CAD$15000 (US$11000). Obviously this is not for home use.

Anybody know anything more about ultra high-rez IBM monitors?

She says the screen redraws are very slow, but that's because of the video card.

I'll try to check it out some time this week.

exa · May 26, 2003, 04:17 PM

C'mon, it's not that hard to find these things.

http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/st...3DG3&storeId=1

I think it was first displayed with 8 linux boxes driving the monitor playing quake 3 at ~40 fps. You need some sort of monster graphics card for it though.

Eug · May 26, 2003, 04:21 PM

Yeah, just got this link for it.

I don't think I'd want a resolution that high for general OS X use though. In that size I'd probably want something with a much lower resolution, something like the current Apple 23" Cinema Display. But for image manipulation, that monitor would be killer.

I wonder what cards can drive it quickly in 2D. Certainly the G200 on that IBM page can't be that speedy for it.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · May 26, 2003, 04:34 PM

Why in the hell would someone want that? I mean they don't even use something close to that for high end magazine and photo printing.

Eug · May 26, 2003, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Why in the hell would someone want that? I mean they don't even use something close to that for high end magazine and photo printing.

For viewing ultra high resolution microscopy images for medical research.

Radiologists routinely use 5 MP monitors for everyday diagnosis of X-rays. 9 MP is just a step or two up, and is justified for research purposes I guess.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · May 26, 2003, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by Eug:
For viewing ultra high resolution microscopy images for medical research.

Radiologists routinely use 5 MP monitors for everyday diagnosis of X-rays. 9 MP is just a step or two up, and is justified for research purposes I guess.

I still have to wonder how they got by 5 years ago then.

What can they see that a 23HD lcd can't?

Eug · May 26, 2003, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
I still have to wonder how they got by 5 years ago then.

What can they see that a 23HD lcd can't?

For microscopy, 5 years ago people used microscopes. Now they can use digital images of scanned-in microscope slides and still have adequate resolutions.

10 years ago, radiologists used X-ray film - transported around the hospital by porters. Now radiologists use digital images - transported around the hospital on Gigabit Ethernet.

Cipher13 · May 26, 2003, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
I still have to wonder how they got by 5 years ago then.

What can they see that a 23HD lcd can't?

Um. Well, I wonder how doctors got by back in ancient egypt without X-Ray machines...?

Skywalkers new Hand · May 26, 2003, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Um. Well, I wonder how doctors got by back in ancient egypt without X-Ray machines...?

We are talking 5 years ago here not 3000.

Nick_G · May 26, 2003, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Um. Well, I wonder how doctors got by back in ancient egypt without X-Ray machines...?

They probably used their eyes, ears and noses.

todrain · May 26, 2003, 06:15 PM

IBM has this monitor at Epcot in Disney. It's Amazing.... it's like looking out a window, images are so clear.

Amorya · May 26, 2003, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by Eug:
I'd probably want something with a much lower resolution, something like the current Apple 23" Cinema Display.

Something I never thought I'd see anyone say

Amorya

MindFad · May 26, 2003, 06:36 PM

Man, I'd love to see that. Gotta be beautiful. 9 million pixels ... what 20 browser windows at one time!?

fireside · May 26, 2003, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by Skywalkers new Hand:
We are talking 5 years ago here not 3000.

c'mon, stick with one nick mr starwars.

as for the monitor: gimmie gimmie gimmie. i dont think that i would ever need a new monitor again.

Eug · May 26, 2003, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by Amorya:
Something I never thought I'd see anyone say

Amorya

Well, actually, I was talking more about pixel density. Unfortunately, our OSes don't support ultra high pixel densities well. I can see how my statement would have seemed odd though.

I wish the OSes and appz were better with high pixel densities. Then I'd say bring on those 1600x1200 15" (133 dpi) laptops!

istallion · May 26, 2003, 07:23 PM

Originally posted by fireside:
c'mon, stick with one nick mr starwars.

as for the monitor: gimmie gimmie gimmie. i dont think that i would ever need a new monitor again.

Do you have 1 foot in the grave or something? Monitors better than this will be available for literally pocket change in 15-20 years.

fireside · May 26, 2003, 07:28 PM

Originally posted by istallion:
Do you have 1 foot in the grave or something? Monitors better than this will be available for literally pocket change in 15-20 years.

** fireside tries to explain exageration to istaillion but fails **

calimehtar · May 26, 2003, 11:30 PM

FWIW, I believe one of the advantages of basing Quartz on PDF is that it will be very easy to scale OS X up to look normal on a monitor like this when they become more widespread.

Cipher13 · May 27, 2003, 08:04 AM

Originally posted by Skywalkers new Hand:
We are talking 5 years ago here not 3000.

My point remains, as valid as ever.

euphras · May 27, 2003, 10:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by istallion:
"Do you have 1 foot in the grave or something? Monitors better than this will be available for literally pocket change in 15-20 years."

Concerning resolution monitors will reach a climax stadium and then stay there, not developing any further when they reach the maximum resolution a human eye can resolve (and i think this IBM is pretty close to that).

gadster · May 27, 2003, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by euphras:
Quote:
Originally posted by istallion:
"Do you have 1 foot in the grave or something? Monitors better than this will be available for literally pocket change in 15-20 years."

Concerning resolution monitors will reach a climax stadium and then stay there, not developing any further when they reach the maximum resolution a human eye can resolve (and i think this IBM is pretty close to that).

What if you get up REAL close to the screen? I am shortsighted and can focus to about 2 inches from my left eye with my glasses off. (No loupes for me!) Bet ya I could see pixels there.

euphras · May 27, 2003, 10:58 AM

Quote:
"What if you get up REAL close to the screen? I am shortsighted and can focus to about 2 inches from my left eye with my glasses off. (No loupes for me!) Bet ya I could see pixels there."

My definition of "human eye resolution" includes this. Watch an object so close that it is on the borderline to still see it sharply (5-10 cm).