is 4k on a 15inch laptop a meme?

File: cost.png (34KB, 551x767px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 551x767px

>>56273997

File: 1363273499846.png (97KB, 1440x851px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1440x851px

Yes, according to /g/ technology expert computer science PhDs.

>>56273997
>>56274020
>acer

good luck with that max 2 year laptop life span

>>56273985
Not really a meme but Windows scaling is dogshit aside from its native apps so it depends on how much blurry text you can stand

>>56274053
i want to do programming on this thing, is text rendering completely fucked?

>>56274069
Mac OS X does a much better job with high res displays because, unlike Microsoft, Apple has the backbone to force software developers to upgrade their shit.

No. Posting from my Dell XPS 15 with touchscreen 4k, i5-6300HQ, 960m, 8GB RAM. Would highly recommend. I will never go back to sub-4k.

>>56274098
>i5

>>56274069
No.

File: linus.png (158KB, 639x349px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 639x349px

>>56274084
i heard Ubuntu does hi res pretty good

>>56274107
You jealous? 4 cores @ 2,3GHz turbo up to 3,2GHz. It doesn't even throttle.

>>56274098
what's the average battery life?

how do older games look that have no support above 1080?

>>56274127
There are still many older programs that don't scale well, or fuck up their own layout in high res.

OS X has those too but due to Apple's vertical integration, OS X can just scale their pixels by 2x. This is only possible because Apple doubled the PPI. 1440x900 => 2880x1800 and so on.
GNU/Linux and Windows apps can't assume that and have to work with arbitrary PPI

>>56274156
thanks anon, that's informative

>>56274185
That said, I still wouldn't buy a Retina MacBook because they're all glossy displays.
I use Debian unstable with Cinnamon on a 13" @ 1080p, high enough PPI to warrant scaling and it's workable.
Some old applications don't scale well but you can always just increase the font size. Tiny icons are not so bad.

>>56274209
probably gonna go for the fhd 1080 version of xps 15

FOR full stack web dev and light gaming

>>56274141
With chrome and a lot of tabs about 6 hours on the 84Wh one. When you use the graphics card, it can use a lot more (it has a 130 watt brick, that should tell you something. I easily trip the 150 watt breaker in my car when charging it and using it at the same time.).

>>56274245
1080p at 15" is perfectly fine on Linux, even without scaling. Just pick a slightly larger font size maybe.
Good choice

>>56274141
Just like they would on the 1080p one. The only difference is that I've been spoiled by the awesome screen now, so 1080p looks pretty shit to me.

>>56274245
Go to the store and look at the difference between 4k and 1080p. The 4k screen makes looking at text much more pleasant.

File: pepebutt.jpg (25KB, 450x500px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 450x500px

There is an argument for 4K becoming the standard and becoming steadily embraced by more and more Windows software.

But fuck that battery consumption.

Even more undecided than I was before anons.

>>56274350
Take your charging brick with you. The 130 watt brick means that you can charge the 84Wh one in about 1 hour 20 mins.

>>56274350
Also, don't underestimate the touchscreen. At first, it seems like a gimmick, but you'll start to use it more often after a while. I look pretty stupid when I try to press on something with my finger on my friend's MacBook. It can make your screen a little bit messy after a while, so get a microfiber cloth.

>>56274404
>>56274449
>>56274297

went with 4k

i hope i cum from the screen the way you're describing it

>>56274978
Nice! You won't regret it!

Anything about upgrading the screen display seems to be pointless before you taste it

But I suppose it does affect the battery performance

>>56274978
u just got meme'd