what are the chances they'll release the screen panel/monitor

>>57329475
why are you even posting. what's wrong with it?

>>57329488

>3:2

>>57329501
That's the single most appealing thing about it.

>>57329453
> affordable
zero

>bullshit names for high PPI display

t-t-thanks apple !

>>57329453
>what are the chances they'll release the screen panel/monitor by itself

Very low. They're trying to create an integrated and uniform experience with the Surface line. But another manufacturer might fulfill your wish.

for an affordable price

Nonexistent.

I'm willing to bet that panel is most of the cost of the device. If they sold it on its own my guess is it would be somewhere close to $2000. Less without the N-Trig tech, but easily still half that amount, given what Dell can charge for their smaller, lower PPI, color accurate business displays.

>>57329453
you think the keyboard and knob thing are what makes the $3000 price tag?

>>57329573
you mean microsoft?
>>57329579
What do you mean another publisher might? Affordable is relative, I'd give a pretty penny for a high pixel 3:2 screen.

>>57329593
I think it's at least a little bit the actual pc.

File: 1398133439651.png (186KB, 669x1015px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 669x1015px

>>57329593

To be fair, it's a pretty nice knob.

>>57329617
What's the price of these specs, standalone? $1200 ? That leaves $1800 for the monitor which is still far from affordable.

There's no way releasing it is part of Ms' strategy anyway. At best the manufacturer of the panel may release a similar product to lower production costs a bit.

>>57329593
I should add that I don't even want the touch screen hardware or the hinges or anything (although the hinges would be the one other feature I'd actually enjoy having), I just want the actual screen panel in a working normal monitor.

>>57329663
I'd pay 1800. You also have to realize some of this is for touch screen integration. And some of it is microsofts price premium, which would have to be relatively smaller on a cheaper device.

>>57329501
fucking 16:9 babies
>>>/v/

>>57329730
agreed senpai

Good chance someone else will.

Microsoft owns the company that makes the touch layer though so whoever else tries to make it will have to pay a license fee.

File: smug-00036.jpg (97KB, 480x604px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 480x604px

>4500x3000
KEK
So basically a 2250x1500 workspace? Really?

>>57329730
16:10 :^) argue against nature's law of beauty m9

Microsoft should release a surface cinema display

>>57331465
>Good chance someone else will.
microsoft makes the panel, how would others do it?

>>57329453

0%

Microsoft never do what you want. At the moment they are all hands on deck to out "apple" apple. Thats means chiq metal and high pricetags desu.

imho that screen and the surfacebook are pretty fucking impressive,

>>57331507
>complaining about one of the highest resolution screens on the market for being too low res

You can always use more than a quarter of the display for a given task, anon.

>>57332151
>microsoft makes the panel

They're almost certainly paying a display manufacturer to make a custom panel to their specification.

>>57332222
>Microsoft never do what you want
I just want a Surface 4.

Also, checked.

>>57329453
I dont give a shit. Release dell oled 4k panel now (and make it affordable so poors like me can buy it)
Pixel panel is dog shit compared to dell up3017q

>>57332251
>They're almost certainly paying a display manufacturer to make a custom panel to their specification.
They're putting pretty big emphasis on the capabilities of the screen and how it's relatively unique.
How would one figure out the manufacturer?

>>57332264
>dell oled 4k panel now
>4k
I'm asking specifically because I don't fucking want 16:9, that's like the main reason I'm interested.

>>57332151
I seriously doubt microsoft makes the panel

>>57332317
why?

>>57332316
On a 30" panel its alright.

>wanting anything but 16:9 (or 16:10)
Stay pleb

>>57332397
>wanting anything but 16:9 (or 16:10)
leave /g/, 16:9 is useless for work, it's only good for video

>>57332264
>Pixel panel is dog shit compared to dell up3017q

The Dell is also $5000, So I'd hope it's better. But even then, it still has a much lower pixel density.

>>57332298
>How would one figure out the manufacturer?

Wait for a teardown and hope there are some identifying marks on the components.

>>57332356
>why?

There are only a few manufacturers that could do something like this. The processes, machinery and supply chain are extremely complex. It's sort of like how most companies that design custom chips for their devices still have them made at one of a couple companies that own the fabs with the capability to do so. Intel being a notable exception until recently.

File: 1476565650046[1].png (299KB, 680x598px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 680x598px

>>57332356
Don't think microsoft would invest money into a factory to build display panels for a single product instead of just getting another company to do it

>>57332426
they're starting to have a pretty substantial line of pcs and are clearly trying to take Apples old turf, which in particular promoted their screens

>>57332469
>they're starting to have a pretty substantial line of pcs

It's still not worth spending billions of dollars on a factory to make their own displays.

>>57332557
unless they start selling them!
>>57332425
>>Pixel panel is dog shit compared to dell up3017q
>The Dell is also $5000, So I'd hope it's better. But even then, it still has a much lower pixel density.
I don't even see how the dell would be better, they pretty much have the same specs except the surface studio has a better pixel density and a far superior aspect ratio

>>57329453
I hope so. it'd go great with my hackintosh build

>>57332254

fuck me i never dubs let alone quads.... must be my lucky day.

>>57332572
How is 1.5:1 superior to 1.5(+0.28 of extra space):1 ???

>>57332637

Because some people want a taller display, rather than a wider one.

>>57332708
In fact, all professionals should want this

>>57329453
Extremely unlikely but would be nice

because of my autism i'm only able to use non-sandard aspect ratio monitors. please understand

>>57329573
Pixelsense is the touchscreen though, the old name is Microsoft Surface, Bill Gates talk about it all the time.

>>57332251
>>complaining about one of the highest resolution screens on the market for being too low res

It's not though. My 5120x2880 screen has almost 2MP more.

>>57333615
>It's not though.

It's one of them. You can probably count the number of consumer focused desktop monitors with higher than 4K resolution on one fucking hand.

>>57332469

Protip: Not even Apple makes their own displays.

>>57329501
3:2 increases productivity supposedly.

>>57329501
superior height is half of the appeal of the monitor.

Rotating a 16:9 monitor makes it awkwardly tall and needing more width. Okay for browsing but gotta rotate it every time to watch a video, movie or play games. No chance in hell I'm doing that.

I've run a triple 16:9 setup, left, mid, right. The width makes it so that I'm not even using the far edges of the left or right monitor.

I'd love to switch to a triple 3:2 setup. Basically I keep all the width that I actually use, but gain significantly more real estate vertically.

Random off-side, I do photography and digital camera sensors are not 16:9, the native is 3:2 for both full-frame sensors (36mm x 24mm = 3/2) and for crop sensors (23.6mm x 15.7mm = 3/2), so full-screen of every native image has ugly black bars on left and right of screen, not even on the traditional top and bottom.
Photographers and graphic designers will love having a 3:2 to better view their images.

>>57333239
>non-standard
fuck off, 3:2 is not a weird aspect ratio

>>57335304
he didn't say it was weird

>>57335335
it is A standard. it is not THE standard. calling it non-standard is also wrong

>>57335353
correction accepted

>>57335366
thanks senpai.

>>57335181
Thank you for correcting the record.

>>57329501
>there are people like this on /g/

>>57329663
The touch panel supposedly has the fidelity that matches professional ones like Cintiqs, which are expensive as hell and doesn't come with a computer built in
This thing is made for people who make a living of design. Not for people who are looking a tool for their hobby.
It might seem expensive to you, but for people who live, eat and breath design, they'll buy this

>>57331507
That makes no sense
>1920x1080
KEK
So basically 960x540 workspace?
Really?

Like wtf are you saying here?

>>57331588
I use 16:10 for my vertical monitor

>>57329673
You do realize that the touch screen is literally the panel. It doesn't work like a smartphone screen, it has a tiny one pixel camera in the (I guess each fourth) pixels

>>57337595
get some tweezers and remove them then.

Never gonna happen unless the screen becomes a household name

>>57329453
0%
Microsoft doesn't sell monitors.

>>57339309
That would make it more expensive tho

>>57335181
>Okay for browsing but gotta rotate it every time
That's why double monitor or triple monitor setups exist you stupid retarded fuck.