Asus Transformer Infinity

[IPD]

1080P in so little screens are more than enough.

not 1080p. thank god. i want to falcon punch the assclown who invented 16:9.

[IPD]

Probably because most people wouldn't spend the money on something like this even if it was available(for laptops). The price increase would be significant enough to dissuade people from buying them and the majority of the computer world wouldn't notice a difference anyways.

Although, now that Crapple has made it a "cool feature", I bet it starts showing up from several of the manufacturers.

"price increase"?

rofl. if apple can put 2880x1800 in a 15.4" laptop and price it at $2200....there's no freaking way in heck that the cost of said screen upgrade is THAT much. maybe for a pos. $500 bottom-rung laptop; but not for a high-end gaming rig. $2000 for a non-crapple 15.4" laptop with 4mp+ screen resolution & a high-end GPU isn't ridiculous at all. heck, i paid only $1400 for an MSI in 2010 that was essentially top-end everything in the 15" form-factor...except a crappy 1080p screen. i guarantee at that price, you could charge a $300 premium for 2880x1800 and people would still buy it in droves for $1700.

consumer demand isn't driving the market--it's corporate penny-pinchers who feel the need to save mere pennies per sale by using junk screens. every single other tech market has improved in the past few years. laptop displays are no better now than they were in 2008 (with the exception of this new MBP).

it's not the cost that's caused this segment to disgustingly stagnate (or backslide, in my case--from wuxga)--it's marketing that has convinced consumers that their experience now is somehow superior to years prior...even with less than before.

[Zaroth]

"price increase"?

rofl. if apple can put 2880x1800 in a 15.4" laptop and price it at $2200....there's no freaking way in heck that the cost of said screen upgrade is THAT much. maybe for a pos. $500 bottom-rung laptop; but not for a high-end gaming rig. $2000 for a non-crapple 15.4" laptop with 4mp+ screen resolution & a high-end GPU isn't ridiculous at all. heck, i paid only $1400 for an MSI in 2010 that was essentially top-end everything in the 15" form-factor...except a crappy 1080p screen. i guarantee at that price, you could charge a $300 premium for 2880x1800 and people would still buy it in droves for $1700.

consumer demand isn't driving the market--it's corporate penny-pinchers who feel the need to save mere pennies per sale by using junk screens. every single other tech market has improved in the past few years. laptop displays are no better now than they were in 2008 (with the exception of this new MBP).

it's not the cost that's caused this segment to disgustingly stagnate (or backslide, in my case--from wuxga)--it's marketing that has convinced consumers that their experience now is somehow superior to years prior...even with less than before.

I'm willing to bet that Apple's cut a lot of the profit out that they make on their typical laptops to offer this one at the price they are. I also think to recoup that money is the reason they made this laptop so difficult to service, leading to more repairs done in house amounting to more money it their pockets.

If people would buy them, companies would make them. As of right now, it would cost more than most people are willing to spend on screen. There certainly wouldn't be "droves" of people buying them. Gaming laptops are already kind of a niche market. The majority of gamers game on desktops and if they wanted to have a monitor that high, they could. They would have to chop an arm or a leg off to do it... but they could.

On top of that, I would be willing to bet that playing most highend games at that resolution would slaughter frame rates. Expecially with the graphics power that the majority of laptops have excluding laptops at the bleeding edge.

[IPD]

I'm willing to bet that Apple's cut a lot of the profit out that they make on their typical laptops to offer this one at the price they are. I also think to recoup that money is the reason they made this laptop so difficult to service, leading to more repairs done in house amounting to more money it their pockets.

If people would buy them, companies would make them. As of right now, it would cost more than most people are willing to spend on screen. There certainly wouldn't be "droves" of people buying them. Gaming laptops are already kind of a niche market. The majority of gamers game on desktops and if they wanted to have a monitor that high, they could. They would have to chop an arm or a leg off to do it... but they could.

On top of that, I would be willing to bet that playing most highend games at that resolution would slaughter frame rates. Expecially with the graphics power that the majority of laptops have excluding laptops at the bleeding edge.

long story short:

ignore a market segment because that's the popular thing to do.

.....


part of the reason why gaming has stagnated is because of the push for everything to stay at 1080p. to me, this is backwards progress. additionally, with "retina" displays already being offered for iphones and ipads--slapping one (with a substantially lower ppi than either of those) into a 15" laptop doesn't seem difficult, super expensive, or silly. really though, all i'd like to have is a little bit of selection in this market--since it IS where i shop each time i need a PC. desktops don't cut it when you can't deploy with them.

and you're right, most laptops would choke on framerates at such a high resolution---but that's because the laptop market has always treated the problem like "what's the least expensive GPU we can put in here that will appear to work great at "this shitty resolution". the whole reason why much of the enthusiast pc market (laptop and desktop) has been drying up is the dearth of technically demanding games. it's also the reason why we're seeing roughly equal performance (in many cases) between laptops and desktops--as far as the player's viewpoint is concerned. sure, a desktop may eek out another 60fps at 1080p--but when the laptop is already at 120fps...that's not a lot of visible improvement.

if i didn't know better, i'd say it's a conspiracy between display MFGR's and the gaming industry to price-fix. forcing a 1080p standard (that, again, is a step backwards in progress) allows for production costs to drop rapidly. it also allows gaming companies to mass-produce swill that will still sell because it "supports 1080p".

[J-Groove]

not 1080p. thank god. i want to falcon punch the assclown who invented 16:9.

The old SMPTE member and film major in me wants to roundhouse kick you in the face.

[IPD]

The old SMPTE member and film major in me wants to roundhouse kick you in the face.

if you--as a film major--knew anything about the golden rectangle, you'd be pissed about anything other than 16:10 aspect ratios as well.

[Zaroth]

long story short:

ignore a market segment because that's the popular thing to do.

.....


part of the reason why gaming has stagnated is because of the push for everything to stay at 1080p. to me, this is backwards progress. additionally, with "retina" displays already being offered for iphones and ipads--slapping one (with a substantially lower ppi than either of those) into a 15" laptop doesn't seem difficult, super expensive, or silly. really though, all i'd like to have is a little bit of selection in this market--since it IS where i shop each time i need a PC. desktops don't cut it when you can't deploy with them.

and you're right, most laptops would choke on framerates at such a high resolution---but that's because the laptop market has always treated the problem like "what's the least expensive GPU we can put in here that will appear to work great at "this shitty resolution". the whole reason why much of the enthusiast pc market (laptop and desktop) has been drying up is the dearth of technically demanding games. it's also the reason why we're seeing roughly equal performance (in many cases) between laptops and desktops--as far as the player's viewpoint is concerned. sure, a desktop may eek out another 60fps at 1080p--but when the laptop is already at 120fps...that's not a lot of visible improvement.

if i didn't know better, i'd say it's a conspiracy between display MFGR's and the gaming industry to price-fix. forcing a 1080p standard (that, again, is a step backwards in progress) allows for production costs to drop rapidly. it also allows gaming companies to mass-produce swill that will still sell because it "supports 1080p".

Companies have one goal. To make money. That's it. That is why they exist. They are not ignoring a market segment because that is the popular thing to do. They are ignoring it because they wouldn't make enough of a profit to make it worth doing.You said it yourself, "forcing a 1080p standard allows for production costs to drop rapidly". You specifically are a teeny tiny market segment that is obsessed with this thing 95% of people don't really care about. At least not yet. Like I said, once Apple starts making these displays a hot item, the demand for them will go up and manufactures will start producing them.



If your laptop is running a game at 120fps on the highest settings, your either playing old games or ones that are not very demanding.

You're a shooter fan, so what were your frames in Metro 2033, Max Payne, Battlefield 3, Bulletstorm, Deus Ex?

I'm willing to bet your laptop would struggle to do 30 frames in any of those at max settings.