Dell Precision M3800 - 2013!

Will Windows 7 get the scaling capabilies that 8.1 has? I'm not looking forward to Win8 on the m3800...

Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk 2

 

If the technology operated as specified, then I might consider it. But at this point you'll likely be on your next notebook before Thunderbolt is up and running anywhere near max. That is, considering third party sluggishness, if it even gets running at all.

Access your memory data base, the fastest, best, technology does not always make it into production, nor survive for long afterwards.

That's a whole lot of speculation at this point. Don't you think?

 

I don't think so.

 

I would give Windows 8.1 a chance on the M3800. It is supposed to perform faster than Windows 7 and if you don't like the Metro UI, you can boot directly into the classic desktop and get a Start menu replacement either for free or for a modest price. And you get the potential scaling benefit that won't show on 7. I can't wait to see the M3800 officially announced and a full configurator for the M4800 so we can compare.

 

It is speculation at this point yes, but I've based it on observations. If you go to the M4800 configuration and click "Help me choose" you'll see that the 1080p has a 60% adobe rgb color gamut and a 600:1 contrast ratio. Where the QHD+ display has a 72% adobe rgb (100% srgb) color gamut and 1000:1 contrast ratio. The touch QHD+ display on the M3800 will also be made by sharp and judging by their latest 4K panel for the Dell 32 and Asus monitors, the color gamut and contrast ratio should be good on the smaller QHD+ panel too.

We won't know for sure until release, but it shouldn't hurt to speculate.

I can definitely tell you Windows 8 performs better than 7. I upgraded all of my computers to 8. You can also bring the start menu back using applications like startisback. That's what I did. It's way better than the metro ui and you can keep both too.

 

I remember one of the complaints was that it took longer than OS X to rescale windows when moving them from one screen to another. The problem appeared to be, and again a typical Applezombie issue, is that they compared against a Retina Crapbook running a 650m and a Kirabook running a HD4000.

 

If I remember correctly, it was either a comment on Ars (probably Peter Bright) or by Thurrott during Windows Weekly, it wasn't about how fast they rescaled, but on how they rescaled.

 

Judging by the max hard drive configuration (1tb non-ssd) I'm assuming that the hard drive is going to be of the 7.5mm 2.5in variety. No msata (2.5in wouldn't be an option). No multiple drives (they would've mentioned it.)

512gb ssd would be my choice, but I'd probably install my own.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 4

 

The scaling issue has to do with reading stuff on screen at such a high res, right? Because websites and all are gonna be all jagged and out of place?

So if 1080p on 16 inches is already difficult to read sometimes without scaling in Win 7, and scaling with Win 8 is supposed to be "bad" until 8.1, which may have it fixed, 3200x1800 has gotta be pretty hard eh?

 

1080p on 15,16 inches screen has not been an issue since Vista. Scaling at 120% has worked for ever. I have used 1920x1200 on 15.4" and 1600x900 now on 13.3" at 120% scaling w/o any issues for ages. 150% and above used to be trickier. Although many folks have run Vaio Z with the max resolution (13.3" at 1920x1080) in Windows just fine. I have also friends that are using MPBr 15" with Windows 7 at native resolution with scaling well above 150% who are not complaining so it is doable. I am confident that 3200x1800 with Windows 8.1 will be ok, I like so much high dpi that I am willing to take the risk.