Dell Precision M4700 and M6700 - Preliminary Info

Good to hear. Thanks, like I said, just saying...

Cheers!
Sent from my GT-N7000

 

No worries.

 

I'm just curious. If so many people are willing to pay much, much more for IPS panel in their Dell Precision, how many will be willing to pay for 16*10? Even TN. I don't think, that cost difference will be more than $50 - would definitely pay this (even more) for 1200px high screen.

I mean, if this is a market - why not ask your customers what they really need? And not just use what you can buy in bulk. Anyway, Precision - is not a thin bezel screen laptop with no extra space.

P.S. Sounds like a good competitive advantage. Especially when customers are happy to pay for this.

 

Why is Dell Corporation can not do (as an experiment), a small batch Dell Precision (about 1000 pcs.).
Call it, for example, M6700P (unlike conventional M6700 16:9).
Equipped with a matrix 16:10, to make the price up to 50 percent more...
And see will be in demand or not...

I would buy...

Best Regards,
Alex.

PS. Oh great, Michael Saul Dell! Read this post! And tell your guys: "Yes, folks, this is to be done!"
PPS. Sorry for my English...

 

The engineering cost to designing two chassis - with different parts - would be astronomical compared to the potential revenue.

I'd much prefer to see Dell push for much higher quality displays ala the MBPR, even if that means 16:9.

Or invest more in other areas, e.g. power / etc.

Ultimately, if I want 16:10 I can buy an external display.

 

50% more, I dunno, pretty steep, Precision is already pretty expensive. :-\

Such a small run would cost a lot. As the 16:10 screen would have different physical dimensions, it would require a custom screen enclosure — and an entirely custom chasis design, unless you want a lot of wasted bezel space on the left and right side of the screen. The internal components would have to be rearranged somewhat. Getting the design down and manufacturing process set up would cost a lot, and the cost probably wouldn't be made up for by selling 1000 machines at 50% more. No point doing all this work unless you're going to sell a whole bunch of them.

([Edit] msjgriffiths wrote pretty much the same thing while I was writing this post. )

While regular 16:10 screens are probably still possible to source (Apple gets them from somewhere, after all), special screens like the IPS or touch screen would be hard to come up with, I bet. So, if they were to offer 16:10 screens in the Precision, they'd also have to have a 16:9 line for these special upgrades anyway. Since it's easier to come up with 16:9 screens, this is not worth the hassle to Dell. Realistically, most people who buy the Precision probably don't care that much and are happy to take the 16:9 screen as long as it is of good quality. It's just that those of us that do care about the aspect ratio complain very loudly.

That said, I'd gladly take a $500 hike in the price to keep my extra 230,400 pixels. It's quite disappointing that 10% of the pixels are going to be gone after I upgrade. :-\

 

Apple gets them because (i) they can commit to a certain volume, which (ii) partly explains why their machines are not (very) configurable.

Dell could probably do the same for their Precision line, but they'd lock themselves into one (maybe, but I doubt it) screen options.

Either way, you'd screw over a subset of Precision customers. Either you put in a high-quality IPS display and jack up the base price by a lot - and lose lots of customers - or you don't offer a high-quality IPS display with excellent color reproduction.

 

Yeah, but the MBP 17 limitations come from the chassis design (being unibody and of thin height) so they didn't really give up on anything. On the other hand, since it didn't really offer anything over the 15,4" model (apart from a somewhat higher res), it might be a reason why it didn't really sell well.

But, the Dell and HP workstation models are thicker and heavier so they can offer better configuration options, especially regarding the GPUs. They possibly could have made the effort to stick to the 16:10 on their workstations, especially considering their premium price (and not choose some cheaper model of Chi Mei screens).

You have a point there. Dell and HP would have to keep at least two types of screen in production (like some cheaper TN and a more expensive IPS) to cover more configuration option.. And I'm not sure how much of the 17" models are they selling with all the Ultrabook craze lately..

 

I agree with You Aaron! (I agree with Dell-Bill_B also )
But... Really want to...

Best Regards,
Alex.

 

I currently have an m6500 and when I look at m6600 pictures it looks like the borders above and below the screen are thicker than on my m6500. So I could imagine that you just need to make the borders thinner to fit a 16:10 screen into the same chassis.