Dell Precision M4700 and M6700 - Preliminary Info

Ha, actually I'm not surprised to hear someone say that. I carry a USB->Serial dongle for the odd occasion that I need to use one, myself — generally for getting to the terminal configuration interface for an old ethernet switch. Though, like the 56k modem (which I occasionally use to send or receive a fax), its use is infrequent enough that a USB dongle in my bag is fine, and I'd just as well have them use the space on the laptop for more modern connectivity options.

 

Sure. The same question is asked of any manufacturer that offers business/workstation-class laptops. And I am sorry, but I have never, ever, heard a cogent explanation of the switch to 16:9, of the entire industry, that made any sense at all. Of course, by now, after just about everybody has moved to 16:9, trying to turn back the wheel would be expensive, but why we ever got where we are now is a mystery.

 

Come on, come on, give it out, Dell!

 

They say its because 16:9 screens are way easier to make, and there for cheaper. There is some technicality around here of why specifically it is cheaper to make.

 

Everybody is saying that even it is probably a nonsence. I have spoken to a Eizo engineer, and he said that this is a myth.

 

Then think in dollars and cents. In business, that drives everything.

Again do the math. You get more panels per sheet with 16:9 than 16:10 which equals a lot less recycle, clean up, throw away costs. Again, we're back to dollars.

 

Those are all far-fetched arguments... Have you noticed, that people need that 16:10 screen and are ready to pay for that?

And keep in mind that we don't ask for a new technology to develop. We're asking to offer the old and good 16:10 screen that this company had already offered several years ago...

 

My point exactly. Perhaps it would cost them a bit more per screen, but it was certainly doable and considering the workstation prices, even expectable, but here we are.

I wonder if the 21:9 becomes a new industry standard (as most movies are shot in the cinema 2,35:1 ratio so it should be a standard for most movies on bluray AND given this usual production cost explanation, it would be even cheaper compared to 16:9 to make screens in this format), e.g. like

Test Toshiba Satellite U840W 21:9 Ultrabook - Notebookcheck.com Tests

will the marketing people try to convince us again that it's better or that there was no other choice?

 

After going through many great 15" Dell Latitudes with WUXGA screen, I missed the last precision with 16x10 screen by a few weeks, I went instead for a Vaio Z where I still hate the 16x9 ratio. I guess I am ready to finally switch to MBP hardware. After hearing many times from Windows PC manufacturers that Apple was living on borrowed time on their 16x10 stock, the latest Apple MBP offering was a clear counter message. Why on earth are PC manufaturers not listening to that simple request, giving another reason to switch to Apple!

 

Because they know that people frequently say one thing and do another. They also know that the driving force behind computer advancement is in multimedia. Where do you think the advancements in CPU and GPU would be today without the huge market of multimedia and entertainment behind it? You should be thankful.