Your world is waiting...
https://quake3world.com/forum/
It's a fully functional prototype PC, weighing in at 18 pounds, with a 20-inch display, sporting 8 speakers, and running Windows XP Media Center Edition. It's got a Bluetooth keyboard along with a matching Bluetooth remote, has DVI output for adding additional displays, and supports both dual hard drives and dual-core processors. The Properties dialog of My Computer identifies it as an Inspiron M2010, though we don't know if that model name will stick, and lists its processor as a dual-core 2.1GHz Intel T2600.
. I'm regretting it now.
Forget those puny 1080p displays. If you want really high definition, check out Westinghouse's 56-inch, 3840x2160 LCD display. That's a full eight megapixels, or 4 times 1080p, for those of you doing the math at home.
more (and better) pics at dap.reviewWithout a doubt one of the highlights of last night's Digital Experience press event was getting to play with the Gigabeat S Series, Toshiba's new portable video player running Microsoft's Portable Media Center software. The device itself was lighter and thinner than we expected, video looked crisp and clear on the Gigabeat S's 320 x 240 LCD screen (the photo above definitely does not do it justice), and switching between portrait and landscape modes was a snap. Of course, the big selling point, and what Toshiba and Microsoft are hoping will make the Gigabeat S a strong competitor for the new iPod with video, is its support for video subscription services like Vongo (which plans to offer a catalog of about a 1000 movies for download later this year). The Gigabeat S should be out sometime next month, retail price will be $299 for the 30GB version and $399 for the 60GB version.
yeah, i guess if you're a teenager that's true.Kaziganthe wrote:I think that, in general, better features are no longer as important as being able to say "I have an iPod".
only $10.000? thats fuckin ultra cheap, a 65 inch plasma (by far cheaper to manufacture in large sizes) will set you back around 15.000 euros here. And it wouldnt even be 1920*1080+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
via Engadget:
Forget those puny 1080p displays. If you want really high definition, check out Westinghouse's 56-inch, 3840x2160 LCD display. That's a full eight megapixels, or 4 times 1080p, for those of you doing the math at home.
:icon28:
dmmh wrote:only $10.000? thats fuckin ultra cheap, a 65 inch plasma (by far cheaper to manufacture in large sizes) will set you back around 15.000 euros here. And it wouldnt even be 1920*1080+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
via Engadget:
Forget those puny 1080p displays. If you want really high definition, check out Westinghouse's 56-inch, 3840x2160 LCD display. That's a full eight megapixels, or 4 times 1080p, for those of you doing the math at home.
:icon28:
:icon26:
i don't think they know what' it's going to cost. they're only guessing because of the partnership with Chi Mei Corp. i would think that it'd be closer to 15k. at this level, 10k's a steal.dmmh wrote:only $10.000? thats fuckin ultra cheap, a 65 inch plasma (by far cheaper to manufacture in large sizes) will set you back around 15.000 euros here. And it wouldnt even be 1920*1080+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
via Engadget:
Forget those puny 1080p displays. If you want really high definition, check out Westinghouse's 56-inch, 3840x2160 LCD display. That's a full eight megapixels, or 4 times 1080p, for those of you doing the math at home.
:icon28:
:icon26:
i don't see where he said that plasmas look better...primaltheory wrote:dmmh wrote:only $10.000? thats fuckin ultra cheap, a 65 inch plasma (by far cheaper to manufacture in large sizes) will set you back around 15.000 euros here. And it wouldnt even be 1920*1080
:icon26:
Plasma TV's do not look better then lcds, they just cost more...plasma tvs are more or less somthing to brag about, why pay 20k for a 80inch plasma with a shitty ass picture when you can pay 10k for an lcd like that?
i would, but i don't have that problem:booker wrote:could we quote the same image a few more times please
He was insinuating that because the price is more they look better+JuggerNaut+ wrote:i don't see where he said that plasmas look better...primaltheory wrote:dmmh wrote: only $10.000? thats fuckin ultra cheap, a 65 inch plasma (by far cheaper to manufacture in large sizes) will set you back around 15.000 euros here. And it wouldnt even be 1920*1080
:icon26:
Plasma TV's do not look better then lcds, they just cost more...plasma tvs are more or less somthing to brag about, why pay 20k for a 80inch plasma with a shitty ass picture when you can pay 10k for an lcd like that?
wait, you aren't dmmh, so wtf?+JuggerNaut+ wrote:see.