Quote:
Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze
Why, then, has MS chosen consistently to limit the resolution of a tablet that performs (and is packaged) like a luxury item in every other way?
|
Oh, maybe because pixel count isn't the only, or even the best, measure of screen quality. (Color fidelity and purity, to mention two, come to mind.) It has value but it has its limits in describing quality, especially in the newest PenTile displays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile...ly#Controversy
And, maybe because higher pixel counts mean the GPU needs to work harder and generate more heat, just to display the same information. (Remember the short-lived iPad3? The jump to "retina" resolution ate the added processing power, ran hotter, and required a bigger battery.)
And finally, there is the matter of the digitizer: since the Surface tablets support ink as a data type their digitizers need to be pixel-level precise. That alone justifies most of the premium.
Not all the features that define the quality of a product are readily apparent or appreciated by the mainstream market. Sometimes, the best engineering intentions result in superior quality that goes underappreciated or even ignored by most buyers.
(The much maligned Zune comes to mind: it had spectacular audio fidelity far superior to ipods. But you only noticed if you fed it high quality files and played back through a quality stereo or truly premium earbuds or headsets. Most buyers simply noted that it sounded better than the ipods but assumed it was just because it had better earbuds.)
Edit: check these displaymate reports:
http://www.displaymate.com/Tablet_ShootOut_3.htm