High resolution end-game

"I ordered one yesterday. Jaw-droppingly gorgeous display, outstanding performance, and amazing technology to make it all work. They could have gone “retina” with scaling earlier, but instead, Apple waited until they could truly go pixel-for-pixel @2x retina at 27 inches. I’ve never bought a new machine with less hesitation."

DaringFireball's review of the iMac

The new iMac is out and by all accounts, the new screen is the stand-out feature. I haven't seen it yet but if it's just a bigger version of what is on my Macbook Pro, it must be amazing to look at (and read on, let alone do more intensive activities such as photo or video editing). As an aside, here's great comparison of the difference between the original Mac and the latest iMac screen for resolution comparison - make sure to click on .

Image Credit: ThingsofInterest.com - click on image to direct to original full-quality version for perspective.

Sometime around mid-to-late 2000's, we reached a point where computer processors were good enough that improvements have become ever harder and harder to justify to the consumer. The same happened with phone monitors a year or so after the iPhone had gotten it's first 'retina' screen (and other manufacturers had caught up). The same also happened with DVD to Blu-ray (and perhaps even more visibly with Blu-ray to 4K) - it's harder to justify upgrading for what is a smaller increase in quality. 

For a great thought on this, and showing the challenge to the creators of these incredible devices, Horace Deidu has a great insight here:

"People don’t naturally have exponentially increasing needs. For them to absorb this new power, it has to be couched in new uses."

We're now starting to reach that point in monitors - another year or two and then all monitors will be 'retina' (I'm using that term as a generic description as it's in the public consciousness but feel free to use whatever term you prefer for high-density screens) - what will be the up-sell then?