NEC CRV43: 43-inches of curve on sale July
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Jun 4th 2009 1:53AM
posted Jun 4th 2009 1:53AM
posted Jun 4th 2009 1:53AM
The percentage of electronics at the end of their lives which were recycled.
The EPA found that the percentage remained consistent from 1999-2005. Even as recycling rates went up, the amount of electronics reaching end of life outpaced the increase, leaving the figure static. (source: EPA, July 2008)
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
+1 for taking Mossberg's ugly face off the top of the page.
+2 seconded for removing Mossturd from the first post. Thank goodness, anything is better.
Nice Walt p0wnage! Zing, Ba bing, you're a gunslinger ;^)...
+1 for "junk / trunk" - gotta love Engadget for down with the kids.
i bet the zune hd would look great on their
***there***
What's going to look great on there is a stretched version of the Windows file transfer. It's going to look like my files are going transcontinental.
Wait, what? This display seems useless to me for anything but gaming...
A 30" monitor would be superior for any other task (and even certain gaming genres like RTS) at much lower cost...
This is basically a multi-monitor setup without the seams, and it's every bit as useful. Unless you disagree with the usefulness of multiple monitors, then you must admit to the usefulness of this big guy. Of course it's going to be absurdly expensive though, but that's because it's designed for people who don't care what it costs.
Really? Porn doesn't come to mind at all?
Actually, I agree. With only a height of 900 pixels, I see a standard 30 incher (2560 x 1600) as a much more reasonable option for work requiring high resolutions, and only about 1/6 the cost, while maintaining almost 90% of the horizontal resolution
As a user of multiple smaller monitors, I can say that the entire reason I enjoy my setup is the ability to separate my applications between two screens. I can maximize each, and lower the brightness (or even shut off) of one display if I care to. You cant do this with this monitor.
It would, however, be an absolutely amazing addition tho ultra-high-end gaming rigs if developers chose to support it.
I use a 30" monitor, I game and I WANT THAT THING!!!
30 inches are good but for some tasks I really wish there were 3x30" monitors. I lack space for tasks that involve multiple windows.
This thing NEC made looks like 3 CRT monitors together. Too big for gaming. Too expensive for average gamer as well.
Great thing for professionals, now we just need a cheap slim variant from Dell or some other company...
My 30inches Dell have 2560 by 1600. I paid it 800$ (I still cant believe Ive got that deal!!)
This is quite bad idea... make it 4000 by 1200 and I will be impress.
I also use a 30" monitor with a 24 incher next to it in portrait mode. You are crazy if you think I would give up this setup for some measly 900 pixels height. Talk about a severe loss of screen real estate. Honestly I cant think of anything other than gaming that would benefit from this screen...
Prove me wrong NEC (but you still aint gettin' my cash)
I totally agree with you guys... the 900 pixel height is ridiculous in this day and age, epically if you are targeting it at multitaskers.
Most people would buy 2 30" monitors for less than half the cost of this setup.
This display is 2880x900 = 2,592,000 pixels
2 30" monitors running at 2650x1600 = 8,192,000 pixels (for half the cost)
not a tough choice.
32:10, THE CORRECT RATIO SHOULD BE 16:5..........
well then why isnt 16:10 done 8:5? because its easily comparable to 16:9.. same with this, its easily comparable with 16:10 (oh look, twice as wide)
I believe the reason lies in marketing and public ignorance about high school mathematics. Joe Public Sees 8:5 as being inferior or Less wide than 16:9.
I'll burn some books to clean up the shelve space!
You have books?
Here, take this spare kerosene.
Your canteen is empty. Will you fill it?
i'll burn some of my books to help you make some space for that.
Maybe Bradbury will loan you his mechanical hound.
I think it should be 1200 pixels high minimum. It would be cheaper to buy two 30" cinema displays which will give you a lot more pixels and can actually display HD video, unlike this one
Curved seamless image: Yes
It's not seamless.
just look at the vid man http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/06/video-nec-crvd-display-hands-on/
if I were the kind of person that wanted this, i'd wait for flexible oled screens
I have seen one of these in person, used it for extended periods of time, and have to say - it absolutely sucks. the screen itself is blurry since it's dlp projected through a transluscent plastic sheet (your screen) and then there's an absolutely clear separation between each dlp projector.
it's completely pronounced, and if you're able to calibrate the monitors for a particular app, once you change apps, it'll show up terribly.
it's worst when you're working on something with a white/bright background since you'll have dark vertical lines cutting down the screen.
Oh - and guess what, you can actually hear a high pitched wine from the DLP mirrors spinning. Ruins gameplay for me - it's even more bothersome doing any sort of work without loud music blaring out of my speakers.
Oh.
Now I'm rather deflated by it all. A shame.
Of course I was never going to spend 8Gs on display anyway.
I doubt the micro mirrors make any sound. It might be the colorwheels making the noise.
It could also be the cooling fans making noise since DLP light sources get hot.
I hadn't even realized it was DLP until I read your comment, no wonder it has such great response times with that color gamut. I was trying to figure out who had invented a curving LCD panel with good color and super fast response.
Now I'm saddened, although if they could improve the problems you mentioned it wouldn't be so bad. Of course this thing could really use a little more vertical resolution. Just a little tragic when your $8000 monitor can't show all the vertical pixels of a 1080p image.
Terrible pixel/cost ratio. 2880x900 for $8k vs. 2560x1600 X 5 for ~$7k. And I can still "curve" the five 30"ers around my desk.
5 30" desktop = ridiculous.
Thats a 20-megapixel desktop.
At that point, your really stretching it to say desktop. Really, that's more like . . . garage(top?).
It would make for an awesome setup though to have those monitors. At that point, you could just forgo folders all together and place all your files on the desktop.
Rename to: NEC JLO43.
I see what you did there. lmao
I must know, what is that about?
I'm craving for it so it CRV, others can call it JLO or JLS.
Monitors like this shouldn't be measured diagonally.
ok. how do you propose measuring them? keep in mind that companies won't switch to a height/width two number system.
How about a measurement of area?
Area and ppi.
For example, a 19 inch 3:4 display has a greater area than a 19 inch 16:10 display which has a greater area than a 19 inch 16:9 display, and don't even try to compare the resolutions without a calculator. 2 things really matter: size, and detail. Diagonal measurements portray neither on an easily comparable scale.
Hopefully oled will make curved display more common. This is just not it.
That doesn't count as curved. You can get 5 30" displays and set them side by side in an arc shape and it will be cheaper and more powerful.
Nice try.
But can this display Crysis and GTA4!?
this or a very expensive hooker....
CHOICES...
Oh HELLLLLL .. . that is what I call a monitor , this would fit perfect on my desk.
what a beautiful piece of electronic. . this is innovation.. now it's starting to feel like 2009.