LG's UltraWide Monitors Are All About Multi-Tasking
LG is showing UltraWide IPS monitors that connect to up to two devices and split into four separate windows.
Sometimes, nothing gets tasks done quicker than having more than one display on the go. A multi-monitor setup means you can write a document on one screen while reading an important spec sheet on the other. We won't even get into the benefits of multi-screens in PC gaming.
LG has taken an interesting approach to multi-tasking with its new LG IPS UltraWide (21:9) monitors showcased during the show. The EA93 in particular had a 2560 x 1080 resolution, an sRGB of 100-percent, Dual-Link Up for connecting the display to two devices, and two 7W speakers. It also sports LG's thin-bezel CINEMA SCREEN Design
The wide display also features 4-screen split software that adjusts windows into pre-settled layouts. Users merely find the "Screen Split" function on the lower right-hand side of the tray bar, click the "Screen Split" button, go to "layout", and then pick the option that fits best for the multitasking scenario.
For PC gamers, this should be the ideal screen for desktop and maybe even laptops computers. In the general business or consumer environment, it would be interesting to see how three of these displays could function off the same device, seemingly boxing the user in with wall-to-wall desktop wallpapers, Facebook feeds, browser windows and other desktop clutter.
LG's announcement regarding all of its new IPS monitors for 2013 can be read here.


I'm sure they will have this eventually when prices are at a point they could sell a few tens of thousand of them. As sits today not enough people would buy a $5,000-$8,000 monitor. When the OLED TV's are reasonably priced Im sure we will see these high res curved monitors as mass production savings will have finally overcome the R&D costs.
Because that is the pixel density of a brick on a 27 inch monitor and as much as I don't like apple, the resolution you are asking for is only good on 10.1 inch screens. I would expect 5 times that on a 27 inch screen.
Well we all would, but that is a different story, but with all this 4K, 4K, 4K stuff going around, one would think that creating a bridge to that, by giving us a stretched version of the top monitors, instead of the stretch version of el cheapo would be the way to go. I'll just get one of the two I mentioned and have way more vertical space, something that is useful since the point of this is to increase productivity, so that vertical space is already available in the 27 and 30 inch models while also giving us the 2560 horizontal space that this introduced. Like someone else says give us something, either better resolution or OLED, giving us Nothing is not worth my money.
But that is not true, Apple had that odd ball 960 x 640 resolution and people bought it, because well, it was retina display and for a small screen it was really resolute. What about the new Ipad's 2046 X 1536, we know of monitors going to 1600 and 1440, but Ipads was different, people didn't necessarily need a normal standard. PC monitors was always either 4:3 or 16x10, where we had lots of 1920 x 1200 monitors, and then the manufactorers fell in love with 1080P and gave us the inferior (for PC that is) standard of 1920 x 1080. 2560 X 1600 is in the Nexus 7, 2560 X 1440 is in all of the nice Apple thunderbolt/Cinema displays along with other manufacturers. It doesn't necessarily have to be 4K. Remember laptops, they use to be of higher resolution, and then the manufacturers fell in love with 1280 X 720 or 1366 X 768 and kept pumping out these low quality monitors for ever. For a long time, it was like a needle in a haystack to find a descent IPS monitor with a descent resolution on a laptop. Apple got the balls to actually bump up the resolution and now I'm starting to see a lot more 1600 X 900 and 1650 x 1080, and full 1080P laptops as a result.
Also, if I may add, so many people are jumping into laptops and tablets now, that real desktop PCs are slowly going the way of either business mass purchases, or more like me, enthusiast that build their own, and make sure the GPU is powerful, CPU is fast and so forth. While the former may play around with this 21:9 monitor if it is under 200 bucks, any person who actually knows about computers, would feel this is a waste when 2560 X 1440 monitors are out there for maybe twice as much, but with greater resolution, and even greater pixel density since they tend to be 27 inches, while these 21:9 monitors tend to be 29 inches.
I have a 30 inch panel now and I don't see why the need to make this curved. If they somehow made it like 35 inches, then maybe, but then if it was that large, you would have a very low pixel density monitor and that would make it even more crap. I've seen another monitor that is 21:9 and it was 29 inches. At that size, flat should be fine.
Try editing a 1080p video on a 1080p screen. No room for buttons etc.
And yes, I use a multi-screen setup but still would prefer to have room for basic video controls under the actual video instead of 2 feet to the right on the main monitor.
It may not sound like a big deal unless you spend 8h+ in the studio !
It is because manufacturers want to use the cheap mass produced panels. I have a few 1920x1200 displays but even those are rare anymore. IPS displays are becoming more cost effective but they're still at a big premium to glorified TVs...
it costs more than 2 1080 monitors by a significant ammount. at least current ones.
i like the idea too, but i hate the current costs more than 2 separate monitors.
I have a 26" 1920/1200 display, but I believe that res is native for 24" 16/10 so I don't think I've got the best dot pitch
I really want a 32" monitor but they all suck at 1080!!!
i really want to see this, drop the oled to save money, through in a quality ips or high end tn and get them to us for less than $500, i doubt we'll ever see this