Note to manufacturers: don\'t spend a lot of money developing 2K/4K TVs. HD is still relatively new and I\'ve bought my last TV for (hopefully) many years. I don\'t care how hi-def the picture is. I\'m content with 1080p. If I want a clearer picture, I\'ll go outside and see it with my own eyes. Stop the madness!

Note to Manufacturers: Ignore the comments of Mr. Clay Jones. Please continue to develop technology at a freaking ridiculous rate. I am not content with 1080p, nor am I content with the pixel density of my current 47inch monitor when used as a gaming monitor. Thanks. :)

The first (and only) use that comes to mind for consumers would be a wall-mounted photo viewer. I\'d like to have one to showcase some of my photos instead of printing them for hanging. I like the idea of an eight megapixel slide show! Additionally, it\'s use as a computer monitor for photo work is appealing. I\'d imagine hard-core gamers would love it although I\'d imagine the graphics card would be pretty pricey.

As a software developer, the higher the resolution, the better. A 30\" monitor with that kind of resolution would make it easy to have a lot of windows open without overlapping.

Gamers don\'t need superhigh resolution. It was understood almost from the dawn of computer games that very high resolution is wasted when a game has lots of fast action. You don\'t have time to see all the fine detail in the middle of all that motion.

Gadgeteer, that is bollocks. I play Battlefield on a 30inch monitor at 2560x1680 res and the fine detail makes a dramatic difference to game play, you see can more of your peripheral area and it makes sniping a breeze. I would love to have a 4k monitor to play on. and to Wanzewurld. only use? I work as an architect and the more pixels I have for 3d modelling the better. It is a genuine time saver as I'm not zooming in an out all the time and I can put parts of a 3D model next to each other to compare things without having to overlap them. I will be first in line for 2 of these monitors when they get released. Keep up the good work Panasonic, this monitor Rocks.

\"Panasonic demos world\'s smallest and thinnest 4K2K IPS Alpha panel\"
I feel like every website is just regurgitating the same line from Panasonic.
What makes it \'the world\'s smallest\'?
I could be wrong but I think it should be:
\"Panasonic demos world\'s thinnest and MOST DENSE 4K2K IPS Alpha panel\"

Develocon,
Sounds like you\'re the one spouting bollocks. Resolution has nothing to do with peripheral vision. Size is what makes the difference there.
Also, if you\'re really an architect, I would be very leery of being in one of the buildings you design. There\'s no such resolution as 2560x1680. It\'s 2560x1600, which I am just as familiar with as you are, since I have a Dell 3007WFP-HC. I also have a 42\" 1080P HDTV connected to one of my computers. At anything resembling a reasonable gaming distance, nobody can tell the difference in resolution. And where are you going to get the graphics card to drive this display? Not even top of the line gaming cards support 4k2k.

Not to be you know.. but
the latest video cards do support 4K2K, actually just one at the moment (AMD\'s 7970).. Also since Graphics Cards are now moving into a new generation, probably all of these will have 4K2K support.

I don\'t get it. The iPhone 4S has a pixel density of 326 ppi. So how can it be claimed this has the \"world\'s highest pixel density of 216 pixels per inch\"?