SirPrimalform: We just need 2400p monitors then!
Now you're talkin my language. There's one on the market for high end usage that I've found, but it was $30k so is a non-starter. :(
Other than that, I haven't found any other modern 3840x2400 16:10 displays though, so I'll be sticking to 2560x1600 for the foreseeable future until hopefully Dell or someone gets with the program.
ZFR: What I really wish for is new technology that would allow variable size pixels again. Is there anything on the horizon?
Pretty unlikely I'd say, there's no real market for it. With 4k displays the DPI is quite small, and with 5k and 8k even much higher than that, so with scaling and AA et al. at those resolutions + DPI it becomes difficult to discern the difference in theory anyway. Granted, 4k has not yet taken over as the mainstream resolution at use, but I think it is highly likely to do so in less than 5 years time. 8k wont likely become common for another 10 years as our hardware just can't push that many pixels at a high frame rate without extreme cost currently, but time solves all of these problems.
If people really want the effects of analogue displays, the best way to get them is to buy and use an analogue display though. I've got 10 of them in my basement if anyone wants one. :)
Maighstir: Well, since screen resolutions are increasing again, and "4k" (3840x2160) have already become a fairly common resolution, wait a while and we'll get to 8k and 16k resolution soon enough. With 15360x8640 on a 20 to 30 inch screen, you
probably won't notice a slight distortion in scaling where a row in the image has an extra row on the screen.
Dell has 5k and 8k displays for a while now. The 8k is around $5000 USD, and needs about another $5000 or more worth of expensive GPUs to push it. It'll probably be 15-20 years before we see 16k or higher displays likely, extrapolating existing display history into the future.