Hacker News Reader

From 2011. Lots of things have changed since then.

Most notably that manufacturers now use very narrow gamut LCD panels (50% NTSC, or even 50% sRGB) in low/mid range screens to force consumers to spend vastly more on hardware than was necessary, even a few years ago, to have access to devices with reasonable color rendition.

Charging the same prices for items of inferior quality is one way capitalism can increase inflation without it appearing in the official statistics.

How cheap are you talking about? Because from what I've seen that's not the case.

Most monitors hit sRGB. Easily. Unless you're talking sub $100.

The differentiating factors today are high refresh rate or HDR where the DCI-P3 gamut is the gamut to hit.

sRGB is almost like expecting a car to have electric windows.

There's a HDR certification for displays where HDR 1000 is actually real HDR. https://displayhdr.org/

They probably mean laptop screens. Finding one with full sRGB is very difficult.

Most notably HDR standards which (usually) specify a newer wide gamut not covered in the article and a wider luminosity range that has to be thought about separately. Cheap displays in cheap devices has always been a thing, particularly for LCD panels over the years. If anything I've seen cheap LCDs tend to get better over time not worse but that's just an anecdote.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com