...you just described what "artificially limited" means in this case.
I'd say option three is best.
3. Products that can not be resold are not bought by anyone, so the companies that insist on selling such products either disappear from the market or change their business model.
The problem is that this options requires people to actually not buy, for instance, games that can not be resold.
Try looking at HP, Dell and Lenovo.
For instance, here's a few of the ones from HP, Simply filter on "Operating System: Windows 7 (64 bit)":
Similarly, I found a whole bunch of Thinkpads from Lenovo which ships with Windows 7 after searching for about 1 minute.
The easy solution is to simply not buy the product if you think it's bad.
Ford: "So, we got ourselves a life-signs detector."
Sheppard: "We can name it later."
I had similar issues with a USB3 pcie card. I don't remember the chip-model but the problem was solved by switching to another card made by another OEM. This one had the same chip and used the same driver, so I assume either a faulty card or a faulty design was to blame.
Building giant, expensive, vibration sensitive equipment in an area prone to earthquakes seems like a bad call in the long run.
I converted my main workstation at work to windows 8 a week ago, mostly in order to learn and get used to it.
While there indeed is a bit of a hassle to change some of the habits from xp, vista and 7 to fit 8, and I really dislike the start panel that has replaced the start menu, it's not really a big deal.
I've put my 20 or so most used applications in the taskbar and pinned my most used folders and files into the respective taskbar icons and changed my "click start menu and open the file or folder"-habit into a "right click the taskbar icon and open the file or folder"-habit.
Also, I've installed regular windows applications as replacements for all the standard windows 8 applications, like vlc instead of the full screen windows 8 movie player, acrobat reader instead of the full screen windows 8 pdf-viewer, etc.
To be honest, I haven't used the start panel at all this entire week, except for going to the desktop after logging in.
On one hand, I've not really seen any of the horrible downsides with windows 8 that everyone talks about. On the other hand, I haven't seen many improvements over windows 7 yet. The new task manager and the new file-copy graph windows are awesome though.
I think it is time for the US to declare a state of war against climate change. That's the only way.
If there can be armed military conflicts going on against other incorporeal foes like crime, drugs and terrorism, why not climate change... =-P
UHDTV 4K is 3840x2160 (Which really should be called 2160p, if we are to follow the name convention of HDTV)
UHDTV 8K is 7680x4320
So a regular Display Port 1.4 port can indeed drive a 4K monitor.
But, as you say, it can not drive higher resolutions today.
It would be possible to use the same method that IBM used for their T220 and T221 monitors though.
There was no connector that could drive the 3840x2400 resolution in 2001, so they used up to four single link DVI-connectors, sending part of the screen on each connector.
This, of course, needed special driver support. But the same thing could be done with Display Port.
Use 4 of them to run a 7680x4320 display.
When it comes to desktop monitors, I've got the following impression:
Most 21.5" are 1920x1080, about 102 PPI
Most 22" are 1680x1050, about 90 PPI
Most 23" are 1920x1080, about 96 PPI
Most 24" are 1920x1200, about 94 PPI
Most cheap 25" to 30" are 1920x1080, though some are 1920x1200, roughly between 74 and 88 PPI
Most high end 27" are 2560x1440, about 109 PPI
Most high end 30" are 2560x1600, about 101 PPI
So the sweet spots are 21.5", 27" and possibly 30"
That is why one should have a desk that can be adjusted between a stand up desk and a sit down desk.
Personally I use my desk in stand up position maybe 10 - 30% of my desk bound working hours. I'm in IT administration and support, so a lot of my time is at my desk.
Also, when I use it in stand up mode, I stand on a balance board. It's really great for avoiding back pain, it is good for my damaged knees and right ankle and it makes people baffled, which is something positive in itself. =)
Another good thing about standing on a balance board is that you get tired quicker from standing so you don't stand too long in one stretch which might give you other kinds of problems, like plantar fasciitis.
The GPU's themselves probably could support those resolutions on a single monitor if the driver supported it, since they can handle the amount of pixels when spread out on several outputs and displayport supports it.
When higher than 2560x1600 monitors becomes available, drivers will surely follow.
WQUXGA (3840×2400) computer monitors, which is a little higher than the 4K UHD resolution (3840 × 2160), has been around for quite a while.
For instance the 204 PPI 22 inch IBM monitor T220/T221 from 2001.
Hopefully there will come high density monitors at a price point reachable by us mortals soon, since there seem to be a trend towards high density monitors in mainstream computing.
Also, since WQUXGA (barely) fits into the specifications of Displayport, it won't be required to use quad single-link DVI or dual dual-link DVI to support the resolution at reasonable refresh rates any more. =)
A new industry standard would be one way to go, and probably the best.
Another solution is to license the XJACK-design.
It's a retractable RJ45-connector with a height of about 5mm.
Much better solution than idiotic adapters.