[HN Gopher] Dual 75" 4K TV Floor Computing
___________________________________________________________________
Dual 75" 4K TV Floor Computing
Author : walterbell
Score : 297 points
Date : 2022-03-27 13:28 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
| mnkmnk wrote:
| I am tempted to do this, at least as a FU to the monitor
| industry. There is so little innovation in monitor tech! Why are
| monitors so expensive and old tech compared to TVs? I just want
| an affordable large monitor with 120Hz refresh rate and USB-C for
| coding, but options are quite limited. All monitor innovation is
| into HDR and super high refresh rate which I don't care about.
| And prices seem artificially high.
| thrwawy283 wrote:
| The thing that really bothers me are all these "AI"
| technologies in my new LG oled tv that don't actually get used.
| All of them to reduce "crushed" images, correct color, improve
| blurriness in motion scenes, etc are only used when not using
| HDMI/PC hookup. My feeling is they're used when viewing things
| streamed on Netflix/Hulu/HBOMax/etc. But I spend most of my
| time using the TV as a computer monitor. I'm in a niche group,
| but this was my only option for large-format oled.
|
| I wish they did more with HDMI, even though HDMI is being
| phased out. I want to hook up my computer and have the computer
| gain an ethernet link from the TV, even though the TV is
| wirelessly connected to my router. The TV should be a "dock"
| that includes a 2nd monitor. I have a wireless controller
| reciever plugged into the USB port on the TV. I want that to
| give input to my computer from it. I also want my computer to
| charge while being hooked up to my TV. I think the only answer
| is this TV should have type-c and do all those things as a
| dock, but it's frustrating that we're 1 step behind.
|
| I wish I could watch a program, while showing my computer hdmi
| input picture-in-picture. Hell this thing has 4 HDMI inputs on
| the back, let me do each input to a quarter of the screen.
| Another niche use..
|
| Don't even get me started on the ads. Doesn't make sense to
| keep the TV on when my computer is locked for long periods of
| time, so I generally come back, turn on the TV, and unlock the
| computer. First thing I see is fucking ads. Takes 2 clicks on
| the remote to dismiss but it colors my experience that they're
| always pushing another $30 or $40/month service when I first
| see things onscreen. They know you can't get this quality
| elsewhere so they're happy to push you ads. And the telemetry,
| my god. It's my $3k TV!
|
| Most TVs are still waiting to support the next hdmi standard so
| you can do 120fps & hdr simultaneously.
|
| The 2 things that did impress me were this LG tv supporting
| both Miracast and Airplay with /no/ hoops to jump through. It
| just worked. I do wish I could "cast" things to the TV, and
| that's like pushing a link to it where the TV navigates to that
| stream and plays. No other device has to stream or push the
| video to the TV, it does it itself in the Chomecast paradigm.
| That would be nice.
|
| </rambling>
| zamadatix wrote:
| There is never going to be a single product that has a great
| display, a great casting solution, a great app solution, a
| great privacy solution, a great input solution, a great
| docking solution, a great selection of leading edge
| technology, a great content mixing solution, and whatever
| else you could want at a great price. Apart from such a thing
| inherently needing to cost an arm and a leg it needs to outdo
| every best of breed, it's just not possible.
|
| On the other hand what is possible is buying a great display
| (link a 120 Hz HDR OLED), buying a great dock (thunderbolt 4
| doing power, ethernet, and more), buying a great app/casting
| solution (like a Shield TV providing Android apps and
| Chromecast casting), buying a great multiview HDMI matrix,
| and so on and connecting them to the TV with the advent of
| HDMI CRC making it so you never have to manually adjust
| sources (excluding the multiview case where you want to see
| PiP versions of multiple sources at once in which case there
| is no adjusting outside adjusting what is PiP'd). This all
| comes with the upside when you want a better display or a new
| technology comes along you don't have to replace all $$$$ of
| it at once.
| linsomniac wrote:
| One thing I noticed about my 46" LG 4K monitor, which was
| "cheap" at $600-ish (edit: looked it up: $720) 3-4 years ago,
| is that it really isn't designed for viewing at desk distances.
| On my desk, as far back as it'll go, the viewing angle puts the
| backlight not exactly behind the pixels, so the left/right have
| 4-6 pixels and the bottom has ~10-15 pixels that are unlit.
|
| I use it for a bunch of terminals, so part of the left column
| of text and the entire bottom line, or my status bar, were
| unreadable. Thankfully my window manager had an unsupported
| feature that let me "pretend" that those areas didn't exist.
|
| So what I learned is that TV-oriented panels aren't just
| directly usable on the desktop.
|
| However, I was more recently able to pick up a couple 32" Dell
| 4K displays for $300-ish each, and they are glorious! That was
| on a big year-end sale.
| jyxent wrote:
| I think that is mainly due to being direct-lit backlight. I'm
| currently using a 43" Sony X800H, which is edge-lit, and the
| pixels are fully lit at my 2 1/2 - 3 foot viewing distance.
| usefulcat wrote:
| I also use a 40-something inch desktop monitor and I see
| slight viewing angle problems on the sides. For my use it
| would actually be better if it were slightly curved.
| copperx wrote:
| For 32", wouldn't you need an 6-8k display to get Retina-
| quality text? I believe that's why 32" 4k displays aren't
| usable for coding, unless you're ok with low resolution text.
| samatman wrote:
| Some of us get a larger monitor to see more text, others
| get a larger monitor to put further away and look at the
| same amount of text.
|
| Once your eyes turn forty, see which group you're in!
| copperx wrote:
| I still have a month to go before 40; I'll see which
| group I belong to then.
|
| However, right now, I can't tolerate screens with lower
| PPI than Retina.
| bartvk wrote:
| So what monitor do you use then?
| copperx wrote:
| A 24" 4k Dell monitor. Not perfect, because it has a
| moire pattern on white backgrounds because of the anti
| reflection coating.
| FpUser wrote:
| >"32" 4k displays aren't usable for coding"
|
| I use my 32" 4K for just that at 100% scaling and totally
| happy. Fonts looks fine to me. Do not feel low res at all.
| jamesliudotcc wrote:
| I have Dell displays with those specs and at that price
| point. Probably the same display. They are fine for
| coding if you are not acclimated to "retina" smoothness
| for fonts. Since they are so cheap, I bought a second one
| so my wife. A giant screen is just as useful for legal
| work as for coding, it turns out.
|
| There are downsides. The colors aren't great. The blacks
| are just dreadfully light. Sometimes there are artifacts
| when I use the screen after it has been idle for a time,
| but the artifacts disappear quickly.
| linsomniac wrote:
| The model on mine is S3221QS, I had looked earlier but
| couldn't find the order, but I remembered I have them
| plugged into the Dell support site. Looks like I paid
| $360 landed each for them.
| FpUser wrote:
| >"if you are not acclimated to "retina" smoothness for
| fonts"
|
| I am not using magnifying glass so for my eyes smoothness
| is just fine without "retina" prefix.
|
| >"The colors aren't great. The blacks are just dreadfully
| light"
|
| If you care so much about colors get real pro display.
| Just be prepared to second mortgage your house for that.
|
| For mere mortals (I mostly use 32" BenQ monitors) colors
| on are reasonably fine and so are blacks. No artifacts. I
| do not see Apple as superior in this department.
|
| Once again, if for some reason you need perfect colors /
| blacks / uniformity / whatnot Apple with its "retina" is
| not the one to go with. Try Eizo for example
| bdcravens wrote:
| I recently bought 4 32" monitors (2 for work, 2 for home),
| and I wasn't remotely interested in 4k. QHD is perfect, and
| if you get monitors where that's the max, pretty cheap.
| (Every 4k monitor I've had I always downscaled it)
| rootusrootus wrote:
| 32 inch 4K is perfectly fine. I recently switched to a
| Samsung CRG9 (I can only have one external display on this
| computer) and the resolution is pretty crappy compared to
| the 32 inch. But either one of them is perfectly fine for
| coding.
| copperx wrote:
| I don't trust people who say "it's fine" anymore. After a
| lot of tests with people I know, many young(!)
| acquaintances are not able to distinguish between 2k and
| 4k. People of my age can't sometimes distinguish the
| difference between HD and 4k on a monitor. And that's for
| static images. No one I know is able to notice the
| difference between motion interpolation on/off on a TV.
|
| This is going to sound dismissive and entitled, but I've
| learned that people's eyesight and visual processing is
| extremely bad in general.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| If someone can't distinguish 4k and 2k on a 32" display
| then the image they're looking at has horrible quality.
|
| Its instantly visible as soon as you see any sharp edges
| / letters.
|
| 2k 32" is 80 dpi, that puts it at the same pixel density
| as fullhd on 24". That's perfectly usable but not
| particularly sharp at normal viewing distances
| [deleted]
| jerlam wrote:
| Outside of laptop monitors, there are only a handful of
| monitors that are "Retina-quality" (>220 ppi). It is very
| doubtful that programming is difficult or impossible on all
| other monitors. Most computers cannot also drive a 32" 220
| ppi monitor.
| copperx wrote:
| That's true. It was really hard to find a 24" 4k monitor
| for my desktop. It's insane that people can tolerate
| lower PPIs after seeing a Retina-like screen. You can't
| go back.
| linsomniac wrote:
| I dunno about Retina Quality text, that moniker isn't
| important to me. What is important to me is that I get the
| amount of text on the screen without it being all blocky.
| My previous Dell U3011 32" 2500x1600 display was a bit
| blocky. The 4K 32" is quite nice for my use.
|
| I will say that the difficulties I had getting dual 4K
| working in my setup make me glad I didn't try for something
| like 8K. In my case, I have a recent Dell XPS 15, but not
| quite recent enough. My docking station can't do 4K output.
| The next newer XPS 15 can. In the end I found that using
| two USB-C to HDMI cables, directly connected to the laptop,
| will do it, so that's good enough for me. Went from the
| 1-cable docking to 3, but I'm ok with that. I don't tend to
| move my laptop much these days.
| copperx wrote:
| The Retina moniker isn't important. Text becomes non-
| blocky at about 200 PPI. A 32" 4k monitor has 138 PPI,
| which is extremely blocky unless you're using 400% zoom.
| grishka wrote:
| Ever since I got the new MacBook Pro, I've wanted a monitor
| that would be its screen but 27" of it, in 5K resolution. But
| apparently I'm asking for something impossible. Or maybe Apple
| announces a "Studio Display XDR" next year? Who knows.
| mh- wrote:
| I've had an UltraFine 5K for around 4 years now. Is that not
| what you're asking for?
|
| edit: if you meant aesthetically, yeah, no, it's ugly
| plastic.
| grishka wrote:
| I'd like a higher refresh rate (120 hz scrolling feels so
| much better) and, if at all possible, same HDR
| capabilities, or at least truer blacks. And preferably also
| glossy finish.
| throwaway684936 wrote:
| Unfortunately, Apple uses Thunderbolt, and they're the
| only ones who do 5k/6k. We absolutely have the bandwidth
| for 5k120 over DisplayPort, but Apple insists on sticking
| to Thunderbolt.
| throwaway684936 wrote:
| The new Studio Display is the same panel as the UltraFine
| but ever-so-slightly brighter, and with a better shell.
| Arubis wrote:
| > Why are monitors so expensive and old tech compared to TVs?
|
| ("Smart") TVs are subsidized by the push advertising and
| analytics crammed into their firmware.
| Sujan wrote:
| (Reputable) source?
| blamazon wrote:
| How about Vizio's Q4 earnings report? You can see that
| "Platform+" accounts for nearly twice as much profit as
| hardware in 2021.
|
| https://investors.vizio.com/investor-relations/default.aspx
| davidgay wrote:
| Because money is "funny" inside companies, and because
| there's no platform sales without hardware sales, I would
| think that the relevant metric from an external
| perspective is total revenue (The change in fraction of
| revenue over the years is probably interesting too).
| threeseed wrote:
| I use a LG CX 48 as a monitor.
|
| Every time I switch it on I get an ad for Apple Music that
| I can't disable.
| MrVitaliy wrote:
| https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/
|
| https://www.zdnet.com/article/i-spent-3000-on-a-samsung-
| smar...
| joezydeco wrote:
| Bill Baxter (CTO, Vizio)
|
| Smart TVs continue to make money for the manufacture after
| the sale by providing data to viewer measurement and
| consumer research companies and through all of those apps
| they integrate in the TV's smart functions and subsequent
| app usage.
|
| "This is a cutthroat industry," Baxter went on to say.
| "It's pretty ruthless. The greater strategy is I really
| don't need to make money off the TV. I need to cover my
| costs."
|
| http://cjni.com/smart-tvs-too-smart/
| kurthr wrote:
| I assume you're looking for an LCD monitor... not OLED or
| something novel. I'm not sure why you would want 120Hz, that
| seems like the only challenge to a competative price. Most LCD
| materials have long response times (>5ms) so they tend to blur
| at high refresh rates. High refresh rates at high resolution
| are also a challenge and thus higher cost. If you're looking
| for 4k, it's also worth noting that most non-premium TVs will
| use 2subpixel (RGBG rather than RGBRGB) rendering for higher
| brightness ans lower cost whereas most monitors will use 3.
| There are also economies of scale to much larger glass >40"
| which aren't usually seen in monitors. I am surprised how
| relatively poor the color matching on many monitors is,
| however.
| 0xcde4c3db wrote:
| I'm far from an industry insider, but I think it could be LCD
| panel factories needing to be set up for specific sizes in
| conjunction with mainstream TV sizes going up rapidly over the
| past ~15 years. That is, the most-updated factories are the
| ones chasing the TV size trend, and monitors tend to get stuck
| with the output from the stragglers.
| pronlover723 wrote:
| I'm am curious about USB-C vs others. My MBP takes 10-20
| seconds to wake up on an external USB-C monitor. Is that a
| MacOS issue or a USB-C issue?
| infinityio wrote:
| I haven't had this issue on Windows, the time to wake seems
| to be identical for usb c vs other connection methods?
| culopatin wrote:
| Your monitor.
| novok wrote:
| The m1 macs are pretty much instant, might be an intel issue
| somehnguy wrote:
| Both my Intel & M1 macs wake up instantly with external
| usb-c monitor, might be a monitor issue.
| Stevvo wrote:
| I think things are changing; at CES this year QD-OLED launched
| on both TVs and monitors simultaneously with the AW3423DW, and
| there are some 42 inch OLED monitors derived from TV panels.
| Nursie wrote:
| LG also seem to be launching a 32" 4K OLED monitor this year,
| but it's really expensive.
| ptero wrote:
| My main monitor is Dell u3014, 60Hz. I had a Dell 3008 at work
| and replaced it with 3017 when it died, so I had this tech for
| over 10 years both at home and at work.
|
| What am I missing with 60Hz compared to 120Hz? Honest question.
| When I look at friends' office setups with latest curved 4k (or
| now 8k) monitors I do not see anything that I like more than my
| current monitor, so while we are generally not limited in
| workstation or monitor options at work I see no reason to
| upgrade.
| matsemann wrote:
| > _And prices seem artificially high_
|
| I switched companies last year and was gonna return the screen
| they gave me to use for home office, and buy my own. I looked
| it up, and the screen had cost like 700 USD back in 2016. So I
| thought I for the same price, 5 years later, I would get a
| sweet upgrade.
|
| But no, basically same specs. Same panels, perhaps upgraded a
| bit, but not much had happened. Prices were the same, perhaps
| because of the pandemic. Luckily my previous company ended up
| gifting me the screen.
|
| My new company ended up giving me the "newer" version of the
| monitor at the office. Only difference I can see is that it now
| charges my laptop via usb-c. Neat, but not much innovation in
| those 5 years.
| Nbox9 wrote:
| I really enjoy the 49" ultrawide 1000R format Samsung has been
| pioneering. It's the size/resolution of two 27" 1440p monitors
| next to each other, has a buttery smooth refresh rate, and a
| curve that makes viewing more comfortable and natural.
|
| The new quantum dot displays are also very innovative.
| metadat wrote:
| What do you like about the qDots vs "regular" pixels?
| thfuran wrote:
| Samsung's newest qd displays are qdoled so you get
| extremely fast response time and very high contrast ratio
| and the dots give high color saturation so the color volume
| is very large. Brightness is also high (for an oled).
| lordnacho wrote:
| I've seen trading firms do this. Why have 8 monitors when you
| can just have one giant screen? All you do with it is show some
| app, doesn't need to be special.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| Interesting. I find innovation in TV's to be opposite of my
| desired direction. Smarts that make them slower, wifi, ads,
| slowness,forced firmware updates, slowness, unfathomable
| picture controls and auto magic colour correction that's Gawd
| awful, unresponsiveness and slowness. So I'm more likely to use
| my monitor as a TV then to want to use tv as monitor. I'm also
| clinging to my 2008 46" lcd tv that just works, and am stunned
| by how often my father in law has to call for my help with his
| shiny 76" tv which is showing blue screen of death or mandatory
| update or things have moved or icons have changed or their
| version of Netflix / Disney / whatever app is borked or needs
| maintenance or no longer supported or just looks different...
| And slower. Always ever slower.... the slowness of response is
| astonishing. Reminds me of new cars where if last driver had
| volume set up max, you can't kill the radio or volume until car
| is done telling you about its disclaimers and boot up sequence
| and pretty animation.
|
| If you can't move in menus or mute instantly, than no thank you
| to innovation.
| FpUser wrote:
| >"Interesting. I find innovation in TV's to be opposite of my
| desired direction. Smarts that make them slower, wifi, ads,
| slowness,forced firmware updates, slowness, unfathomable
| picture controls and auto magic colour correction that's Gawd
| awful, unresponsiveness and slowness."
|
| Maybe just do not connect it to a network ever. At least I
| don't. I've used TV as a monitor for a while but after some
| time strain in the neck showed up I downsized to 32" 4K
| monitor
| anonymousab wrote:
| > Maybe just do not connect it to a network ever.
|
| This is slowly but surely not becoming an option. Beyond
| automatically connecting to any open networks, some models
| already will stop working until you give them a network
| connection to perform a 'necessary' periodic update.
| FpUser wrote:
| Hopefully not all the models will stop working. But we
| will see. I am an old fart and hate all this sneaking in
| my backyard. I am fiercely independent and trying to stay
| this way as much as reasonably possible. Alexa has no
| place in my life. It can go fuck somebody else.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| Wait, what TV's are doing this?
|
| Automatically connecting to open networks sounds like a
| potential legal quagmire, since aiui I'm not legally
| allowed to just use my neighbor's wifi without
| permission.
| alias_neo wrote:
| In one sense, yes, but if you live somewhere where energy
| is expensive why have not only my TV (~30W) on but also the
| PS5 (~100W+ + ~30W) or gaming PC (~200W+ + ~30W) just so I
| can watch Netflix?
|
| I'll choose to use the TV's app every time.
|
| I have a higher-end LG 4K OLED with WebOS which is
| extremely responsive compared to others I've had, also it's
| rooted to block any ad-crap, but also you can do most of
| that at the DNS/Network/Router level if you have an issue.
|
| Then there's the fact that the non-tech family members
| don't want to use more than one remote or fiddle with
| channels etc, my wife can press the Netflix button in the
| remote from TV off and have instant Netflix and tue
| surround sound on too.
|
| Younger me would have agreed with you, but as a parent and
| husband, in my mid 30s, I just want an easy life.
| Larrikin wrote:
| Just use a Roku, why use a video game console? The energy
| is negligible and you only ever use one remote. The Roku
| works with most TV remotes, although since I rarely watch
| broadcast TV I use the much better Roku remote typically.
| My Switch automatically changes inputs when I turn it on,
| so don't even need to switch inputs usually.
| swaranga wrote:
| For me, the Roku's killer features is its app that lets
| me instantly stream the audio to my phone/airpods so i do
| not disturb anyone else while still watching tv. All
| others require me to pair my headphones with the tv or
| some other painful process.
| stepanhruda wrote:
| Maybe he got a large but shitty quality TV? I got an OLED 2
| years ago and none of this rings a bell.
| Kiro wrote:
| I can't relate to any of this at all. My Smart TV (LG) is not
| slow or unresponsive. It doesn't show any ads and the picture
| control is easy to understand.
| lelandfe wrote:
| Well done picking a good TV. Unfortunately even other LG
| TVs are doing this:
| https://twitter.com/chriswelch/status/1369733357756686349
|
| Many, many smart TVs send analytic data to marketing
| companies. Some even send full snapshots of the screen.
| https://archive.ph/DWTGC
|
| > When tracking is active, some TVs record and send out
| everything that crosses the pixels on your screen. It
| doesn't matter whether the source is cable, an app, your
| DVD player or streaming box.
|
| > Many of the TV companies say they aren't violating our
| privacy, because ACR data technically isn't "personally
| identifiable information." TVs, they say, are shared by an
| entire household.
| Retric wrote:
| Don't connect it to WiFi and update. 2020 LG CX OLED TV
| randomly started to play ads after update:
|
| https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2021/3/10/22323790/lg-oled-
| tv-...
| metadat wrote:
| Never attach a "Smart TV" to WiFi. As a rule of thumb,
| they'll only get worse.
|
| Once the manufacturer sells the TV, they don't give a fuck
| about you anymore, they're already paid! Though they would
| like to push updates to send you more ads and track you.
|
| I've never attached my 2020 LG 4k 65" to any network and it
| works great. I did pay $50 to add a GoggleTV CrapCast thing,
| it works fine for watching movies.
| rychco wrote:
| Does anybody know if there are any resources for tampering
| with the hardware itself to remove networking capabilities
| from a smart TV? I'd like to just use it as a big monitor,
| but if there's still a possibility of automatic network
| activity without my consent then I'd rather just rip out
| that functionality entirely
| lstamour wrote:
| Well, you could always investigate how to detach the wifi
| antennas, though it's possible your Bluetooth will also
| stop working, and most TV remotes are Bluetooth these
| days.
| lelandfe wrote:
| Maybe broadcast a WiFi SSID that blackholes everything?
| unicornporn wrote:
| > I've never attached my 2020 LG 4k 65" to any network and
| it works great.
|
| I guess that would work as long as you move to a place far
| away from humanity. It definitely won't work if a neighbour
| runs a WiFi hotspot without password protection.
| hawk_ wrote:
| I have not come across a working password free
| residential wifi hotspot in almost a decade - because
| routers have had passwords by default.
| mcculley wrote:
| I live in an apartment building downtown adjacent to
| other buildings. They are all around me.
| metadat wrote:
| My observation is the open wifi's are much more prevalent
| in dense living situations like apartments, condos,
| townhomes, and shared work spaces.
| Art9681 wrote:
| What would happen if you configured manual network and
| gave it a fake DNS or sent it over to PiHole for example?
| Wouldnt there be plenty of ways to capture the traffic
| and stop it from going where it wants to go? I would
| think the tech savvy folks on this site would be able to
| figure something out if it is a big enough concern of
| theirs.
| daredoes wrote:
| I was doing something similar, except I went for an LG tv
| for Web OS in the hopes something good would come out of it
| being open source.
|
| As luck would have it, https://rootmy.tv came out for Web
| OS. It's still in a very basic stage, but it's better than
| nothing!
|
| I'm a HomeAssistant user, so I do want my TV connected to
| my network.
| pbronez wrote:
| Awesome! I had no idea this existed. Look forward to
| giving it a try.
| eckmLJE wrote:
| Aren't the newer smart TVs equipped with a cell modem so
| they can phone home without wifi, or they stop working
| after not being updated for x days?
| Larrikin wrote:
| I don't think there are any? This is always a wild
| speculation about the hellscape to come in the future in
| these threads, but as far as I know nothing like this
| actually exist. My TV I bought last year has never been
| connected to WiFi and never will be.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Neither of these things are true.
| crooked-v wrote:
| No, but there are definitely ones that will try to
| randomly connect to any open wifi networks if left
| unattended.
| stragies wrote:
| Can you name some models? Between that, and user-space
| wireguard, I think, there might be a bleak future ahead
| for ad-blocking.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| At least in Europe having a cell modem would ruin the
| company, who would pay phone bills? Sure as hell not me.
| kube-system wrote:
| > who would pay phone bills
|
| Advertisers or data brokers? They're already subsidizing
| the purchase price of TVs.
| Art9681 wrote:
| There is no evidence of this and we would know. Its not
| easy to hide wireless signals.
| Art9681 wrote:
| Disconnect the TV from wifi and enable GameMode to bypass
| most of the post processing. Disable HDR on the OS. On some
| TV models, there is an additional trick to rename the input
| port to "PC" and it reduces input lag even more. Use a good
| web app that guides you to some basic calibration, especially
| brightness/contrast/gamma. Those 3 things can be changed in
| your display driver's control panel and TV. So fiddling with
| both to get a "perfect" image goes a long way. Once you have
| the configs you like, take some pics or save them in a note
| somewhere in case you need to restore.
|
| I play Steam Games on a 77" OLED like this and the only
| reason I dont use it for normal day to day development is I
| dont have a suitable recliner keyboard/mouse setup. Got the
| TV for $2,000 from Woot a year ago and it is the VRR model.
|
| Why are monitors with similar capabilities at a third of the
| size so expensive?
| zamadatix wrote:
| Disabling HDR is akin to buying a sports car and throwing
| your hands in the air when you can't figure out how to
| start it outside of eco mode. The same for any tweaking on
| the driver's control panel instead of on the display.
| Ultimately though the truth is when you go through all of
| that hassle (special input ports, special input names,
| advanced/hidden input settings, image adjustments) it still
| somehow comes out worse than it should be in terms of input
| latency and image accuracy.
|
| I always have 2 wishes:
|
| - For TVs to have a mode that just displays the signal
| according the reference mode of that signal (particularly
| for HDR) and not fuck with it to make it "better".
|
| - For a decent selection of monitors that come with larger
| panels.
| [deleted]
| wowokay wrote:
| I think better examples would be the lack of motion control,
| unlike computers the bulk of content experienced on TVs
| expects to run at specific refresh rates. Innovations like
| OLED which offer instantaneous response rates cause issue for
| that media when expected pixel dimming latency is expected.
| Causing motion like pan shots to appear jittery. TVS need
| innovation that focuses on feathering motion, since it's
| clear the TV and Movie industry have no plans to bump frame
| rate.
| mattgreenrocks wrote:
| This is why I passed on an OLED when upgrading my TV. OLED
| is definitely the future, I just have little desire to beta
| test it with jittery panning. I'm sure they'll sort it out.
| majormajor wrote:
| OLED doesn't have any new issues here compared to LCD. Both
| sorts of TVs will often have "black frame" insertion
| options, but I've never found the flicker worthwhile.
|
| Smooth panning would be fixed by content being shot at
| something higher than 24fps, like you say; but I've seen
| that same jitter in theater screens for decades, it wasn't
| something that was designed to depend on CRT tech or such
| (like videogame lightguns).
|
| TVs _have_ been doing tons of "smart" picture processing
| to try to smooth out motion since so much content is so low
| frame rate. It just often looks fake!
| gutitout wrote:
| Software is too much. But OP is talking a lot hardware.
| mnkmnk wrote:
| Yes, where are the quantum dots, the local dimming, the
| mini leds that TVs have?
| Aeolun wrote:
| I think it would be shocking to todays people to see a TV
| from 20 years ago, before all that digital funkiness. Instant
| switching between channels.
| loonster wrote:
| Imagine if they were exposed to a laser disk fast forward /
| skip. Gasp
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Or an old copper phone line before cellular ruined call
| quality.
| bsder wrote:
| The problem is that the monitors are only about gaming. In
| particular, I find the "1440" Y dimension resolution
| particularly infuriating.
|
| Yeah, I know the reason is that modern games make all the
| graphic cards left over that aren't being used for crypto die
| in horrible flaming balls of heat when you actually ask them to
| ... you know ... actually _use_ the pixels on your monitor.
| GASP! The Horror!
|
| So, how can we fix this? I know! Let's make sure the monitors
| don't have enough pixels to cause the graphics cards grief.
| Brilliant!
| thangalin wrote:
| > affordable large monitor with 120Hz refresh rate
|
| This year, I went through four different monitors to find one
| that works. Stay away from IPS panels, they all suffer from
| "IPS glow", which is visible when using high contrast colours
| (i.e., a bright window on a dark desktop background will blast
| a translucent white "overlay" above and below the window).
| "Smart" 4K TVs are untrustworthy, IMO (e.g., Samsung is known
| for spying/spyware and inopportune ads, making them a hard
| pass).
|
| The ROG STRIX XG43UQ was the only display I could find that
| runs at 120 Hz, works with a KVM switch (IOGEAR 2-Port 4K DP),
| has a 16:9 aspect ratio, offers 4K resolution, uses a VESA 100
| adapter, and is suitable for programming. The OS must be
| instructed to render using BGR instead of RGB, which Linux
| supports. The panel has some subtle horizontal glow in rare
| high-contrast situations, but it's nowhere as noticeable as IPS
| panels.
|
| Depending on your definition of affordable, it runs for about
| $1,300.
|
| https://rog.asus.com/ca-en/monitors/above-34-inches/rog-stri...
| mnkmnk wrote:
| I can get a 2021 65 inch Samsung qled tv for $1k and it has
| 100% dci-p3 coverage compared to 90% of the monitor, has HDR
| and 120Hz refresh rate, has usable speakers, has a good
| remote to control it and is larger and cheaper. I don't know
| the numbers, but I bet the contrast would also be better on
| the TV.
| threeseed wrote:
| On any Mac you won't be able to get 4K 120Hz if that TV
| just has HDMI.
|
| It only works on monitors/TVs that support DisplayPort.
| opencl wrote:
| Does the 4K 120Hz actually work properly? There are a _lot_
| of TVs that claim to support 4K 120Hz but actually display
| the signal at half vertical resolution as 3840x1080.
| bhauer wrote:
| This reminds me of my rant about televisions versus monitors on
| my 2014 blog entry "4K is for Programmers."
|
| https://tiamat.tsotech.com/4k-is-for-programmers
| kayoone wrote:
| hm I think the industry was stale for quite some time but
| lately it has picked up a lot. What exactly are you looking
| for? Today you have high refresh rates,4k or 5k screens,
| (curved) Ultrawide, Variable Refresh rates, low latencies.
| Comparing them with TVs is not entirely fair, as those usually
| are not great for displaying text unless you get a specific
| panel with good chroma subsampling and in terms of latency TVs
| are usually also pretty far behind Monitors. The really good
| TVs are equally as expensive.
| razvvan wrote:
| I guess it depends on what you do with it but the cognitive load
| of the potential situation that would need all that realestate...
| unsettles me.
| rolobio wrote:
| I've found that a 32" QHD monitor is the highest PPI my eyes can
| comfortably read. I tried to use a 4K TV as my monitor, but I
| needed something like 55" up close to read it comfortably. It was
| simply too large and I had to move my neck too much. Also, that
| was the day I learned some pixels are chevrons!
| Jaruzel wrote:
| My screen on my main PC is a 32" BenQ QHD display. I run it at
| 100% scaling. I don't like the idea of 4K displays at >100%
| scaling, as I'm just wasting money on pixels I don't actually
| use directly.
|
| To be honest, the DPI on this monitor is a little too low... I
| have a QHD 27" on another machine, and that seems 'just right'
| (for my eyes).
|
| If 4K monitors were the same price as QHD ones for the same
| screen size, then maybe I'd re-consider, but whilst they are
| sold at a premium, I'm not interested.
| [deleted]
| Nursie wrote:
| So use scaling?
|
| I find this a strange complaint, (not saying you're wrong!) as
| to me more pixels should mean better rendering of elements, not
| dictate their size.
| bdcravens wrote:
| When I replaced all my monitors, I just went with QHD
| displays instead of 4K, even though I've always scaled in the
| past. So much cheaper.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| I have the same, from cca 2 feet I really don't need more for
| anything, including occasional gaming (where performance
| difference vs 4k is huge, visible benefit for me is 0). If I am
| running out of space that just means I am messy and doing too
| much in parallel which is never a good idea. Something similar
| to coding principle of having method/function no longer than 1
| screen.
| legalcorrection wrote:
| Windows supports fractional display scaling with perfect crisp
| text and graphics. MacOS doesn't, but it can do integer scaling
| at least. (Edit: I've been corrected. Apparently macOS does do
| fractional scaling, but in a way that causes blur). Text size
| and resolution don't need to be bound.
| tossoutijsbshsu wrote:
| i use linux on a retina macbook @ 2880x1800 and fractional
| scaling works well in swaywm. they warn against it in the
| docs, but no problems so far (though it's only been a week)
| wlesieutre wrote:
| macOS has scales between 1x and 2x. It doesn't tell you what
| the scale factor actually is as a number, just a couple of
| options between "More space" and "Larger text".
|
| IIRC the way it's implemented is by rendering 2x and
| downscaling, so sometime's it's not as pixel perfect as
| Windows. But the simpler implementation for software
| developers meant they had like a 10 year head start compared
| to Windows where software takes a long time to support up new
| OS features.
| dustingetz wrote:
| macos fractional scaling causes massive system slowdowns,
| completely unusable for coding. integer multiples are fast
| argsnd wrote:
| I don't think this has any effect on speed even in
| post-2015 Intel Macs
| telesilla wrote:
| There are also 3rd party apps for finer control of
| resolutions and displays on macOS, such as SwitchResX
| ojbyrne wrote:
| On my monitors and most recent OS versions it shows the
| resolution when you hover over the preview.
| eyesee wrote:
| APIs existed for fractional scale and assets in early Mac
| OS X versions (10.4 I think). I remember building out 1.25,
| 1.5 and 2x assets for an application at the time. These
| were never to be shipped to consumers for a few reasons.
|
| There were intractable issues with window spanning across
| displays with different scale factors. Ultimately this was
| resolved by not allowing window spanning on the platform
| anymore.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Wasn't there an early exploration of using vector UI
| elements some time around then? I have a vague
| recollection of it being found as a partly implemented
| feature.
| sgjohnson wrote:
| > Ultimately this was resolved by not allowing window
| spanning on the platform anymore.
|
| You can still window span on macOS. You just have to
| disable the feature that gives every display its own
| workspaces.
|
| Not that you'd ever want to do that. At least I can't
| think of a single good reason why anyone would want this.
| legalcorrection wrote:
| This display spanning issue exists in Windows but I think
| Microsoft made the right trade off by just allowing that
| one thing to behave strangely. The other issue is pixel-
| based UIs that don't fractional scale without blur, but
| at this point that doesn't affect any software I use
| except little utility programs that I'm not staring at
| for very long anyway.
| tossoutijsbshsu wrote:
| right around QHD is the sweet spot imo. I use 3 30" Apple
| Cinema HD Displays @ 2560x1600 (my school was throwing them
| out), and theyre perfect for everything. games, code, movies,
| whatever. Needs dual link dvi though, so old gpus only.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| How is this different from having smaller monitors, closer to the
| user?
|
| Does it come down to the distances at which the user can
| comfortably focus their eyes?
| corysama wrote:
| Pretty much. That and how much your view changes when you move
| your head.
|
| I've played with virtual monitors in VR. Everyone loves the
| idea of having 80 foot virtual monitors. But, all that really
| does is make it so you can't move your head in close to examine
| the low-rez text like you can with smaller virtual monitors up
| close.
| woleium wrote:
| for many people (esp as you get older) the longer focal
| distance will be easier on the eyes.
| mgerdts wrote:
| I have a 4k 28" monitor which I can't use at its highest
| resolution with 100% scaling and a 4k 40" TV that is a few
| inches further away which I can comfortably use at its highest
| resolution with 100% scaling. I'm a big fan of the setup I have
| and suspect I would be equally happy with a slightly larger
| display (maybe up to 55") a bit further away. Maybe the 28"
| screen would be more usable with computer glasses. With the 40"
| screen, I can see fine with my regular glasses.
|
| 75" seems a bit extreme, as it would require a few more feet of
| distance between me and the screen to make the screen fit into
| my field of view. I could see it as beneficial and quite usable
| in a situation where you need high resolution with many people
| viewing it.
| karmakaze wrote:
| This reminds me of a vivid dream I had in university, where the
| room I programmed in had source code displayed on the floor and I
| could scroll or walk around and browse it. The listing on the
| floor had that wide green-and-white band printer 'paper' look.
| Don't remember if it went all skeuomorphic with rendered
| perforated edges and holes. It also had other printer type things
| that were just sitting there not printing at the time. And for a
| reason I never understood there was a large pixelated volumetric
| figure of my housemate Bill also in the room like a 3/4 life-size
| Lego figure. As I interpreted it at the time, I didn't think the
| figure was generated in real-time as to be able to instantly into
| something else. It didn't feel virtual, and augmented reality
| wasn't a concept at the time. I suppose in theory it could be
| fully rendered in roomscale VR if my hands and arms looked and
| moved accurately enough.
| mhh__ wrote:
| I think recently I've been fiddling around with my monitor when
| my real issue is the angle of my arms and posture due to my
| chair, even if it manifests as being tense and unable to focus on
| the monitor.
| drewolbrich wrote:
| At this scale, I'm concerned about latency due to the speed of
| light travel time.
| QuikAccount wrote:
| If you aren't gaming then latency concerns are really
| overblown.
| throwaway684936 wrote:
| They were obviously joking talking about light speed, but I
| strongly disagree. Even ignoring how it improves the feel of
| typing, I'm a mouse-using heretic and it makes a _huge_
| difference with mice.
| cma wrote:
| It's just a joke, light only takes 3 nanoseconds to go a
| meter.
| uo21tp5hoyg wrote:
| could be 2 nanoseconds if you built it in Rust.
| fb03 wrote:
| I propose a new movement: RRIR instead of RIIR
|
| Rewrite Reality In Rust!
| cloudking wrote:
| Having tried multiple sizes and resolutions, personally I've
| found 27" 2560x1440 (2K) to be the sweet spot for desktop
| computing and gaming.
|
| Very happy with https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B08LCNWQWL
| bombcar wrote:
| I have four monitors connected to my Mac. The two centrals are
| ultrawides (34UB88-P) on top of each other - the lower one is the
| main window where the action happens - the one above is the
| secondary where terminals and other monitoring processes happen).
| The main is large enough for work and references to be next to
| each other.
|
| The 4K on the right (run at hi-dpi) is for various non-work chat
| programs, reference images, etc. the 4K on the left is for work
| chat and Finder windows, and the laptop display itself holds
| email.
|
| It works well. The main advantage is being able to glance at
| chats without switching windows.
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| How big is your desk?
| bombcar wrote:
| It's a normal size desk. The key is lots of vesa mount arms.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| As a fellow multi-monitor geek, I'd love to see a photo of this
| setup!
| temp8964 wrote:
| The reason this can be superior to desk computing is that it
| gives you more vertical space. Desk computing removes the lower
| half of your vertical space because of the desk.
|
| Imagine in the future, the desk surface is also a screen, we can
| put some supporting apps like calendar, notebook, todo list, etc.
| on the desk. That will be really nice. In his setup, he can
| literally add another screen by laying another TV on the floor.
| fleaaa wrote:
| Try using a tablet or any display laid on desktop, it's
| terrible posture and very painful after a while.
| temp8964 wrote:
| You are probably right. But a small angle to tilt the screen
| may help if the screen is not a main screen.
| DesiLurker wrote:
| This abomination is what happens when you let peasants WFH for
| way too long.
|
| seriously though I have thought about doing a projector to
| ceiling so I could code lying down on bed with zero stress on
| back.
| jiveturkey wrote:
| That's a really tiny chair and keyboard.
| didip wrote:
| If I have the budget and the space and wife's approval, I think
| the scorpion desk is better and a lot more ergonomics.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Imperator-Scorpion-Gaming-Computer-Of...
| passivate wrote:
| Hah, just looking at this gives me a headache. When I last tried
| such experiments (5+ yrs), I found that none of the display
| panels I had access to played nice with sub-pixel font rendering.
| Also now that I'm used to smaller 120hz panels, I can never go
| back to 60/75hz.
| throw0101a wrote:
| The Dashews, a couple who design offshore boats (sail and power),
| after a few years of experimentation, ended up coming to a
| similar design for their navigation station their FPB line of
| powerboats:
|
| * https://setsail.com/rethinking_modern_nav-2-2/
|
| May not be able to do this on the deck of a traditional sailboat
| where things are exposed to the elements, but in an enclosed
| wheelhouse it adds a lot of flexibility, especially with modern
| the NMEA 2000 data bus and various vendor 'black boxes' (or
| leverage a Raspberry Pi), e.g.:
|
| * https://mvdirona.com/2016/09/maretron-n2kview-on-dirona/
|
| Aside: the owner of the above linked _Dirona_ is James Hamilton,
| VP & Distinguished Engineer at Amazon.
| blamazon wrote:
| Wow. I am blown away by the photos in that FPB link. I'm not a
| boat person but it's unlike any boat pilot house I have seen
| before. A great room indeed.
| throw0101a wrote:
| The Dashews seems to regularly think 'out of the box'. They
| took their decades of experience in sailboat design,
| especially to hull shapes, and applied them to a power boat
| (so they could continue to travel in old/er age):
|
| * https://setsail.com/the-concept-explained/
|
| * https://setsail.com/intro-to-fpb-program/
|
| * https://setsail.com/category/fpb-78/
|
| YT channel:
|
| * https://www.youtube.com/user/DashewOffshore
|
| A tour of one of their earlier sailboat designs that is/was
| for sale recently:
|
| * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrDxYkSI710
| rasz wrote:
| Looks great until the first big wave weather where you lose
| ground and lean on/kick the big shiny TV losing all the
| telemetry.
| walrus01 wrote:
| I'm skeptical how well that display on the left side of the
| nav-2-2 URL holds up for visibility under direct powerful
| sunlight. Even if it's a very expensive model.
| throwra620 wrote:
| dylan604 wrote:
| This is a godsend for all of the people that love to read what's
| on their co-workers' screens.
| computator wrote:
| Do you think such a setup would be helpful for an elderly
| relative whose eyesight is getting worse? Even with glasses, the
| relative has trouble with a 27-inch desktop monitor with 2560 x
| 1440 pixels. Specifically, I was thinking of using an Ultra High
| Definition TV (49-inch with 3840 x 2160 pixels) but setting the
| resolution at 2560 x 1440. So it would be the same resolution but
| everything would be bigger. Would it help?
| Jaruzel wrote:
| Why not just set the desktop resolution to 1280x720?, as it's
| exactly 1/2 that of QHD, so everything will be twice as large,
| at perfect 2x pixel scaling.
|
| For the 4K screen, 1920x1080 is 1/2 4K so same point applies.
| dagmx wrote:
| Why change the resolution and not the OS scaling?
| Jaruzel wrote:
| Depends on the OS.... not everything scales properly,
| especially older applications.
| haunter wrote:
| It can help for sure. The longer focal length itself is a huge
| difference but I'd test it out somehow (renting, borrowing
| etc.) before investing into something like this
|
| >I was thinking of using an Ultra High Definition TV (49-inch
| with 3840 x 2160 pixels) but setting the resolution at 2560 x
| 1440. So it would be the same resolution but everything would
| be bigger.
|
| I'd rather use OS level UI scaling you will have sharper and
| better picture
| ______-_-______ wrote:
| Couldn't you get an equivalent focal length by wearing
| reading glasses?
| computator wrote:
| > _I 'd rather use OS level UI scaling you will have sharper
| and better picture_
|
| I tried various OS scaling methods. The problem with "magnify
| or zoom in on the whole screen" is that it's very cumbersome
| for an elderly person, easily getting lost on where you are
| on the screen. The problem with an OS configuration to make
| all text and icons bigger is that it doesn't do it for
| everything -- many text labels, buttons, menus, etc., remain
| at a small font.
|
| That's why I'm hoping a hardware-level solution (a much
| bigger display) is the answer.
| chiph wrote:
| I used to work with a guy that was very visually impaired and
| he used a 40" monitor set to VGA resolution. He would still
| have to crane his head to the left & right sometimes to follow
| the mouse on screen.
|
| Going to something like a 49 or 55" television could work but
| you need to check the field of view at the distance they'll
| have it set up. Get a piece of cardboard at your largest
| anticipated screen dimensions, prop it up at their normal
| viewing distance, then put some high contrast marks on the
| edges & in the corners and see if they can make them out
| without too much head rotation. If they can't then cut the
| cardboard down to the next smaller TV size and try again.
|
| Once you have bought the right sized TV, then adjust the
| resolution so they can make out screen elements (the window
| close button is a good one to test against). Then adjust the
| mouse size, browser zoom, etc.
| yummypaint wrote:
| No. If their eyes are unable to resolve the smaller pixels it
| will offer no benefit. Would be better to get a large standard
| resolution screen. However, i would avoid smart TVs as they are
| extremely consumer hostile and may blare ads over your
| relative's attempts to use the computer. A 27"+ monitor made
| ~10 years ago would be ideal.
| computator wrote:
| > _If their eyes are unable to resolve the smaller pixels it
| will offer no benefit._
|
| Sorry, I don't understand. The pixels would be bigger in the
| idea I'm proposing.
|
| > _A 27 "+ monitor made ~10 years ago would be ideal._
|
| That's exactly what they have now. I'm suggesting replacing
| it with a 49-inch monitor (a Ultra HD TV) set to the same
| resolution. The pixels would therefore be bigger.
| tossoutijsbshsu wrote:
| My grandmother used to have difficulty reading her email, even
| with double font size, low res, etc. Over the summer, I
| replaced her monitor with a 32-inch 1080p TV that I had lying
| around, and it makes a big difference.
|
| I think your idea would definitely help.
| goosedragons wrote:
| How big is the monitor? A 27" 1440p monitor is about 130ppi, a
| 32" is about 90.
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| And 8k is coming....
|
| I'll probably get a big 50-55" 8k for the main and try to put my
| 1-2 40" 4ks on the flanks.
|
| If you're not twitch gaming, TVs are such a better bang for the
| buck.
| FlyingAvatar wrote:
| I use 3x 27" 4K monitors in portrait mode side by side with my
| Macbook Pro screen at the end. This gives me about 10 normal
| screen sized areas.
|
| I usually have the following things open in specific spots:
| - General Browser (mostly for email and weather) - Calendar
| - Terminal - Text Editor - Desktop Mode Browser for
| App in Development - Detached Debug Console for the above
| - Mobile View Browser for App in Development with attached Debug
| Console - Browser for documentation / reference - To
| Do List - Slack
| mendelmaleh wrote:
| Nice! what scaling do you run them at? I like avoiding
| fractional scaling, I have two 24" and run them at 2x.
|
| The next step would be 27" 5K for a similar DPI, someday : )
| jwr wrote:
| I'll present a different data point. I also used to like
| multiple monitor setups, using up to three monitors. And then I
| realized that I'd much rather have a single good quality
| screen, because there is less fussing around with things. A 27"
| iMac 5k screen got me enough screen real estate to be happy.
|
| These days I am looking for single-monitor solutions, at 27" --
| anything larger and you need to turn your head.
|
| (incidentally, 5K vs 4K makes a huge practical difference for
| me: in my full-screen Emacs I can comfortably fit three columns
| of code on a 5K screen, but on 4K this is problematic)
| caffeine wrote:
| Have you tried 2x 27" screens _vertically_ , ideally models
| with minimal bezel?
|
| I've found that it doesn't increase head turning because it's
| not much wider than a single screen, but I can fit twice as
| much stuff.
|
| Also I can read a much longer file of code at once, which is
| more useful than you'd expect..
| boulos wrote:
| That's been my setup for the last decade (currently a pair
| of U2720Q monitors). macOS unfortunately does a worse job
| with "font smoothing" when using the monitors vertically,
| but it's fine.
|
| The main downside is that since most people (obviously) use
| their displays in landscape mode, lots of websites and
| applications are pretty antagonistic to a tall and thin
| display. (Spreadsheets are often quite bad, but there are
| lots of places where people eat up horizontal space for
| padding or side bars that are suddenly super annoying).
|
| There's a bit of a push to larger, ultrawide 5k2k monitors
| (e.g., Dell's U4021Q or the delayed-by-a-year-not-actually-
| available LG 40WP95C) but a pair of high resolution 27s is
| still a lot more pixel density. These bigger ones also tend
| to have lower brightness, presumably do to power and
| thermal targets per display.
| sneak wrote:
| I use 3x 27" 5K displays (an iMac Pro and two LG ultrafine
| 5Ks with the same panel) in an H: iMac in normal landscape,
| with the two side displays in portrait. It's perfect.
|
| They are all on arms that somewhat encircle my position so
| it is no issue to code for extended periods on either of
| the "side" displays.
| frankwiles wrote:
| Half crazy, half awesome. 100% tempted!
| Trasmatta wrote:
| Speaking of monitors, I got one of those absurd 49" ultra
| widescreen displays a few months ago. The resolution is
| 5120x1440, so it's functionally equivalent to two 27" 1440p
| monitors placed side by side.
|
| The text is naturally not as crisp as a 4K monitor, but the
| amount of screen real estate is great for development. Paired
| with a tiling window manager it gives so many options. I did the
| dual 27" 1440p thing for years, and I find this setup superior.
| With the dual monitor strategy you have to either deal with a
| huge bezel right in the center of your vision, or push the
| secondary monitor off to the side, requiring more neck movement
| to see what's on it. With this monitor, everything remains much
| more clearly in my field of view.
| matsemann wrote:
| Biggest gripe for me with the curved displays is that 1440px in
| height is not really that much. Kinda blurry when one's used to
| a 4k display with 2160px over the same vertical distance.
| Trasmatta wrote:
| Yeah, if you're used to 4K, the resolution will definitely
| feel like a step down. For my personal usage, I've found the
| horizontal space to be really beneficial for development.
| YMMV.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| I would be less scared of one of those monitors, if I could use
| them as two virtual monitors - that is, the OS would split it
| down the middle and treat them with separate wallpapers (if
| desired), along with the keypresses and mouse shortcuts
| associated with tiling/managing dual monitors.
| tuvan wrote:
| I believe all of them have a "picture by picture" mode where
| left half shows one input and right half shows another input.
| You could achieve what you want with 2 cables. But I haven't
| felt the need for such use. I use Microsoft Powertoys to tile
| a 16:9 area in the center and two half width areas on the
| sides and I am very happy with that setup. I am sure linux
| window tilers have even better capability.
| prosaic-hacker wrote:
| This is a scaled up version of my setup for my adult son, who is
| legally blind. We setup 2 of these as our "zoom" stations at the
| beginning of the pandemic. A good chair/sofa up close the TV, 55"
| UHD TV connected to a Lenovo laptop with a wireless keyboard and
| trackpad combo. My son's TV is also connected to the cable box,
| WII, DVD players (Reg & BR)
|
| These are not some sort of high performance workstation just a
| cheap and dirty solution. Everything was in the house , Laptops
| from 2016, TVs and keyboards from the last couple of years of
| Black Friday sales and a few HDMI Cables.
|
| I saw someone else's setup with a dual recliner that had
| integrated Fold away TV tables that the keyboard and mouse sat
| on. It was a gaming setup.
| legalcorrection wrote:
| The guy claims he uses the keyboard by hunching over the side
| table[1]. That is so comically anti-ergonomic (most people would
| get back pain within an hour or two, and be bedridden within a
| couple of days) that I think this is fake and posted on Reddit
| for karma/trolling purposes.
|
| Consider also that to focus on another window requires the user
| to substantially turn his head. This would very quickly cause
| neck strain.
|
| Our inclination is to believe things are real, but people do just
| go on the internet and lie. A lot.
|
| [1]
| https://old.reddit.com/r/battlestations/comments/toecyt/dual...
| seattle_spring wrote:
| My thoughts as well. This looks like an ergonomic nightmare.
| fleaaa wrote:
| Attaching split keyboard on the armrest with a trackball or
| trackpoint would be a sweet spot.
| globular-toast wrote:
| There's no way anyone is doing any serious typing with such
| setup. I can imagine it if keyboard use is minimal. Not sure
| what job that would be but I'm sure there are some.
| [deleted]
| peterhajas wrote:
| I've used 4K 39"/40" televisions (originally 3, now 1) for the
| past 8 years. I find that the panels look great, and they give me
| a huge working area. They're also really reasonable - $250 - $350
| for a good TV. They last a while.
|
| Smaller 4K/5K panels (with more pixels per inch) are nice, but I
| never understood the push for density. I'd rather have more
| workspace with lower density.
| jaqalopes wrote:
| I guess the idea behind this share is to get people's thoughts.
| To that end, I'm totally in favor of this honestly. Only reason I
| won't do something like this is that it's very space intensive
| and won't fit in my apartment. But if I could I would. Why not?
| My eyes aren't getting any better with age, and even my costly
| "good" office chair gets uncomfortable after a couple hours.
| russellbeattie wrote:
| I recently turned 50 and though I've had to wear glasses for long
| distance vision my entire life, my arm-length distance has only
| just succumbed to age. I just got a new prescription, but for the
| past year I've been bobbing my head back and forth to my screens
| like a chicken.
|
| The solution is now bifocals, or multi-vision contacts which
| leave everything - both close and distant - slightly blurry. I
| can't say I'm in love with either solution, but that's life.
|
| But hey! I like this idea! I could dial in my contacts
| prescription for 20/20 distance vision and just sit back in my
| La-Z-Boy. It might be a bit awkward going back to the office...
| etchalon wrote:
| No.
|
| Just.
|
| No.
| amelius wrote:
| Guy should have better spent some money on nice furniture, imho.
| rwc wrote:
| Love it in theory, but the strain of moving your head to see the
| full dimensions of the screens would get old. Eyes are good at
| darting around a smaller screen up close, don't know that the
| entire head and neck would appreciate that day in and day out.
| georgewsinger wrote:
| This is only an issue if the pixel density of the screens is
| small (forcing you to blow windows up larger, which forces you
| to crank your neck around more to see an entire screen).
|
| If the pixel density is high enough, you can compress tons of
| genuine screens together within your eye-gazing FOV, and even
| sit close to the screens.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Sure but then there's tons of screen area you're not using.
| If you're only going to look at a 32" FOV on a 75" screen,
| why not just get a 32" screen?
| georgewsinger wrote:
| From the comments:
|
| > I'm curious as to how this affected your productivity
|
| Answer:
|
| > Productivity is through the roof. Even when noodling about on
| small side projects I find you so quickly end up with so much
| things open that you're constantly flipping between, so to have
| multiple terminals, text editors, reference documentation,
| version control, etc, immediately accessible is, honestly, life
| changing.
| happimess wrote:
| Alternate take: I achieve constant-time access (mod key +
| digit) to all those things with 10 workspaces in i3.
|
| I can't imagine having to see them all at once. Realistically,
| I'm only actually thinking about 1 or 2 of them at a time. If I
| need to check documentation, I'm no longer thinking about my
| build output. Slack, email, and calendar are disconnected from
| development tools. And if I need to do a quick context shift, I
| can switch over instantly.
| xhrpost wrote:
| I've never used i3 but have been intrigued for ages. I'm
| finding myself more and more "faking" a tiling window system
| on my work Mac. I generally open a separate zsh/tmux session
| in a vscode pane for each workspace, which works great. I'm
| now also adding a split window to the left for note taking,
| initially Gdocs but more recently just another vscode window
| for markdown files. I merge all my other coding workspaces
| into one window on the right, so I can have the same notes on
| the left but switch projects on the right with ease.
|
| Curious if something like yabai would be even better but just
| haven't made the time to try it.
| spiffytech wrote:
| I find I'm a lot more productive if I can see everything I'm
| keeping in my head all at once. Virtual desktops are good for
| organization, but for me, don't substitute for a large
| display.
| DyslexicAtheist wrote:
| that's also my philosophy (in sway). in my first workspace I
| keep all my terminals that belong to a specific task ws 2 for
| another task ws 3 for web browsing, ws 3 for irc|mail|signal
| etc ... and most of the time I am in fullscreen so I won't
| get distracted (by things like polybar/waybar etc) ... really
| did wonders for my attention and productivity.
| pronlover723 wrote:
| workspaces don't work for me. I constantly need to see 2-3
| windows from different apps together and which 2-3 change
| constantly meaning to see them together I'd have to move the
| windows across workspaces every 10-20 minutes.
|
| Documentation + editor
|
| Editor + Terminal
|
| Editor + Issue Tracker
|
| Terminal + Issue Tracker
|
| Issue Tracker + Testing Result
|
| etc. etc.
|
| I don't "context switch". My context is "getting shit done"
| and for me it requires access to many many windows at the
| same time.
| hexomancer wrote:
| Check out dwm. It has a different concept from workspaces
| called 'tags' which is close to what you are describing.
| fleaaa wrote:
| I do the same and have triple displays that is placed with
| ergonomics in mind, so workspace is like 3*n mostly.
|
| There's no drawback for me except probably terrible carbon
| foot print..
| apetresc wrote:
| Sorry, what impact does i3 have on your carbon footprint?
| NateEag wrote:
| Not i3 - the energy consumption of running three large
| monitors.
| bullfightonmars wrote:
| I am not sure if I understand this claim. It looks like this
| setup has the same density of information as a typical 27in 4k
| monitor.
| tga wrote:
| I definitely agree with that take when talking about running
| two 4k monitors at full resolution, but it doesn't address the
| size at all. The more reasonable approach would be to use two
| ~38-42" monitors.
| that_guy_iain wrote:
| One 32 inch 4k monitor massively improves my ability to get
| stuff done. I'm tempted to get another one to see how it
| goes.
| bdcravens wrote:
| I used to love "smaller" fonts and whatnot. Unfortunately
| my 45 year old eyes can't do it anymore. These days I stick
| with 2 32" at QHD. I've always used my laptop open for
| things like the terminal etc, but I find that's a bit too
| small unless I'm sitting directly in front of it (coffee
| shop etc)
| matsemann wrote:
| Don't see how it increases productivity compared to normally
| sized 4k screens? Can fit just as much into them?
|
| Edit: Or might be able to not scale text as much. But that is
| the screen being too close I feel.
| sometimeshuman wrote:
| Slight skepticism should be applied to any productivity claim.
| There was research to determine if changing _X_ in the office
| boosted productivity. But in the end it was found that _X_ didn
| 't matter, within reason. Changing any _X_ boosted productivity
| and the benefits often diminished with time. I thought this was
| called the Hawthorne Effect but I am no longer sure.
| jpking wrote:
| Hawthorn Effect is right although it is disputed [1].
| Interestingly, the interpretation that I remember is that
| productivity increased because the subjects were part of an
| experiment and being observed.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect
| paulcole wrote:
| Kind of funny that the idea of constantly flipping between a
| bunch of things increases productivity. I'd imagine if this
| person had instead limited themselves to a single 15" laptop
| screen their productivity would've increased over their
| baseline because they'd be focused on one thing at a time.
| moonchrome wrote:
| Honestly doubt it - I watch files/diffs side-by-side
| constantly - at 120 line length with a 15 inch MBP there's
| just no way even if I kill the explorer panel - I can just
| barely fit it when i zoom out one level from my comfortable
| font size and have the panel closed - but that's not a great
| experience for me.
| paulcole wrote:
| My point was that committing to a change that you think
| will make you more productive is likely to make you feel
| more productive.
|
| People don't like to admit they're wrong and really like to
| convince themselves they were right.
| whartung wrote:
| So, I look at this and it reminds me of a trivial experiment I
| did in a hotel room, which is sort of the opposite of what these
| people are doing.
|
| Simply, I took my phone and held it up in front of me, a
| comfortable distance from my face, and covered the hotel TV with
| it.
|
| At that point, it's easy to realize that the phone screen isn't
| necessarily too small, at least for "TV" watching, because, net,
| the screens are the "same size" in terms of consumed field of
| view.
|
| In the end it was the same if you could watch it comfortably
| (which is a different problem).
| cma wrote:
| Aside from the eye issues, with a phone size screen mounted
| externally, moving your head 2 in would be like moving your
| head 2ft, so you couldn't have any variation in your posture
| without the screen being uncomfortably off-centered. Think of a
| movie theater where you can move several seats or even rows
| from the center sweetspot seat and still have roughly the same
| view.
| wasmitnetzen wrote:
| It does make a difference on eye strain, since they need to
| focus to a point much closer.
| cma wrote:
| You can also shift to more postures the farther back the
| display is and it will still take up roughly the same field
| of view no matter how you move, whereas with small monitors
| you can't both sit up straight and lean back without
| drastically changing pixels per degree of vision.
| sometimeshuman wrote:
| A constant focal point is not good for eye health either. I
| had considered converting my two monitor setup to one
| traditional monitor and one project that is > 10ft away. But
| projectors have too many disadvantages atm (e.g., high power
| consumption, brightness, etc.).
| noja wrote:
| Perhaps an alternative would be to suspend a screen from a
| drone that is constantly moving around the room. It would
| combine eye muscle exercise with neck exercise. For extra
| points, the screen could be configured for me to chase
| after it, providing ever more opportunities for exercise.
| Fauntleroy wrote:
| I use a single 65" 8k monitor about 4ft away (behind my actual
| desk). While this affords quite a bit of space, text rendering at
| small sizes (even with the ridiculous resolution), is simply not
| ideal. If I were only getting a screen for productivity / dev
| purposes, I would definitely seek a large monitor instead of a
| giant TV.
| hirundo wrote:
| I use a 65" monitor at about 12 feet away for comms, and a 27"
| monitor close up for code. I'm looking forward to football
| stadium sized monitors in VR.
| emacs28 wrote:
| I find curved displays much nicer to look at on the edges. I hope
| spherically curved monitors come out some day too.
|
| I use a 32" 2160p 4K curved display (1500R). It's harder to find
| than the 1440p curved displays but they're out there.
|
| Also, I find I prefer looking straight in front of me best and
| don't really use anything more than a single 4k display. I try to
| improve my app switching skills & tools before using more
| monitors.
| Kiro wrote:
| Readable link on mobile:
| https://www.reddit.com/r/battlestations/comments/toecyt/dual...
| twoodfin wrote:
| The biggest challenge with a setup like this would seem to be
| mapping the user's focus to the UI focus. Traditional pointing
| devices and window selection highlighting would be suboptimal.
|
| But I expect these problems will be solved via gesture or eye
| tracking + new modes of interaction for AR/VR. In particular,
| curious what Apple's going to end up doing for their headset.
| soared wrote:
| I don't know if we're talking about the same problem, but I
| previously solved something similar by binding a key that
| modified mouse speed. So if I need to go large distances with
| the mouse I hit the modifier and it zipped over super fast, let
| go of the key, and was back to normal speed.
|
| I replaced my desktop/keyboard/mouse with an Xbox
| controller/rpi for a while in college just for kicks. Worked
| great.
| zrail wrote:
| I use a 43" 4K LG monitor (not TV) as my every day work screen,
| positioned about five feet from my face. I have macOS set to
| scale it up about 25". I can't really say I'm more productive on
| it than just using my laptop, but I definitely notice less eye
| strain when I'm using the big monitor.
| prettyStandard wrote:
| I use a 4k 49" tv on my desk as a monitor. Let's me snap 4
| screens to the corners. The neck strain isn't great, though
| sometimes I will underscan the screen and that fixes the neck
| strain.
| tga wrote:
| I use a 40" screen about 80 cm away, and it's almost the
| perfect size. I think it would be even better with a curve,
| because text right on a corner (like a terminal prompt) is a
| bit of a stretch.
| smartbit wrote:
| regretfully curved UHD 40" aren't sold anymore. The MMD
| Philips BDM4037UW was available from dec '16 till summer '19.
| tga wrote:
| Too bad, that hits really close -- my monitor is a Philips
| BDM4065UC.
| smartbit wrote:
| The Philips BDM4065UC has a better speaker. Conners are
| difficult to see, in my experience.
|
| That's why I prefer the BDM4037UW and add an external
| speaker.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-27 23:01 UTC)