[HN Gopher] Ultrawide monitors are overrated, here's why I use a...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ultrawide monitors are overrated, here's why I use a 4K TV instead
        
       Author : redbell
       Score  : 44 points
       Date   : 2022-06-13 16:53 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.androidauthority.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.androidauthority.com)
        
       | paulmendoza wrote:
       | 49 inch ultrawide is now the only way I can code. So nice. My
       | lines of code are very long
        
       | BatFastard wrote:
       | I am going the opposite direction, a more squarish monitor just
       | came out from LG. Its awesome! I run one 30 inch monitor as main,
       | and the Dual Up which is 26 wide by 28 tall as my code monitor to
       | the side. So much better than my old 27 inch monitor in portrait
       | orientation.
       | 
       | https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-28mq780-b
        
       | wruza wrote:
       | I'm only using side displays for logs or something I don't need
       | to refer to often and can see by side vision. Same for large
       | "viewport" angles like tv right in front of me. Can't stand
       | turning my head or reading at an angle (even if it's good-angle
       | ips). However you arrange your screens, the field of your
       | effective sight remains the same.
       | 
       | Multiple displays is just a physical solution to the core issue:
       | desktop window managers and software and hardware suck. You can't
       | have an event-transparent overlay of a compiler/runtime output
       | over your ui testing area, you can't have windows that slide in
       | from the side on a hotkey or a click, showing quick status when
       | "holstered". You can't reveal/popup a window when text in it
       | matches a regex. You can't assign a hotkey to a browser tab. You
       | can't custom-dpi a specific window. You can't have drawers with
       | links in them that are already preloaded and ready to refer to.
       | You can't have a special set of keys to launch, raise or shift
       | windows temporarily. You can't scroll on a keyboard. It's all
       | stupid and fixed even with advanced WMs, or requires programming
       | comparable with creating a new WM and most apps from scratch. And
       | it's always arcane combination of two-three-four keys, most of
       | which live in rural areas of your keyboard.
       | 
       | Funny thing is, 3d games figured it out with huds, OSD messages,
       | consoles, choice wheels, trivial panning, zooming and movement,
       | "physical" buttons and switches, and 3d itself.
        
         | dendriti wrote:
         | Multiple displays have a tremendous advantage that cannot be
         | matched in software, namely that you can adjust each monitor to
         | its use-case. The portrait monitor I use for web browsing is
         | adjusted very differently than the one I use to game, or the
         | one I use for TV.
        
       | PebblesHD wrote:
       | I think it really depends what you're using it for. I look at
       | multiple log windows all day and do some platform development
       | when there's time, and having a screen that fits 3 useable panels
       | of logs across it has been the single biggest improvement to my
       | professional work since switching to a MacBook a decade ago. I
       | went for the Philips 50" with an inbuilt KVM switch, and it has
       | worked flawlessly.
       | 
       | I would wish for a higher refresh rate but they released one with
       | that about a year after I got mine, so if you're in the market,
       | get that one.
        
       | Semiapies wrote:
       | After threads the last few days where people were suggesting
       | getting monitors to use as TVs, it's amusing to see the reverse
       | offered just as sensibly.
        
       | aquir wrote:
       | I do the same. Cheap 4K TV (HDR, 60Hz) gives you much more screen
       | estate. 43 inch is big enough to keep the DPI scaling on 125%. I
       | am very happy with this setup
        
       | AtlasBarfed wrote:
       | 8k is coming, I'll want an 8k 55" to go with two 40" 4ks for my
       | dream setup
        
       | montag wrote:
       | In my opinion the Samsung Q7C is the best 4K TV for desktop
       | computing:                 - it's curved       - it can do
       | 1920x1080 at 120 hz       - it does 4:4:4 color
       | 
       | That said, I still like multimonitor setups. The built-in
       | partitioning is a nice feature for most work.
        
       | kitsunesoba wrote:
       | I'm not really big on either ultrawides or 4k TVs for
       | productivity usage.
       | 
       | Ultrawides don't play as nice with OS workspace management and
       | can't provide physical partitioning/prioritization (e.g. primary
       | windows on main screen virtual desktops, auxiliary windows on
       | secondary screen virtual desktops). They also tend to not measure
       | up to regular monitors in terms of specs.
       | 
       | 4k TVs put heavy constraints on desk arrangement to get
       | satisfactory perceived sharpness and UI scale and come with all
       | sorts of extraneous TV junk (unless you go with an ultra-basic or
       | signage model, which are anemic in terms of panel capabilities).
       | 
       | My preferred setup would be 2x 16:10 30-32" monitor or a single
       | 16:10 30-32" monitor accompanied by a 1:1 or 5:4 secondary
       | monitor that's height-matched to the primary monitor, but that's
       | not practical so I go with the pretty-standard setup of 2x 16:9
       | 27" monitors. If I absolutely had to go with a TV-like setup
       | though, I think it'd be with a BFGD (big format gaming display),
       | because the panels on those are more monitor-like and they don't
       | have all the cruft that TVs tend to come with.
        
         | jerlam wrote:
         | Your preferred setup sounds like one of the layouts of my
         | current ultrawide monitor: one primary window at 2/3 the width,
         | and a secondary window at 1/3. But a single ultrawide gives you
         | flexibility - easily switch to a 50/50 split or 100% width if
         | you're working with something that requires it (or has a really
         | big sidebar).
         | 
         | I'm using Magnet on MacOS so I don't know how easy a 1/3 split
         | would be in other operating systems. If you get an ultrawide or
         | a large TV, setting up some kind of window management tool is
         | probably required.
        
           | kitsunesoba wrote:
           | That setup sounds workable, but dual screens is almost non-
           | negotiable for me because it allows entire sets of
           | primary/secondary windows to be mixed and matched on the fly
           | just by changing spaces (I use macOS primarily as well). It's
           | very powerful, because it cuts the overhead of window
           | management down to almost nothing without adding any key
           | shortcuts or gestures beyond what I'd be using anyway.
           | 
           | For snap functionality on the rare occasion it's needed, I
           | use Moom because it's probably the most unobtrusive of those
           | types of utilities. No Aero Snap to unintentionally activate
           | or draw spurious rectangles and no extra key shortcuts, just
           | a little bubble that pops up when hovering over the green
           | traffic light. macOS also has very similar snapping
           | functionality built in so when working on a stock
           | configuration system I'm still mostly at home.
        
         | nightski wrote:
         | I have been using an ultrawide for years and find the windows
         | snap window management system quite effective.
        
         | sgarland wrote:
         | I ran dual 23" 1080p monitors for a long time, and then went
         | BFGD. Acer Predator 43" 4K, which I split into four quadrants.
         | I also have a 27" 4K (but I run it at 1440p for readability)
         | vertical monitor to the right, which is used almost exclusively
         | for an editor.
         | 
         | Both are driven via a single (each) USB-C --> DP cable. The
         | Predator doubles as a gaming monitor for my desktop. I couldn't
         | be happier with my setup.
        
         | denimnerd42 wrote:
         | Yeah I bought a ultra wide and make it work with Fancy Zones on
         | Windows Power Toys but dual 16:10 is still the best because it
         | plays nice with the OS by default. I think default window
         | management still has along way to go to suit all the different
         | options out there.
         | 
         | The dual 16:10 you get two "prime" windows in the center and 2
         | aux windows out wide. where as with a 34" 1200p ultra wide you
         | get 2 prime left and right or 1 prime and 2 aux with Fancy
         | Zones, or 3 "aux". If you consistently find yourself needing 3
         | or 4 full size windows then the ultra wide is not ideal
         | unfortunately.
         | 
         | The large 4k is just miserable because there's no ideal natural
         | prime window location like I top posted further down.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | peddamat wrote:
           | I feel like this is a good place for me to plug my Fancy
           | Zones fork, which supports maximizing windows within zones.
           | The latest alpha also supports full-screening videos within
           | zone boundaries.
           | 
           | https://github.com/peddamat/PowerToys/releases/tag/v0.58.7-m.
           | ..
           | 
           | The Power Toys devs have an issue open regarding this
           | feature, and we're figuring out next steps:
           | https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/279
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | closeparen wrote:
         | It is surprising that no one will sell me a reasonable pixel
         | density ultrawide. I have 2x 27" 4k monitors, which look great,
         | but that setup is overwhelmingly large in my home. I got a 34"
         | ultrawide and it's a nice compromise between screen real estate
         | and desk real estate, but the resolution is mediocre.
        
         | gcatalfamo wrote:
         | But isn't your _2x 16:9 27 "_ setup basically equivalent to an
         | ultrawide monitor?
        
           | kitsunesoba wrote:
           | As mentioned in my other posts, the big difference is the
           | second set of virtual desktops that's afforded by a second
           | monitor, as well as physical prioritization of secondary,
           | tertiary, etc windows.
           | 
           | It also means you have a far wider selection of models at
           | your disposal for both screens - in my case I like my primary
           | monitor to be HiDPI while the secondary monitor can be a more
           | run of the mill 1440p 27" monitor that you might find at a
           | yard sale.
        
       | unicornporn wrote:
       | Not to poop on the big screen party, but from an ergonomic
       | standpoint that does not look like a great idea[1]. Such a big
       | screen at that distance will likely make your head tilt back
       | slightly and your eyes look up and may wreak havoc on your neck
       | and eyes.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/office/monitor_po...
        
       | bob1029 wrote:
       | I've been all over the spectrum on size/PPI/format. One or more
       | 27" / 1440p monitors are still, by far, the most goldilocks
       | experience for me.
       | 
       | Anything else has required some substantial modification to how I
       | work or forced a less-than-ideal ergonomic situation.
        
       | jasonjmcghee wrote:
       | I use a 27" 4K IPS @ 144Hz. I upgraded from a 60HZ 1440p at the
       | same size, and it was a massive upgrade. Once you go to this
       | pixel density, it's hard to go back. Similarly to 120Hz, if you
       | do any sort blender / modeling, or other graphical applications -
       | it's a completely different experience.
       | 
       | Both the pixel density and refresh rate, coupled with a backlight
       | onto the wall, reduce the eye strain so much. I can't imagine
       | sitting a foot away from a TV.
        
         | Deritio wrote:
         | I think 27" and 4k is a nice sweet point for a desktop screen.
         | 
         | I'm still waiting for one who doesn't have a fan in it.
         | 
         | Which o e do you have?
        
           | theandrewbailey wrote:
           | Not previous poster, but I have a Samsung LS28AG700NNXZA
           | 
           | Some monitors have fans? That's news to me, I've never had a
           | monitor that did. Didn't know they were common enough to make
           | it an explicit deal breaker.
        
       | jpalomaki wrote:
       | I tried 43" 4K for a while, but it did not work out for me. Using
       | the sides and corners was inconvenient as it required keeping
       | head turned. I noticed I was mostly just keeping stuff in the
       | middle.
       | 
       | Maybe it would have worked better with some more tuning and good
       | window manager. For example keep Slack in corner, bring it center
       | for chatting, put back to corner.
        
       | Salgat wrote:
       | As someone who uses 3 monitors, I really wish they'd make an
       | ultrawide that had 3 panels. Using an ultrawide in the center
       | with a third monitor off to the side is too awkward.
        
         | throw457 wrote:
         | The Samsung Odyssey G9 could fit your bill but we have them at
         | work and it's just to much horizontal space.
        
       | turtlebits wrote:
       | PPI is more important than layout/size to me. 43" @ 4k is 102 PPI
       | which is ridiculously low when sitting at a desk. (just over arms
       | length away from the monitor).
       | 
       | My minimum is 150 PPI (which is ~ 4k @ 28"). If I wasn't so cheap
       | I'd probably just get the LG ultrafine/Apple studio display, but
       | might compromise and get a 5k2k 34".
        
         | jyxent wrote:
         | I wouldn't mind a higher PPI, but with subpixel text rendering
         | I find that the text quality is good enough for me. I'm hoping
         | the TV resolution arms race will continue until 8K is the new
         | normal like 4K is now. Then you will have large displays with
         | good pixel density.
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | 43" 4K is just about exactly the same thing as an oldschool
         | configuration with four tiled 23.5" 1080p monitors driven from
         | a desktop PC.
        
       | atemerev wrote:
       | I used LG OLED 4K TV as a monitor. Worked surprisingly well.
        
         | adrr wrote:
         | No burn-in issues?
        
           | metadat wrote:
           | Buy at Costco and get the full warranty.
           | 
           | This will protect you from the consequences of burn-in and
           | more for 5 years.
           | 
           | (Assuming the terms haven't changed since I last bought one
           | in 2020.)
        
       | gregjor wrote:
       | So many windows and so much to look at seems like the opposite of
       | productivity. I'm not about to go back to an 80x24 dumb terminal
       | but I don't think my measured productivity has improved by the
       | same factor as the number of pixels on my display. At some point
       | you pass the limit of what your brain can focus on and the
       | clutter just turns into busy-ness.
        
         | salmonlogs wrote:
         | I agree, I swapped from 2x27" 2K monitors to 1x34 ultrawide and
         | the biggest change for me was the ability to focus on one
         | thing.
         | 
         | Being able to just make one window full screen really helps me
         | concentrate. Having a second screen constantly doing stuff just
         | broke my focus.
         | 
         | When I need multiple Windows I can just tile with a window
         | manager.
        
       | denimnerd42 wrote:
       | I could write the opposite article on how a 40" 4K is overrated
       | and a 34" ultra wide is what to use instead. Main one being the
       | bottom and top of the monitor is too low / too high so your
       | primary windows will always be in a bad spot if you use that 3x2
       | layout he shows.
       | 
       | I guess you could write a window manager to move that primary
       | window every 20 minutes to a new location in the 3x2 grid so you
       | aren't fixated in one place.
       | 
       | The other issue is are 6 windows really useful? I could find 3 or
       | maybe 4 useful but then your windows get huge and it's kind of
       | overwhelming to concentrate on them. Either way you slice it I
       | think it's hard to manage such a large screen if you're not
       | constantly selling yourself on the imagined productivity of it.
        
         | sieabahlpark wrote:
        
       | neuralRiot wrote:
       | For music production and video editing, ultrawides are a Godsend
       | to me. Being able to see a big timeline without the division in
       | the middle as i was used to when using dual monitor setups,
       | covers any drawback.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-13 23:02 UTC)