[HN Gopher] LG 28-inch 16:18 DualUp Monitor
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       LG 28-inch 16:18 DualUp Monitor
        
       Author : jqcoffey
       Score  : 271 points
       Date   : 2022-07-09 15:22 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.lg.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.lg.com)
        
       | happy_pancake wrote:
       | Anyone know of a good touchscreen monitor/display for events? I
       | am using the lenovo m14t connected to a mac but looking for
       | better options..?
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | Probably helpful if you say more about your required size,
         | resolution, brightness, durability, portability, price, etc.
        
           | happy_pancake wrote:
           | 24 inches or smaller touch screen, 1920x1080 res, vesa mount
           | preferably! No need to be portable. If there's square-ish
           | displays that'll be cool too! Thanks!
        
       | bmcahren wrote:
       | 60hz no thanks
        
       | wongarsu wrote:
       | I find panning my eyes left and right to other monitors more
       | natural than up and down, and I think most ergonomics experts
       | would agree. As such a 32:9 widescreen seems preferable to a
       | 16:8. But if you are pressed for space, either because of small
       | desks or because of everything else going on on your desk (people
       | who work not only in the virtual world) this seems like a great
       | compromise.
        
         | tom_ wrote:
         | I've always been the opposite - not a big fan of having to turn
         | my head much when I'm working.
         | 
         | At home I've got 2 x 27" 9:16 monitors, one in front and one to
         | my right (total display width ~68 cm), then my little laptop on
         | the left (~30 cm wide) - and that's about far left or right as
         | I can be bothered to look.
         | 
         | At work I've got 1 x 27" 9:16 monitor in front, and 1 x 27"
         | 16:9 monitor on my left. The left hand side of the desktop
         | feels very, very far away!
        
           | nopcode wrote:
           | why dont you turn the left monitor vertically?
        
             | tom_ wrote:
             | Partly because I work in video games, so at work I benefit
             | from having one landscape monitor for testing the game at a
             | realistic resolution and/or using the tools, almost all of
             | which are always designed for use in landscape orientation.
             | 
             | (I could probably work around all of that, and indeed when
             | I work at home I just suck it up and/or have things stretch
             | across two screens. But the other part is that the monitor
             | stand I have at work is a bit limited, so if I have both
             | monitors in portrait orientation and move them so they're
             | adjacent, they end up too close to me.)
        
         | isametry wrote:
         | Also don't forget that our eyes are... you know... next to each
         | other. Rather than stacked vertically. The aspect ratio for the
         | average binocular human is almost 2:1 (vertical FOV is around
         | 100deg, while horizontal is up to 190deg).
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_eye#Field_of_view
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Is that 190deg the range for both eyes simultaneously?
        
           | mdp2021 wrote:
           | Yes, but for visually analytical practice - what I do in
           | front of a monitor - I find a more squarish than stripey
           | proportion much better.
           | 
           | I am not enjoying a panorama.
        
         | jcims wrote:
         | Are there any window managers that let you set some kind of
         | 'snap zones' so that you can easily tile screens without
         | fiddling? That's my main issue with large screens vs a
         | plurality of smaller ones.
        
           | erikerikson wrote:
           | For Mac: RectangleApp
           | 
           | https://rectangleapp.com/
        
           | robterrell wrote:
           | I use Moom at home but can't at work, so I just started using
           | https://rectangleapp.com instead.
        
           | curiousgal wrote:
           | If you have a Dell monitor you can use Dell Display Manager.
           | 
           | https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000060112/what-
           | is-d...
        
           | bechap wrote:
           | If you use a Mac, I've really enjoyed using Divvy. You can
           | define snap zones with keyboard shortcuts. It's $20, but
           | that's worth it for me considering how much I use it.
           | 
           | https://apps.apple.com/us/app/divvy-window-
           | manager/id4138575...
        
             | giblfiz wrote:
             | As a free alternative (which I use daily) I would recommend
             | "Hammerspoon" https://www.hammerspoon.org/
             | 
             | You will need to do a little configuration, but it does the
             | snap zones thing perfectly.
        
               | dominotw wrote:
               | Just coming across these. I've been using amethyst. Would
               | this offer any benefit to me ?
        
               | philsnow wrote:
               | Hammerspoon has the benefit that in addition to managing
               | your windows / spaces, you can also script _tons_ of
               | other things in the macos interface with it: have a
               | glance at https://www.hammerspoon.org/docs/ to see the
               | top-level modules.
        
             | no-s wrote:
             | > If you use a Mac, I've really enjoyed using Divvy. You
             | can define snap zones with keyboard shortcuts.
             | 
             | My memory is hazy but I feel this is close to some now-
             | elided window management feature in MacOS...
             | 
             | Thanks for the tip!
        
           | pph wrote:
           | You're looking for a "tiling window manager".
           | 
           | Another tip: In my setup I created dummy screens to fake
           | multiple monitors in RDP.
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | I do this with KDE.
        
           | tuvan wrote:
           | Microsoft PowerToys is pretty great for windows
        
             | maximus-decimus wrote:
             | Fancy Zones are also in base Windows 11.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | Darkphibre wrote:
             | Specifically, the FancyZones utility. I was just showing
             | this to a guest I was hosting and blowing their minds. You
             | can setup multiple patterns per monitor depending on a
             | given workflow, snap windows with shortcuts or shift-
             | dragging with the mouse, and even tab between windows in
             | the same 'pane'.
             | 
             | https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
             | us/windows/powertoys/fancyzone...
        
           | ComputerGuru wrote:
           | Honestly the latest Windows 10 isn't bad in this regard and
           | Windows 11 has improved on that without making it a chore
           | (although the other regressions in 11 make it a strong Do Not
           | Recommend for now). The PowerToys expansion for this feature
           | is worth trying (it's by Microsoft and it's free).
        
           | emarsh wrote:
           | On a Mac, I use Magnet, which lets you snap windows all over
           | the place, even on multiple monitors.
        
         | throwawaymaths wrote:
         | I'm double-extending vscode: top monitor gets the code, bottom
         | laptop screen gets the terminal (vscode click-to-goto file/line
         | in stdout/stderr output is just too powerful)
        
           | dominotw wrote:
           | why can't those be put in different spaces and just switch
           | between spaces using keyboard. Whats the advantage of putting
           | terminal in another monitor.
           | 
           | This has puzzled me for a long time as to why ppl use
           | multiple monitors at all. Is the idea that your peripheral
           | vision is monitoring terminal window ?
        
             | egfx wrote:
             | I don't know about terminals but having live reload on
             | multiple monitors is a god send for frontend developer
             | productivity. You're experimenting most of the time.
        
             | p1esk wrote:
             | I have two 32" external monitors connected to my 17"
             | laptop, so I use 3 screens: the laptop screen is usually
             | for browser/slack/email, first external monitor is for
             | Vscode code editor, second monitor is for tmux (watching a
             | bunch of ML experiments on GPU servers).
             | 
             | I don't want to use different spaces on the same screen, to
             | me it's like context switching, and I don't like that. I
             | prefer to have everything open in front of me, so I just
             | turn my head slightly to see what I need to see. It's like
             | having a large work table where I can fit all my tools and
             | materials.
        
         | spiffytech wrote:
         | I've always stacked my monitors because I recline while I work,
         | so the up/down eye motion feels natural for me. By contrast, I
         | turn my head to see side-by-side monitors, which doesn't feel
         | as nice to do all day.
        
           | redcalx wrote:
           | > I recline while I work
           | 
           | Can you elaborate on this? Sounds like it might be a way to
           | limit back strain? Do you have a desk at all?
        
             | spiffytech wrote:
             | I work at a desk, lean my chair back, and use a footrest.
             | Here's the one I'm using now:
             | https://amazon.com/gp/product/B07PWT8X6K/ My desk has a
             | keyboard tray so I can keep my chair low, and I'd want
             | something taller if I had to raise my chair.
             | 
             | For me, this totally eliminates back strain from working.
             | I've also got a friend who uses a La-Z-Boy in his home
             | office, with his laptop connected to the TV. He can't say
             | enough good things about that setup.
        
               | redcalx wrote:
               | Interesting, thanks. Is your chair anything special? I'm
               | guessing it has a high back for head support?
        
               | spiffytech wrote:
               | A couple years ago I got a Secret Lab Titan, which does
               | have high back/head support. I'm very happy with it.
               | Before that, I've worked this way with whatever chair my
               | job gave me. The head support is nice, but for me it
               | isn't critical.
        
         | ziml77 wrote:
         | I got a 21:9 display for my main monitor which forced me to
         | turn a 16:9 monitor sideways so it would fit on my desk. It's
         | very much just meant for stuff on the side because it is not
         | comfortable to be looking up and down like that. The best
         | arrangement seems to be to have stuff that I'm not focusing too
         | hard on in the top half (a YouTube video or Discord when I'm
         | just glancing at it) and to have in the bottom half stuff that
         | I'm more actively focusing on (general browsing or Discord when
         | I'm doing a lot of chatting)
        
           | Aaargh20318 wrote:
           | I'm also using a 21:9 and a 16:9 sideways. I mainly use the
           | portrait monitor for API docs and the iOS simulator. The tall
           | format is perfect for viewing documentation, especially
           | browsing through long lists of classes or methods.
        
         | vl wrote:
         | Clearly this monitor only make sense if you get two of them and
         | run them side by side... Imagine the glorious luxury of such
         | setup...
         | 
         | I used to run two 30"s vertically, but after upgrading to high-
         | res 32" didn't get back to such setup (would be too narrow and
         | too tall). Two of these 27"s can be great for side-by-side
         | again.
        
       | elliotpage wrote:
       | This reminds me of the Eizo 1:1 format monitor that I always
       | coveted but never bought. Now it appears they are no longer being
       | made.
       | 
       | https://www.eizo.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/
        
       | vehemenz wrote:
       | It's nice to see large manufacturers break out of the 16:9 mold,
       | although I think 4:3, 3:2, or 5:4 would be better for most users.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, LG is letting the supply chain dictate panel size
       | for their product team, instead of the other way around. This is
       | no doubt a byproduct of their decision to stop building their own
       | panels in 2020.
        
         | iLoveOncall wrote:
         | I would say this is very far from "breaking out of the 16:9
         | mold".
         | 
         | You can clearly say that the vast majority of the product
         | pictures instead present it as a 2x16:9. Most of the text is
         | also selling it as a replacement for a double monitor setup.
        
         | lambdaba wrote:
         | 3:2 is ideal, Microsoft's Surface Book series have it
        
           | arthurfm wrote:
           | Huawei's MateView 28.2" monitor too. It has a 3840 x 2560
           | resolution (which is slightly more than the 2560 x 2880
           | resolution of the LG DualUp), although sadly is not VESA
           | mountable.
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | It's a good baseline, but for big setups I think there's a
           | point where you want the width to grow faster than the
           | height.
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | I believe I'd slightly prefer 16:11 if that existed, but it's
           | pretty close to 3:2.
        
             | karamanolev wrote:
             | 3:2 is 16:10.66, so basically the same as 16:11.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | As I said, it's pretty close, but not the same. Looking
               | at http://www.displaywars.com/1-inch-3x2-vs-1-inch-d%7B16
               | x11%7D, I'd prefer the green rectangle (with more inches
               | of course ;)).
        
           | pkz wrote:
           | ...and the Acer Swift. A great screen size for programmers.
        
           | saiya-jin wrote:
           | Its rather close to 16:10 which is more ubiquitous (I have
           | 32" one funnily enough from LG from pre-covid times, and oh
           | boy was I glad I bought when it came).
           | 
           | It feels so natural to my eyes, I definitely don't want
           | vertical panel but 16:9 is pretty crap for any kind of work.
        
         | cbozeman wrote:
         | Jesus Christ, why did they stop building their own panels??
         | 
         |  _No one_ had panel quality like LG... :(
        
           | tumult wrote:
           | Is this actually true? I searched and didn't find anything
           | about LG ending their computer display LCD manufacturing.
        
           | Wistar wrote:
           | I have a pair of 2019 LG 4K 27s that I covet.
        
         | ThatMedicIsASpy wrote:
         | i would not say 16:9 stacked on top of each other is breaking
         | out of 16:9
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | Has anyone tried one of these? I'm intrigued. How well does it
       | work?
        
         | folkhack wrote:
         | Not the LG but I've ran a 1:1 EIZO for years which is very
         | close... Just gonna talk on how I've grown to love the 1:1
         | aspect ratio.
         | 
         | 1:1... it's not for everyone, but it is for me for the
         | following purposes:
         | 
         | * Best LOC on-screen possible - balanced horizontal/vertical
         | space in my IDE means I can fit WAY more readable code on
         | screen vs. my horizontal monitors
         | 
         | * Vertical aspect ratio media - editing a vertical photo is
         | outstanding (color profiles on this monitor are meh but not a
         | huge deal for me)
         | 
         | * 4-corner tiling - I find I only tile to the left/right or
         | top/bottom on normal horizontal/vertical monitors... on this
         | one I can fit 4x windows in reasonable aspect ratios in the
         | corners
         | 
         | * Full-height web browsing/document reading - not exclusive to
         | 1:1; viewing a whole "page" of data is much more natural vs
         | horizontal aspect ratios
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | Downsides:
         | 
         | * Gaming - Some games can be configured to work with it.
         | Outside of Factorio I really don't use it _at all_ for gaming.
         | I have 2x 16:9 1440p's on each side that I typically game on.
         | 
         | * Price/obscurity - This EIZO was way too expensive... the LG
         | is way better but I'm afraid in 1-2 years you won't be able to
         | find them at a reasonable price.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | TLDR: I'm legit considering picking one of these LG's up for
         | when my EIZO dies - I am so happy there's another option.
        
         | sicher wrote:
         | I used to run a 16:9 vertically for writing so I got one of
         | these and love it.
         | 
         | The only issue is that I needed to install BetterDisplay
         | (former BetterDummy) to get retina scaling from my macbook pro
         | M1 . Dunno why macOS doesn't support it natively since it has
         | the same PPI as a 32" 4k screen.
        
         | dormando wrote:
         | I just got one a few weeks back but haven't gotten to spend a
         | ton of time with it yet. It's taking some adjustment but I'm
         | liking it so far.
         | 
         | - had 1440p + 1080p monitors on stands side by side before. Now
         | just this one on an arm (which is excellent), that I can adjust
         | to keep my position from being static.
         | 
         | - not having to hold my neck angled while reading my side
         | monitor is helpful.
         | 
         | - realistically there are a few "modes" of working on here.
         | While coding it's pulled a bit closer, while in CAD or similar
         | creative I might push it back a bit and get more of the monitor
         | in view.
         | 
         | - I recline slightly so the monitor is tilted a bit which gives
         | me a solid view of the bottom 60-70% of the monitor. The top is
         | a bit out of range at close distance.
         | 
         | - For coding so far I have the middle-ish of the monitor as a
         | 1440p code-only view. Below that are a few windows for
         | manpages/reference/interactive debugging/repl/etc. On the top
         | end which is normally slightly out of view I have compilation
         | and long running test output which I glance at by moving my
         | eyes.
         | 
         | I like not having to page between desktops while coding when
         | possible. The bottom view is also large enough to hold a
         | browser window or simulator window. Need to also try pushing it
         | back a bit with slightly larger text and see if that's any
         | better.
         | 
         | I don't intend to game on it, maybe windowed mode in the middle
         | or something.
         | 
         | edit: well, also it has this mode where you can split it into
         | two 1440p monitors on different inputs (which you can hook up
         | to the same computer), so depending on the game I might do that
         | as well.
        
           | locofocos wrote:
           | I have a similar experience with coding! I bought this
           | monitor precisely for that. It's nice to keep some bottom IDE
           | panel open (test results, find results, git log, etc) while
           | keeping the rest of my editor at a normal vertical height.
           | 
           | Similarly, I can keep a browser open at a normal (or even
           | extended!) height, plus keep the developer console open at
           | the bottom. It's made web development more pleasant, just the
           | feeling of not being so cramped vertically.
        
       | beebeepka wrote:
       | It's incredible seeing 60 hz junk being promoted on a tech site
       | in 2022
        
         | jsjohnst wrote:
         | Incredibly low resolution for the size monitor too. Is the form
         | factor the novelty worthy of sharing?
        
           | sicher wrote:
           | I just bought one of these (and love it! I write a lot) It
           | has the same PPI as the 32" 4k Dell I run at work.
        
             | robertoandred wrote:
             | 32" at 4K is pretty low ppi
        
               | sicher wrote:
               | About 140. But I find it okay since I like to keep the
               | screen not too close.
        
           | iLoveOncall wrote:
           | Since when is 1440p low resolution? A 4K IPS panel is by no
           | means the standard, even in 2022.
        
             | Matthias247 wrote:
             | It is rather low 110 dpi, ,,retina" devices are doing > 220
             | dpi for nearly a decade and are much easier on the eyes.
             | 
             | Now unfortunately those are still not common in external
             | monitors - probably because they require 5k resolution for
             | todays display sizes. But even the 160 dpi of a 4K @ 27"
             | screen is such a massive step forward in picture quality
             | and readability that I couldn't ever see myself going back
             | to 110dpi or less. This should especially apply if a
             | display is marketed as ergonomic
        
               | sicher wrote:
               | This LG is just shy of 140 dpi.
        
               | Matthias247 wrote:
               | You are right. I got confused by the mention of 1440p -
               | which is not really what this screen has at 28". Still
               | not really in the hidpi category. I assume it would be
               | most usable with something along 1.5-1.75 scaling, which
               | produces inferior results to 2x.
        
               | sicher wrote:
               | I would prefer higher dpi too. If someone would make a
               | hidpi square (ish) screen I would buy it in a heartbeat.
               | The Huawei Mateview looks great but can't swivel to
               | portrait, unfortunately.
        
           | beebeepka wrote:
           | I think someone is just doing PR, hence the dowvotes
        
       | lvass wrote:
       | This shares an unfortunately common flaw with most monitors in
       | the market, at 137.6 PPI, it'll likely require fractional
       | scaling.
        
         | kposehn wrote:
         | Exactly. That's the reason I don't recommend it and am
         | returning mine.
        
       | iLoveOncall wrote:
       | This is surprisingly reasonably priced.
        
       | seanp2k2 wrote:
       | Wake me up when they make one with the resolution of 2x 4K 16:10
       | screens. 8K 55" TVs are hard to beat as monitors too.
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | Having tried both setups I found 8k 55" to be problematic. At
         | 200% scaling it's like 4 4k 27.5" displays which are already a
         | bit under scales individually (160 dpi equivalent being
         | displayed as normal) but much worse because you need to fit 4
         | within your vision on a flat plane. At 250% things are better
         | but now you're effectively just got an extremely large 5k
         | display with all of the troubles/inneficiencies of fractional
         | scaling.
         | 
         | I found stacking 27"-32" sized displays in a 3x1 or 3x2 to be
         | much more effective. This allows you to adjust the angles
         | horizontally and vertically to where you sit so it's less of a
         | flat plane and allows you to pick 1440p or 2160p panels for
         | each (depending on size you went with and money you want to
         | spend) giving you the option to build to the size and
         | resolution you want instead of the size and resolution you can
         | fit using a single tv. For less than $2k you can get 6x
         | 1440p@165hz displays and 3 dual height monitor stands so it
         | also gives more bang for the buck. Well getting the same peak
         | HDR brightness might cost you more, especially if you want that
         | on all displays.
         | 
         | Not to mention 8k TVs try to do everything I their power to
         | make the experience of just turning on and displaying the
         | content directly and correctly impossible to do fully.
        
         | Kudos wrote:
         | I tried a 49" 4k, and it gave me neck pains unless I only used
         | the middle half of it.
        
           | JackGreyhat wrote:
           | I've been wanting to buy a 49inch curved to _avoid_ neck
           | pain...do you recommend against it? I wanted to buy this one:
           | https://www.samsung.com/ca/monitors/gaming/odyssey-
           | neo-g9-g9...
        
             | Kudos wrote:
             | To be clear, I actually do have that actual 49" utrawide
             | now, and it's been great. The 49" I mentioned was just a TV
             | I used as a monitor.
        
         | jsjohnst wrote:
         | Having had dual 5Ks for the past five years, I probably
         | wouldn't be excited even with it being 2x 4K. The bezels aren't
         | big enough to warrant the drop in resolution for something like
         | this to me.
        
       | moneywoes wrote:
       | How different is this from flipping a 16:9 display
        
         | meatmanek wrote:
         | It's equivalent to putting two 16:9 displays on top of each
         | other, but in the same device.
        
       | puppycodes wrote:
       | its a great monitor if your productivity standards are high and
       | your visual quality standards are low
        
         | mdp2021 wrote:
         | Which specification details you see as bad?
        
           | robertoandred wrote:
           | The ppi
        
             | mdp2021 wrote:
             | 140ppi is bad at book's distance but fair at arm's (or,
             | monitor's) distance, and a definite progress from the
             | traditional ~90ppi.
        
       | pcurve wrote:
       | It's definitely smaller than I was expecting. 18.2" x 19"
       | 
       | My 27" display is almost 25" wide.
        
         | deergomoo wrote:
         | I was all ready to buy one of these until I realised it was the
         | size of two 21" displays stacked, rather than two 27" as the
         | resolution suggests.
         | 
         | I know I wouldn't be losing any horizontal resolution, but I
         | think 27" is the perfect width for a primary monitor and I
         | wouldn't really want to go smaller.
        
         | mdp2021 wrote:
         | According to what you are writing, it is much bigger than your
         | display:
         | 
         | if your display had a 27'' diagonal, and was 25'' wide, it
         | would be 10'' tall. (Which makes little sense: it would be a
         | 5:2 proportion.) So it would have an area of 250 sqi.
         | 
         | Versus the ~350 sqi of the LG. (It is quite a jump: the rounded
         | [?]2 jump, 5:7, Ax proportion, "do it twice to double".)
         | 
         | The steeper (or flatter) the proportion, the less the area per
         | diagonal size.
         | 
         | But I guess the display for comparison is more likely a
         | 24''x13'' scarce, ~300 sqi.
        
           | pcurve wrote:
           | 'if your display had a 27'' diagonal, and was 25'' wide, it
           | would be 10'' tall."
           | 
           | 10" tall? I think your math is off.
           | 
           | My monitor is P2175Q. Dimension with bezel 25.2 x 16.7. LCD
           | alone is 23.5 x 13.25".
        
             | mdp2021 wrote:
             | > _I think your math is off_
             | 
             | How? Have you verified it? [?](625+100) = ~26.9
             | 
             | You brought the measurements of your 16:9 : yes, one of the
             | points was that a 27'' diagonal with a 25'' side cannot be
             | 16:9, and is in fact more like 5:2, as written. Going from
             | 25'' to 23.5'' makes a lot of difference in proportions.
        
         | humanistbot wrote:
         | Pythagoras's revenge....
        
         | meatmanek wrote:
         | Maybe I'm bad at reading, but it would be nice if the page
         | explained "this is the equivalent of two 20-inch 16:9 monitors
         | stacked" instead of having to bust out the Pythagorean theorem.
        
           | kllrnohj wrote:
           | http://displaywars.com/27,6-inch-d%7B16x18%7D-vs-27-inch-16x.
           | ..
           | 
           | I love that site for comparing displays across aspect ratios.
        
           | tom_ wrote:
           | The specs panel has Dimension without Stand (W x H x D):
           | 481.5 x 549.5 x 44.9 mm
        
           | lvass wrote:
           | It's approximately two 21.345-inches stacked, not 20.
        
       | jvolkman wrote:
       | I've been using 43 inch 4k displays as monitors for 3 years now
       | and don't think I could go back to anything smaller. Font size at
       | native scaling is just right for me and there's plenty of real
       | estate.
        
         | koverda wrote:
         | I'm up to dual 75 inch 8k and it feels just right. Tried going
         | down to 43 inches and it felt cramped.
        
           | immigrantheart wrote:
           | How do you even able to read it? From what distance?
        
           | PainfullyNormal wrote:
           | Would you be willing to post a picture of your setup? That
           | sounds insanely cool.
        
           | xur17 wrote:
           | I was considering this recently, but didn't find a good
           | curved version. What do you use?
        
       | akersten wrote:
       | They're still doing the thing where if you want to wall mount it,
       | you've got to punch a hole in your drywall for the cables to have
       | enough room to exit straight out the back of the monitor. Or hope
       | that some cheap 90-degree noname adapter supports the latest
       | version of DisplayPort that you want. I stopped buying this brand
       | of monitor because of this frustration.
        
         | tokamak-teapot wrote:
         | Or fix a piece of board to the wall and fix the monitor to
         | that.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | Do you mean wall-mount I'm general, or do you mean wall-
         | mounting _with no gap between the chassis and the wall_?
         | 
         | Because if you allow a gap, there are plenty of VESA-compatible
         | mounting kits that solve the problem.
        
         | aeyes wrote:
         | Is there no cable with a 90 degree plug on the market?
        
           | akersten wrote:
           | Maybe, but there's a tall raised bezel around the port area
           | so even those cables might not work if the port is close
           | enough to the edge of the port cutout, since it'll intersect
           | the chassis plastic. The lower DP port on this monitor looks
           | way too close to the bezel for a 90 degree cable for example.
           | I guess it's not hitting the wall anymore, but I still can't
           | use it. All in all it's a baffling design decision and I wish
           | they would just put the ports downward firing at the bottom
           | of the monitor with straight clearance like everyone else.
           | You could even still stack them vertically with no gap this
           | way because the actual screen support curves away from where
           | the ports would exit.
        
         | philliphaydon wrote:
         | https://www.av-connection.com/?PGr=13515
         | 
         | Like this?
        
           | daemoens wrote:
           | Cheaper versions on amazon and you can get em quicker
           | 
           | HDMI: https://www.amazon.com/VCE-Supported-Degree-Female-
           | Adapter/d...
           | 
           | DisplayPort: https://www.amazon.com/Displayport-Converter-
           | BolAAzuL-Connec...
        
       | 4ad wrote:
       | Excellent form factor with an unusable ppi. I lost all my faith
       | in non-Apple companies being able to produce usable displays. I
       | hate macOS, but I have no choice. The only alternative is
       | Linux+UP3218K, but it requires Nvidia graphics (no-go on Linux,
       | for me), and the build quality is spotty and poor...
       | 
       | At least now we have a Linux laptop with a usable display though,
       | the soon to be released ThinkPad T14s Gen 3 will have the option
       | of a 16:10, 2880x1800, 242ppi display, usable in Linux with 2x
       | scaling.
       | 
       | Of course that laptop has other problems, but at least we have
       | the first alternative to a MacBook _in over a decade_ for people
       | who care about Linux and displays.
        
         | lvass wrote:
         | >Linux+UP3218K, but it requires Nvidia graphics
         | 
         | Care to explain? I found some articles from 2017 claiming AMD
         | cards can display 8k60fps.
        
           | 4ad wrote:
           | It didn't work a couple of years ago, at least in Linux, with
           | the open source driver. I don't know what the situation is
           | nowadays.
        
             | lvass wrote:
             | Fixed in linux 5.5(jan 2020) according to a phoronix
             | article.
        
               | 4ad wrote:
               | That is excellent to hear! I really, really want a Linux
               | workstation using Dell UP3218K. Sadly so few people have
               | this monitor, and even fewer use Linux, that it's quite
               | the financial gamble to know what actually works and what
               | doesn't. I could return the monitor, of course, but then
               | I end up with a newly bought machine without any display
               | I could use...
        
       | sbf501 wrote:
       | My cervical vertebrae are cowering in fear. I'd rather twist left
       | to right and put the burden on muscles, than over-articulate my
       | neck.
        
         | make3 wrote:
         | can't you just move your eyes
        
           | mdp2021 wrote:
           | To be fair to the poster, we have in general horizontally
           | distributed eyes. Yes the display is squarish, so the focus
           | uses similar distances, but maybe the game of peripheral
           | vision gives the L-R space some advantage.
           | 
           | I would install extra eyes.
        
         | dominotw wrote:
         | I think most of ppl have the opposite problem called "nerd
         | neck" from looking down all the time while using phone, laptop
         | ect. This could be a nice antidote to that :D .
        
           | sangnoir wrote:
           | Never heard of nerd neck til now. Every single piece of
           | ergonomic advice on using monitors that I have encountered
           | has recommended that the _top_ of your monitor be level with
           | your eyes so you look _down_ (slightly) rather than up.
        
         | iblaine wrote:
         | In my experience, 27" monitors on top of each other will hurt
         | your neck and/or eyes, and side by side is more comfortable.
        
         | willio58 wrote:
         | I've been using a vertical monitor recently and I have to say I
         | haven't noticed any pain. I don't tend to look up and down with
         | my head, I simply move my eyes up and down
        
           | Schiendelman wrote:
           | Oh you won't notice the pain. You'll notice in 20 years.
        
             | bartvk wrote:
             | Can you expand on this ominous prediction? What are your
             | experiences?
        
         | arghwhat wrote:
         | You cervical vertebrae are likely covering in fear due to
         | significant underutilization.
        
       | js2 wrote:
       | I've been using a 32" 16:9 4K monitor (BenQ BL3201PH) for years.
       | The biggest improvement I've made recently was putting it on a
       | proper monitor arm. OMG, what a sea change being able to raise,
       | lower, bring forward, push back the monitor throughout the day.
       | 
       | I have a fixed standing desk with a tall bar-stool type chair I
       | use for resting at times. I'm 50, but even with glasses I use
       | just for editing (they are optimized for bringing into focus
       | things at arms distance) I have the monitor relatively close to
       | use it at the resolution and font-sizes I like. This means if I'm
       | working on editing something toward the bottom or top of the
       | monitor I'll often have to adjust its height so that I'm not
       | tilting my head too far down or up. The monitor arm just makes
       | that so easy.
       | 
       | After a couple tries, I found a knock-off of the Fully Jarvis arm
       | that works well, the WALI GSM001XL:
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07NLMLLT6/
       | 
       | Anyway, this LG is neat, but my 32" is already at the height
       | limit I'd want for a monitor. I feel like this LG dual setup I'd
       | need to have too far way to see the full view comfortably, which
       | would mean running everything at larger font sizes, so I'm not
       | sure it makes sense.
        
         | nickjj wrote:
         | Do you run your 32" 4k monitor at 100% native scaling? If so
         | how far away do you keep the monitor from your eyes?
        
           | js2 wrote:
           | I don't run it 100%. I run it at 3360 x 1890, once click down
           | in the Mac display preference pane from native. It's
           | apparently 114%/122ppi according to [1] (not my monitor, but
           | it's an equivalent size/resolution).
           | 
           | The front of the monitor is 24" from my nose.
           | 
           | 1. https://www.eizoglobal.com/support/compatibility/dpi_scali
           | ng...
        
             | sofixa wrote:
             | > The front of the monitor is 24" from my nose
             | 
             | Isn't that a bit too close? Can you see all of it at once,
             | and is there anything but it in your field of view? I'm
             | asking because i had a 60cm (24'' is 61cm) desk with a 24''
             | screen and i found that too close and too straining on my
             | eyes.
        
               | js2 wrote:
               | It's as close as it needs to be for the size fonts and
               | resolution I want to run it at, and still be able to read
               | comfortably with my 50 year-old eyes. Yes, it's a bit on
               | the close side so I do have to pan my head a bit. As I
               | mentioned, I do push it back and bring it forward
               | throughout the day, but I just measured where I'd left it
               | at after coding yesterday and it was at 24" away.
               | 
               | I don't really have any issues with eye strain though.
               | 
               | I did need to get dedicated glasses that I use when using
               | the monitor or when I'm on my laptop. I'm a bit near-
               | sighted, even after Lasik a decade ago, and now I'm also
               | dealing with presbyopia the last few years. I've worn
               | glasses all my life, but they never bothered me at all
               | till I started dealing with the presbyopia and needing
               | task-specific glasses. :-(
               | 
               | I tried progressive glasses (modern versions of bifocals)
               | but found them extremely annoying with their fishbowl
               | effect and only providing enough magnification at the
               | bottom and gave up on them after two weeks. So I now have
               | my regular glasses that are adjusted for normal
               | activities and I just take them off or read below them
               | for near work. My near-sightedness here is providing me
               | some temporary respite from the presbyopia. But at arm's
               | length distances, it's uncomfortable to read text through
               | them because my eyes can't focus that close with them on,
               | yet if I take them off it's just a bit too blurry.
               | 
               | So I basically have my work glasses that make things from
               | ~ 18" - 36" comfortable for viewing.
               | 
               | Presbyopia really sucks and it's the only thing so far
               | about aging that's a constant irritation in my day. :-(
               | 
               | p.s. typing this on an iPad 12.9" that's about 16" from
               | my face, w/o wearing my glasses. Further away and it's
               | too blurry and I'd need my middle-distance glasses. With
               | my regular glasses, there's no distance at which I can
               | read it.
        
               | gedy wrote:
               | > I tried progressive glasses (modern versions of
               | bifocals) but found them extremely annoying with their
               | fishbowl effect
               | 
               | Lord you aren't kidding about that - I tried these after
               | a doctor recommended, and it was so jarring and
               | disorienting I thought something had to be wrong.
               | Apparently that's just how they are.
        
               | bketelsen wrote:
               | I thought I was the clumsiest person in the world until I
               | stopped wearing mine. I was tripping on everything
               | constantly.
        
           | frob wrote:
           | I do. I keep it about 2.5 feet away.
        
       | dhosek wrote:
       | Meh. I never want more vertical space on my monitor. It would be
       | really a hard aun with MacOS too unless it's meant to be two
       | virtual monitors, in which case, it still doesn't impress me.
        
         | ip26 wrote:
         | More horizontal space feels natural, but tends to be an
         | ergonomic problem. I could see vertical working better for the
         | spine & shoulders, as long as it isn't unnaturally narrow.
        
           | jeffbee wrote:
           | Pretty sure that's backwards. Ergonomically you want the
           | entire display to be at and below eye level. The neck rotates
           | easily on the horizontal and really sucks at flexing in the
           | vertical.
        
             | ip26 wrote:
             | Yes, except most people wind up looking at the leftmost
             | third of the screen the vast majority of the time (see
             | visual heat map research) which results in chronically bad
             | posture with very wide screens.
        
               | samatman wrote:
               | I use a window manager to split a 21:9 5k2k monitor into
               | 11:13:11 panels, so the largest is in the middle. Suits
               | me just fine, and I mostly look at the middle panel, with
               | terminals and browsers off to the left and right
               | respectively.
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | Yeah, not advocating for big wide screens, either. A
               | 17x17 square display would be pretty sweet. You can
               | achieve this by setting the right mode on a 27-inch
               | widescreen, because they are 17 inches tall.
        
       | SergeAx wrote:
       | This is a perfect one for crypto traders! These days they should
       | rotate their 16:9 vertically to see the full depth of assets
       | plunged. Now they will have this _and_ see much longer history at
       | the same time.
        
       | JimRoepcke wrote:
       | I received one last week. Works great on my M1 MBP. I have a 16:9
       | monitor above the MBP and the LG to the right of it, but now I
       | want to get a keyboard, trackpad and webcam so I can swap the
       | positions of the monitors and have the LG as my main monitor.
       | 
       | My only complaint is it's not as wide as a 27" monitor despite
       | having the same resolution as Thunderbolt Displays / 27" iMacs.
       | So the pixels are smaller. The width is closer to a 24" 16:9.
       | 
       | But I love the stand, and everything else about it.
        
         | aviditas wrote:
         | Yes! The stand is really great; I have mine on an adjustable
         | height desk and it takes up so little space. Which is perfect
         | as I have so little space to work with. I got it recently and
         | for me it's spot on as my main monitor. The built-in two device
         | kvm saves me so much time. I can't speak to the resolution woes
         | as I was using two very, very old monitors at home so I've just
         | been basking in the glow of using something made recently. I've
         | been enjoying the vertical space for tasks like going through
         | logs/giant spreadsheets and then switching to the dual monitor
         | mode for the usual multi-tasking. I've used dual 32in curved
         | fancy monitors at the office before and found that I would just
         | use a fourth of the real estate available. My brain prefers the
         | vertical space over the horizontal.
        
         | kposehn wrote:
         | Were you able to get proper hidpi scaling on it without
         | artifacts/blurriness or are you just letting it run at native
         | scaling?
        
           | djcollier wrote:
           | My solution has been to use it as a second monitor, run it at
           | native resolution, and only use it for apps where I can
           | reliablably increase the font size (terminals, web apps/pages
           | with good zoom support). I keep VSCode on my high DPI main
           | monitor.
        
       | linsomniac wrote:
       | I've been running two 4K 30" displays in this form factor for 3-4
       | months and love it. I put the upper monitor on an arm above the
       | lower. The upper is a bit too high for doing regular work on, but
       | it's great status stuff (slack, music player, bugtracker, e-mail,
       | ...).
       | 
       | The down side of this LG is that it's about the price I paid for
       | the two 30" 4K displays... The curse of irregular displays,
       | losing economies of scale.
        
         | pcurve wrote:
         | Would love to see your desk setup ;-)
        
       | jefflombardjr wrote:
       | How does this compare to rotating a regular monitor 90 degrees?
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | You also get a normal subpixel arrangement.
        
         | mmis1000 wrote:
         | It's exact 2 16:9
        
         | lvass wrote:
         | https://www.displaywars.com/24-inch-d%7B1080x1920%7D-vs-28-i...
        
       | layer8 wrote:
       | I'm waiting for a 200+ DPI OLED monitor with something like 4500
       | x 3000 resolution.
        
       | Rapzid wrote:
       | Still waiting for LG to come out with a better 27/28 inch HDR
       | monitor. I LOVE my Ultra Gear, but the edge-lit HDR zones could
       | really use a refresh.
        
       | orthoxerox wrote:
       | I wish USB-C single cable solution would become standard on all
       | screens, along with a built-in USB/BT hub. Then we could revisit
       | the idea of thumbstick PCs. I am not a big fan of laptops and
       | would gladly carry a Mars bar-sized computer with me instead.
        
       | kposehn wrote:
       | I've had one of these for a few weeks and am returning it. Here's
       | my take:
       | 
       | - The aspect ratio is great when rotated 90 degrees. I really
       | liked having more vertical room for coding and documents.
       | 
       | - Screen scaling with Mac OS does not work well. I've been using
       | BetterDisplay to address this but it still suffers from lag,
       | banding and pixelation.
       | 
       | As a result I'm returning and getting a BenQ 32" 4K. If the
       | scaling issues on mac are addressed later on I may revisit it.
        
         | likeclockwork wrote:
         | That's unfortunate. I was hoping to get one of these as an
         | external monitor for an MBP.
         | 
         | I do have to wonder though, you're saying 'Screen scaling with
         | Mac OS' and 'scaling issues on mac' but this is just a monitor,
         | Isn't that "MacOS screen scaling does not work well" and "mac
         | scaling issues" rather than any defect with the device itself?
        
           | kposehn wrote:
           | I was disappointed too. In the end the vastly improved aspect
           | ratio and ergonomics could not overcome the unpleasant screen
           | quality.
           | 
           | While Mac OS has never had an issue with other monitors and
           | scaling replies in my experience, it does for the DualUp. I'm
           | not knowledgeable enough about the various protocols to know
           | if this is Apple or LG's responsibility, but the end result
           | is not pleasant.
        
             | acchow wrote:
             | I believe for Apple's rescaling to work properly, it needs
             | to be able to render at 2x resolution on both axes (4x
             | resolution total). So for this 2560 x 2880, it needs a GPU
             | to render internally at 5210x5760. That is 30MP. Can your
             | GPU actually do this?
        
               | kposehn wrote:
               | I'm unsure if that's possible. Running a Mac Studio M1
               | Ultra.
        
               | acchow wrote:
               | You should be fine to run this monitor over USB-C.
               | 
               | HDMI will be terrible.
        
               | kposehn wrote:
               | I tried all the inputs and cables. Still the same result.
        
           | locofocos wrote:
           | I bought one, and I'm also upset with how Mac OS handles the
           | scaling.
           | 
           | I've tried absolutely every utility that allegedly makes
           | higher DPI monitors work: BetterDisplay, SwitchResX, EasyRes,
           | and a few other little ones. BetterDisplay makes it sound
           | like they support full resolution with any arbitrary scaling
           | factor. But all of them, at least the ones that did ANYTHING,
           | they only offered the exact same behavior that Mac's built-in
           | display settings offered. They only let me run at a lower
           | resolution. I'm on a 2020 Intel MBP.
           | 
           | Running it at 1920x2160 (just via Mac's built-in settings) is
           | annoying, but it displays things at the correct size and lets
           | me move on with my life. It's still slightly crisper than my
           | old 96 DPI monitor, and the screen real estate + aspect ratio
           | is absolutely amazing for coding.
           | 
           | It's a real shame that neither Mac nor LG has a solution
           | similar to what Windows offers. Hooking the Dualup to my
           | Windows 10 PC, it immediately just worked. Full resolution,
           | 150% scaling, it was the perfect size. Text looks so much
           | crisper on Windows than Mac with this monitor. I've been
           | considering installing some Linux distro for my daily work
           | just to enjoy proper scaling (I figure Ubuntu would offer
           | something similar to Windows).
        
       | DavidVoid wrote:
       | If you're curious what a setup with three of these would look
       | like, there was a post on r/battlestations today by an app
       | developer who uses three of them [0].
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/battlestations/comments/vv2tca/app_...
        
       | rsync wrote:
       | EIZO makes a 1:1 monitor you can buy off the shelf right now:
       | 
       | https://www.eizo.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/
        
         | steanne wrote:
         | i have that and the one thing i don't like about it is the max
         | rate is 60hz. even 75 would be fine; i don't need amazing, just
         | a bit more than 60. this new lg monitor has really neat
         | features: the picture by picture and the built-in kvm are
         | clever and useful, but it has the same 60hz.
        
         | somat wrote:
         | I love it, perhaps we are entering a golden age of 1:1 screens.
         | I had a blackberry passport and the second greatest thing about
         | it was that it had a square screen and took square pictures.
        
         | dmix wrote:
         | I like how they target programmers specifically on their
         | landing page.
         | 
         | I wonder how well it works in practice. I typically have
         | multiple tabs open so I don't mind going wide over long. But it
         | is easier to look down rather than sideways.
        
           | ahmedfromtunis wrote:
           | What I'm really concerned about is having to look down for
           | longer periods of time with monitors like these.
           | 
           | I used to have a terrible back pain that magically
           | disappeared when I elevated my laptop so that the screen is
           | at my eye level.
           | 
           | I still have a lighter version of this pain whenever I have
           | to work for an extended period from a coffee shop or wherever
           | I can't elevate the laptop.
        
         | markonen wrote:
         | It's a great test case for your "is this display landscape or
         | portrait" functions
        
       | hintymad wrote:
       | Only vertical split? Can it be horizontally split?
        
         | politelemon wrote:
         | If you mean in terms of resolution, that would be a super ultra
         | wide, like the Samsung neo g9.
        
       | okasaki wrote:
       | I find aspect ratio is more important on smaller screens such as
       | on laptops. Once you get to 28" and up, 16:9 is fine, since you
       | can easily tile two windows side by side.
        
       | bhauer wrote:
       | This monitor would be perfect as left and right side displays. It
       | needs a matching center display that is twice the width and the
       | same height, yielding a three-monitor configuration with a nice
       | large central display.
        
         | titzer wrote:
         | Indeed, I think 3 monitors might be my next gamble. I switched
         | from dual 27" (one always portrait and the other sometimes
         | portrait, sometimes landscape), to a 42.5 (!) 4k monitor, and
         | then downgraded to 32". The 42" monitor was a little
         | ridiculous, like I literally started clustering my windows in
         | the middle and ignoring the edges. 32 is better. The only
         | direction I can imagine going would be to add 24" flanking
         | portrait monitors to my 32.
        
         | lvass wrote:
         | >display that is twice the width and the same height
         | 
         | 42.7" 16:9, very close to the common 42".
        
       | cjbprime wrote:
       | For what it's worth, my take: buy something like the LG C2 42"
       | OLED TV. It is huge (but not too huge) and an excellent quality
       | display. If you want to try ultrawide, or a square display, or an
       | unusual aspect ratio, just.. make those desktop sizes out of your
       | large screen.
        
         | likeclockwork wrote:
         | LG C2 42" is 8.3 megapixels vs. this monitor's 7.4 megapixels.
         | 
         | This monitor offers 88% of the pixels the LG C2 does but
         | compresses them into half the surface area. It also costs half
         | the price.
         | 
         | For the same amount of money you can have 14.8 megapixels at
         | higher PPI in a much more flexible format. 4K seems like a lot
         | of real estate but at standard->lower PPI (large screen few
         | pixels) realistically you don't get that much more real estate,
         | especially compared to the 2560x1440 (and multiples thereof)
         | displays.
         | 
         | I used to use a 55" LG OLED as a monitor but in practice,
         | coming from dual 27" 2560x1440 monitors, I rarely did deep work
         | in quadrants of 1920x1080. I tended to use a 2560 main slice
         | and then the leftovers for reference and my terminals. I found
         | 55" 4K as a monitor to be overly large and lacking in usable
         | detail and I'm not sure I trust 42" to be small enough to make
         | up for that.
        
       | vondur wrote:
       | I still have a bunch of older 24" 1920x1200 displays which are
       | 16:10 and give you more vertical space than a 1920x1080 monitor.
        
       | collegeburner wrote:
       | i noticed they didn't abbreviate "nano IPS" all the way lmao
        
       | user_7832 wrote:
       | On a similar note, does anyone know of a squarish monitor that
       | doesn't cost an arm and a leg, and preferably has a good color
       | gamut coverage?
       | 
       | There was an 1920*1920 monitor
       | (https://www.inputmag.com/reviews/square-monitor-eizo-flexsca...)
       | but that's over 1k USD :(
       | 
       | There are other nice displays like Huawei's Mateview at 3000*2000
       | but nothing costs less than ~550-600$/EUR. It's a bit of a pity
       | because you can get a decent 1080p or even 1440p monitor for much
       | less.
       | 
       | Fyi I had written a comment some time back on how to make your
       | own monitor, using Panelook but that also isn't very cheap (edit
       | here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30422163)
        
         | pedrocr wrote:
         | If what you value is vertical space/resolution why not run a 4K
         | monitor vertically? You can either use the full resolution or
         | crop at whatever vertical space you prefer.
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | This is terrific advice. I run one monitor in the standard
           | horizontal configuration and one horizontal. Everybody who
           | sees it falls in love. I can get 100 lines of code on the
           | monitor and rarely does a line wrap. PDFs and other documents
           | look terrific.
        
             | rayiner wrote:
             | I just switched to this setup and it's great. Windows
             | unfortunately doesn't natively support "snap to left/right"
             | on a horizontal monitor and "snap to bottom/top" on a
             | vertical monitor at the same time.
        
           | Bud wrote:
           | It's a little bit better but it's still a crap aspect ratio,
           | and turning it vertical doesn't fix all of the problem. Now
           | it's too tall and not wide enough.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | I do but 9:16 is too tall and skinny, would like it a bit
           | more square.
        
             | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
             | This is where the vertically curved displays used for video
             | slots would shine as a general purpose monitor. You'd have
             | less vertical range to scan and refocus on.
        
         | folkhack wrote:
         | I run the EIZO you linked and love it... since I'm such a fan
         | of this monitor I've always kept an eye out for anything more
         | affordable.
         | 
         | Unfortunately, this LG is the first and only thing that I've
         | seen that comes close with a <$1k price tag... I'm considering
         | picking this up to have as a backup when my EIZO finally dies.
         | 
         | My specs are 1:1 or as-close as I can get.
        
           | rsync wrote:
           | I also have this Eizo 1:1 (1920x1920) monitor and I use it in
           | quadrants for status/monitoring.
           | 
           | I wouldn't want it on my actual workstation ...
        
             | folkhack wrote:
             | 100% not for everyone, and I have to run it along side of
             | traditional monitors (gaming etc). That being said, it's
             | the #1 thing I value out of my setup just by personal
             | preference.
             | 
             | When I'm traveling + using a traditional setup I really
             | miss it.
        
         | saaaaaam wrote:
         | The Huawei Mateview is exceptional. I was bothered by the price
         | but eventually got one on sale. It's so good I'm buying another
         | at full price. (Unless it comes on sale again!)
        
           | CBarkleyU wrote:
           | It does look really nice, but unfortunately it's 60hz
        
           | nextos wrote:
           | Can you comment a bit more on it? I heard some criticism
           | about bleeding.
           | 
           | It's reasonably easy to buy it in EU, and price is not too
           | far from usual suspects like Dell UltraSharp or cheap
           | Eizo/Nec models.
        
             | saaaaaam wrote:
             | Not sure what you mean by bleeding - can you be more
             | specific?
             | 
             | I find it an absolute joy to use. When I am at my desk I
             | spend a lot of time in front of the screen and compared to
             | the Samsung 4k I was using previously I find far less eye
             | strain, much crisper image, and just generally more
             | pleasant. I feel the investment was very worthwhile.
             | 
             | It's also very beautifully designed which was definitely a
             | consideration for me, as my office has a very cheaper
             | defined aesthetic.
             | 
             | Happy to answer specific questions but understand that I'm
             | not a monitor expert :)
        
               | nextos wrote:
               | Apologies for the ambiguity. I meant backlight bleeding,
               | i.e. some bright spots on the edge of the screen. It's a
               | very common issue.
        
             | nickthesick wrote:
             | I have one as well and definitely can recommend it. The
             | only thing is that if you are running macOS you really need
             | to have SwitchResX for it to not look terrible.
             | 
             | I have it next to my studio display and it honestly does
             | not even compare in terms of clarity. I'm sure it'll run
             | better on windows.
        
               | nextos wrote:
               | I was planning to use this on Linux (X11). Perhaps not a
               | good idea given that I'd need scaling.
        
         | pbreit wrote:
         | I much prefer 2560 x 1440 to the standard issue 1080p and there
         | are lots of inexpensive options.
        
         | akdor1154 wrote:
         | Last time i looked you can still pick up the odd 4:3 1280*1024
         | dell ips on ebay, i have one as a secondary and it works quite
         | well.
        
           | projektfu wrote:
           | Actually 5:4, I loved that format and wish it came in
           | 2000x1600 or so.
        
           | user_7832 wrote:
           | I do actually have a Dell 4:3 monitor with me but
           | unfortunately the resolution as well as the physical
           | dimensions are nothing to write home about. I can make do
           | with "smaller" (<~24") monitors fine as long as the
           | resolution is good enough, but as you mentioned most old
           | monitors aren't even 1080p. (Additionally with my
           | shortsightedness I can/end up pixel-peep on 400ppi+ displays)
           | 
           | I guess a decent solution in my case would be to actually get
           | a proper job (I'm still studying) and save up for a decent
           | display, until which I'll just do some _window shopping_ heh
           | ;)
        
           | spicybright wrote:
           | I've been using one for daily for 5 years now. $5 at a thrift
           | store!
        
           | anotherhue wrote:
           | There are some NECs that go better, 1600x1200
           | 
           | https://th.nec.com/en_TH/product/display/multisync/lcd2090ux.
           | ..
           | 
           | Manufactured as late as 2010, especially the MedView series.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | tjoff wrote:
           | That is 5:4. The 4:3 1600x1200 IPS one are quite decent but
           | they are getting bulky by todays standards. Also require a
           | lot more power and they are starting to die. (I think last
           | model is from 2005).
           | 
           | So I'd be prepared to do some repairs / get spares if you
           | can+want.
        
           | zh3 wrote:
           | Dell 2007's (1600x1200) are in high demand. Only a few weeks
           | back I set a watch on an ebay site selling over 100 of them,
           | I see there's only 2 left new.
        
         | coryrc wrote:
         | Find an old Trinitron :)
        
           | adamredwoods wrote:
           | I had a flat 17" Trinitron. So heavy! I still brought it to
           | LAN parties.
        
       | clvx wrote:
       | Make it vertically curve and I'm absolutely in.
        
         | lvass wrote:
         | Bad idea, curved monitors are VA while this really needs IPS'
         | viewing angle.
        
           | 4ad wrote:
           | Not just that, but curved monitors are useless for any design
           | work, like CAD, or even good old graphical design, and I
           | suspect this monitor will be popular with those people.
        
       | llaolleh wrote:
       | Unrelated but I've cycled through monitors and found LG monitors
       | to be the best. They have a reading mode which takes care of most
       | eye strain.
       | 
       | That reading most had stopped 95% of my eye strain attacks.
        
         | mdp2021 wrote:
         | > _They have a reading mode_
         | 
         | How does it work?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | moltar wrote:
         | Any specific models you'd recommend?
        
       | Pakdef wrote:
       | I like my 30" that I use as 1, 2, 3 or 4 monitors by tiling
       | windows... they automatically snap to corner or side by dragging
       | them.
        
       | alin23 wrote:
       | Looks like some users of Lunar (https://lunar.fyi) are already
       | using this monitor:
       | https://files.alinpanaitiu.com/6a7515174ddd729a3df47063ee760...
       | 
       | Some notable data points:                   - supports DDC
       | brightness control (controlling the real brightness of the
       | monitor using Lunar on Mac, TwinkleTray on Windows or ddcutil on
       | Linux)         - supports DDC volume control         - supports
       | Lunar's XDR Brightness feature (https://lunar.fyi/#xdr) which
       | means that in HDR mode the full brightness of the display can be
       | unlocked and used for SDR content             - although the
       | specs page reports a typical brightness of 300nits so not sure if
       | this has any effect         - it isn't recognized as HiDPI by
       | macOS (this used to cause blurry text, not sure if this is the
       | case here but BetterDisplay is a thing these days so not an
       | issue)
       | 
       | If you want to dig deeper, you can find the same data here:
       | https://db.lunar.fyi
       | 
       | And here's the query I used:                   SELECT
       | name,             ddc,             "canChangeVolume",
       | orientation,             width,             height,
       | "dotsPerInch",             "maxEDR",             "potentialEDR",
       | "refreshRate",             "isHiDPI",             "isRetina",
       | "isSmartDisplay",              ("kCGDisplayID" <= 10) as
       | "appleSilicon", -- M1 assigns IDs from 2 to 10, Intel uses much
       | larger IDs             *         FROM             displays
       | WHERE             name ILIKE '%SDQHD%'             AND
       | "DisplayProductID" != 0 -- Filter out those in a semi-connected
       | state
        
         | kposehn wrote:
         | I used Better Display with it (very useful tool) but it only
         | partially improved the scaling instead of resolving entirely.
         | It still has banding, jagged edges and some lag.
        
       | jeffbee wrote:
       | If this almost-square aspect would drive you crazy, Eizo has been
       | selling actually-square displays for ages. There's some kind of
       | U.S. government contract for air traffic controllers that keeps
       | the square panel industry alive. I think their "wide all around"
       | marketing is clever.
       | 
       | https://www.eizo.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/
        
       | system2 wrote:
       | A 4k 32" monitor is $300. Why pay $700 for this when we can use a
       | similar one? Is it just the ratio?
        
         | moltar wrote:
         | Any you'd recommend in this price range? I'm looking for
         | something like MacBook "retina" quality. Thank you.
        
       | ComputerGuru wrote:
       | I've been looking for a replacement for my 16:10 HP zr30w with
       | either high-dpi or high-fps (not that this is particularly
       | either) and have been coming up high-and-dry. This looks like an
       | alternative worth exploring instead of the garbage 16:9 flooding
       | the market with unusable high-dpi real estate.
       | 
       | But it doesn't have VESA? I'm _all_ for the "save desk space"
       | mantra that's plastered all over their marketing materials, but
       | my solution was a wall /stud-mounted gas spring fully-articulated
       | VESA mount that I've used across several monitors. I definitely
       | don't want a desk-clamped alternative that will flatter and shake
       | as I type vigorously on my mechanical keyboard (on anything that
       | isn't a solid, handcrafted wood desk that takes four people to
       | move).
        
         | locofocos wrote:
         | I'm using the included monitor stand. The monitor definitely
         | can move relative to my desk if I shake my desk, but it's
         | noticeably sturdier than a cheap (but highly rated) monitor arm
         | from Amazon. I'm personally pleased using the monitor stand.
        
         | ravis11 wrote:
         | I'm pretty sure it has a Vesa mount. Their specs say wall-
         | mountable 100x100 and other sites say its a Vesa 100x100 mount.
        
           | kposehn wrote:
           | I can confirm it works with VESA mounts without issue. I'm
           | using an Ergotron arm mounted to the wall and it went on no
           | problem.
        
             | ComputerGuru wrote:
             | Thanks for confirming! The pictures made it seem like it
             | wasn't VESA compatible.
        
       | zone411 wrote:
       | I got them recently as the side monitors for a 16:9 43'' 4k in
       | the middle. The height matches almost perfectly. I love this
       | layout so far, so much desktop space and such high resolution!
       | And it's nice to have a big 16:9 screen in the middle for videos.
       | Finally a worthy replacement for my three 10-year-old 30'' 16:10
       | Dells.
       | 
       | For people who work in Windows: you will want to use
       | https://github.com/mgth/LittleBigMouse and you'll need to modify
       | the registry to work around this issue
       | https://github.com/mgth/LittleBigMouse/issues/80 if you don't
       | want your mouse cursor to jump vertically during screen
       | transitions.
        
       | xdfgh1112 wrote:
       | How does this compare to two regular monitors stacked on a
       | monitor stand?
        
         | dixie_land wrote:
         | no bezel comes to mind. also easier to mount than try to align
         | two perfectly
        
         | Gualdrapo wrote:
         | Only one image (unless you use the split feature) with no gaps
         | in between, and only power input.
        
         | alanbernstein wrote:
         | Also easier to reposition as a single unit.
        
         | mbreese wrote:
         | This is basically two 1440p panels attached together... so not
         | too different if you have really thin bezels.
         | 
         | But what I'm curious about is if this acts as one monitor or
         | two? None of the images show windows that overlap the middle of
         | the screen. So is it one or two "virtual" screens?
         | 
         | If it is one virtual screen, I might think of it as more useful
         | to me in the 18:16 orientation.
        
           | da768 wrote:
           | The slideshow just below shows it used as a single monitor.
        
           | tpmx wrote:
           | There is zero bezel since it's one panel.
           | 
           | https://www.lg.com/us/images/features/mnt-dualup-
           | ergo-28mq78...
        
             | causality0 wrote:
             | That image is not evidence it is one panel, especially
             | since the image on the screen is photoshopped and not a
             | picture of the live monitor.
        
               | JimRoepcke wrote:
               | It's one panel. I have this monitor.
        
           | parineum wrote:
           | If it's not actually two monitors, power toys' fancyzones[1]
           | can duplicate that behavior in Windows.
           | 
           | https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
           | us/windows/powertoys/fancyzone...
        
             | iLoveOncall wrote:
             | It is two monitors, you can plug 2 devices at the same
             | time.
        
               | aviditas wrote:
               | It is one panel and has an internal kvm so you can use
               | two devices at the same time.
        
           | cehrlich wrote:
           | You can run it as two 16:9 monitors or one 16:18 monitor
        
         | maximus-decimus wrote:
         | More flexibility when splitting stuff? With 2 screens, I often
         | found I wanted a main thing in the middle and a small window on
         | each side, but that's really ackward if you have a bezzle. Then
         | again, that makes more sense for an ultra-wide than an ultra-
         | high monitor in my opinion.
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | From someone that does a 3x2 setup I'll add one downside: on my
         | split setup I run the bottom row 90 degrees from the desk while
         | the upper ones are angled down and slightly so that both are
         | viewed straight on when glanced at. Not having a physical split
         | like this makes it so the top and bottom will always seem
         | angled.
         | 
         | I suppose if it were curved it'd solve that problem but then it
         | would come with assumptions about how far away you sit and
         | create new problems like glare streaks.
        
       | oumua_don17 wrote:
       | There is also this new ergo dual 27 display from LG. [1]
       | 
       | [1] https://www.lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-27qp88d-b#
        
         | brentadamson wrote:
         | Can you daisy chain another set of these so that I have 4
         | monitors total or can you just daisy chain one set?
        
           | nopcode wrote:
           | Not on apple and probably only 30Hz with windows.
           | 
           | 4 x 1440p@60Hz is +- 26.6 Gbps which is really pushing it for
           | displayport 1.3
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | So this is two 16:9 stacked on top of each other. Each with
       | 2560x1440 resolution and each ... how many inches?
        
       | chrisseaton wrote:
       | Wow these are the worst possible product photos - does it have a
       | bezel in the middle or not?
        
         | iLoveOncall wrote:
         | I think it's pretty evident from this photo that it does not:
         | https://www.lg.com/us/images/features/mnt-dualup-ergo-28mq78...
         | 
         | It should also be obvious given that it is not 2 monitors but a
         | single 16:18 monitor...
        
           | mattkrause wrote:
           | The "ergo stand" photo actually had me fooled for a while--
           | the "ghosts" just show you different ways the one giant
           | monitor could be positioned.
           | 
           | A 2x(16:9) configuration where the monitors could be brought
           | _really_ close together would be neat though...
        
           | locofocos wrote:
           | I have one- I can confirm, no bezel. It's just a single
           | contiguous panel as far as I can tell. I does have software
           | support for feeding 2 inputs into the top/bottom, but by
           | default it just hooked up as a single monitor. Looks great!
        
           | chrisseaton wrote:
           | Every other example use they've picked seems designed to make
           | it look like it has a bezel with no content crossing the
           | middle of the screen - this single counter-example is buried.
        
           | NelsonMinar wrote:
           | Even that image is a little confusing; the strong red/blue
           | line in the middle made me wonder if there was a seam between
           | two panels. The red sugar packet on the left is the only
           | thing that unambiguously indicates it's a single continuous
           | panel.
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | I don't much care for the aspect ratio. But I have been dying for
       | a decent sized 1080p USB-C monitor like this that has no power
       | brick. Is there anything similar?
        
         | anhncommenter25 wrote:
         | I went on this quest recently. I wanted a small display to tuck
         | _under_ my main widescreen monitor, so that I could have chat
         | apps & video streaming in my periphery.
         | 
         | The category I ended up targeting is portable monitors aimed at
         | the business laptop market. These are slim, have a kickstand
         | for support, and can receive data & power over a single usb-c.
         | Not sure about product marketing restrictions on HN so I won't
         | say the brand. But it's a 14" portable monitor from a long-
         | running business laptop brand.
         | 
         | If you want this for a non-laptop scenario, my advice would be
         | to pay very close attention to the types & versions of
         | connectors on the devices you're trying to connect. My gaming
         | desktop didn't have the exact right usb-c port. That sent me
         | into the world of 'weird' cables and lots of debugging to
         | finally get it set up the way I want.
        
           | jonah wrote:
           | You can absolutely mention brands and even link to product
           | pages.
           | 
           | If you're going to use an affiliate link, it is common
           | courtesy to disclose that.
           | 
           | I'm interested in having a USB-C powered screen as a second
           | monitor for my MacBook Pro, but would want it to more closely
           | match the same resolution. 1080 just won't cut it.
        
             | philsnow wrote:
             | Have either of you considered some kind of ipad + sidecar
             | for that? I'm not familiar with the ipad product line but I
             | think there are large-ish ones with high DPI.
        
               | jonah wrote:
               | Ideally I'd like to spend less than the $1,000 for a 12.9
               | screen an iPad pro would cost.
        
       | maximus-decimus wrote:
       | It makes me laugh how this is literally the opposite of my
       | 5120x1440 neo g9.
       | 
       | Larger avoid having to stretch your neck as much, but I have to
       | admit this 16:18 would save a lot of desk space.
        
         | JackGreyhat wrote:
         | Do you like your monitor? I've been wanting to buy it, but I've
         | been reading mixed things about text clarity or sharpness.
         | What's your experience?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-09 23:01 UTC)