41–50 of 68 posts
If you can find yourself a good deal on a 16:9 27-32" 4k screen, you'll appreciate the extra usable space.
For the longest time, I was using dual 1920x1080 screens. Eventually, I decided to upgrade and got myself a 31.5" 4k display. That lasted about 6 months before I ditched it for a 34" 3440x1440p Ultrawide. I found coding on the 4k screen to be just too difficult, I had to scale the text way up for things to be readable. However, since I use a laptop running Fedora which I connect to through a thunderbolt dock, I found…
I have a 49" with a native Res of 5120x1440 and can't use it with my MacBook Pro on MacOS. Works fine in Windows but can't go past 4096x1440@70hz in MacOS...
At work I have one of the dell curved ultra wide monitors. ( https://amzn.to/36tH96T ). Love it. I used to have multiple monitors, but many years ago I made the decision that it works better for me to completely control windowing concerns in software. (I use the i3 tiling manager for this.) I have seen no reason to change.
I switched from two monitors to a single, curved, ultra-wide 38" doing 3840x1600 pixels (LG 38UC99-W) about two years ago. I would never go back. I took maybe two days to get used to it. At first it was funny: going back to a flat screen and I would see the flat screen curved (!) but this weird effect disappeared after a few days and now I can use either curved of flat screen and everything always look normal: it's a…
This is incredibly important for day to day use. A lot of ultrawides will have a horizontal resolution of 3440. If you want to split that into 2 or 3 columns you will be left with windows sized at 1720 and 1146.67 respectively. Those are weird resolutions. No one is specifically designing programs or websites for a horizontal resolution of 1146.67. However a resolution of 3840 splits nice and cleanly into 1920 and 1280. Those are the standard horizontal resolution for 1080p and 720p. Almost all programs and websites will be designed to work well at those specific horizontal resolutions. Therefore using an ultrawide with a horizontal resolution of 3840 is just going to feel more natural.
I am considering upgrading to a 4k moniter or a less-than-4k resolution ultra wide screen. Can anyone with experience in both tell me which you found to be better?
I tried an ultra wide monitor, but I somehow found the limited height annoying. I am much happier with the screen space distribution since I have switched to a 43 inch 4k monitor. Mostly using it for coding. Nice to have a full IDE on the left and an emulator or web window on the right. When viewing code, height is quite important to get a better overview of a function or class.
I don't have a strong preference. But, if I had to choose, I guess I'd go with the 4K setup. When I have 3 documents side-by-side, seamless on the ultrawide, it is really nice and clean. But, I do feel the lack of height. At work I tend to have dozens of scattered windows across multiple virtual 4K desktops piled up over the course of multiple weeks. Having multiple columns of very tall code panels in one 4K editor window is very nice when I need it.
For the ~ decade before I got this monitor I used to use 2x24" 1080p displays at home, but always ended up craning my neck using them as you either have the bezel down the centre to fit and then you're constantly looking to the side, or have one monitor way off to the side so it's even less useful. I find myself turning my head much less with an ultrawide for whatever reason.
Compared to the similarly sized 4k monitor I use at work, the one at home is essentially just shorter. It makes using 4 tiled windows not as good, but I don't really miss it (though this could be due to the tiling WM I use).
I don't do a ton of gaming anymore—but when I do, it's awesome. Surprisingly immersive.
I dual boot my computer at home with Linux / Windows, and use Linux as my daily driver with i3 [1]. I do find the monitor much more usable in Linux with i3 managing windows and workspaces than the occasions I need to develop on Windows (on Windows, I hate how windows just pop up pretty much where-ever). When working I tend to keep two windows side-by-side, one for my editor and the other for whatever I'm working on (terminal instance, android emulator, website, etc). I then use hotkeys to switch instantly between workspaces so it's quite fluid, but the monitor plays less into that. When I first bought mine I had visions of using 3 windows side-by-side, but I just never do that in practice for some reason. I also run everything at 1x scale, so the added vertical screen real estate (1440 vs 1080) is quite useful.
I use LG monitors almost exclusively, but that's simply because of cost—they're almost always cheaper than other brands and I've never had any problems with them. They may not be as high quality or stacked as full of features as other brands but they've always been good enough for me.
I'm never going back to dual-screens—to me they seem embarrassingly bad in pretty much every way compared to a single ultrawide these days.
[1]: https://i3wm.org/
I switched from two monitors to a single, curved, ultra-wide 38" doing 3840x1600 pixels (LG 38UC99-W) about two years ago. I would never go back. I took maybe two days to get used to it. At first it was funny: going back to a flat screen and I would see the flat screen curved (!) but this weird effect disappeared after a few days and now I can use either curved of flat screen and everything always look normal: it's a…
>a single, curved, ultra-wide 38" doing 3840x1600 pixels... That's 3x 1280 wide columns... This is incredibly important for day to day use. A lot of ultrawides will have a horizontal resolution of 3440. If you want to split that into 2 or 3 columns you will be left with windows sized at 1720 and 1146.67 respectively. Those are weird resolutions. No one is specifically designing programs or websites for a horizontal r…
So far, I really like it - But getting it to work at full resolution with my 2013 Mac Pro has been frustrating - It essentially cannot be done at full resolution with a single cable, unless you boot into Windows (also true for Mac Minis, but apparently newer Macbook Pros can drive it) - Despite what you may read, hacks such as SwitchResX will not help here; it's a limitation of the Mac's video card drivers that Apple seem uninterested in addressing.
The "solution", for me, has to drive it using two identical Mini Displayport->HDMI cables as if it were two screens and then have MacOS treat it as a single space. Using identical ports/cables has meant the color temperature on both halves is identical and i cannot tell it is not being driven as a single display, other than the fact the menu bar is only on one half of the screen.
Aside from that, it would be nice it were higher resolution, but the older I get, the less my eyes notice and the extra width is more useful than the DPI.