111–120 of 341 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you could daisy-chain DisplayPort MST monitors, so that only first one would be connected to your laptop.
Does anybody know how to test if a monitor is compatible with that? And is it plug and play?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would love to see a photo of this setup.
I just scrolled through half a dozen ATC tower tour videos on YouTube and didn't see any skewed displays, but it's possible that they 1) they tidied it up for the tour, or 2) they just didn't apply this approach in those particular sites. I'm still very interested to see this novel application.
I've had 3 monitor setups for decades. Then I got an ultra wide Samsung CRG9 at 49" and 5120x1440... Which was terrible. Too wide and not tall enough. Now I have the LG 40WP95C-W at 40" and 5120x2160 and it is perfect. Especially with window tiling that does thirds well.
When I'm not working it makes for amazing ultrawide gaming. A video card to push the resolution is actually possible without a new mortgage. I don't understand the whole too wide thing tbh.
Only thing I wish is that it had better HDR with more zones, but it was a pretty early example of this kind of thing I think so can't have everything.
Maybe if I find an LG c2/c3 43" OLED for a good price I'll get that instead, but for now this thing is awesome enough.
> So this here I think is the best monitor orientation for software development. It provides the longest line lengths and no longer need to worry about that pesky 80 column limit. Author optimized for this metrics. If you dont need this, no need to try :D
If the author is serious, and works in a team, they would still need to worry about that "pesky" line length limit, though. I really don't get the argument against short line lengths, and that they're somehow a relic of old display resolutions. I find them genuinely helpful. Having to glance horizontally to read code is suboptimal compared to keeping my eyes fixed on a relatively narrow block. Being able to fit more…
I'm not strict on the 80 column rule. Readability for code is a balance in intent for me first and foremost, but I also do try to keep lengths close to it.
I used to follow 2 source files side-by-side easily on a 16:10 monitor. I'm struggling to do that on my 16:9 now due to how long the lines are on my current codebase with a regular editor.
Comparisons are hourly occurrences for me. Long lines require scrolling or word-wrapping, either of which is just horrific. If I try the same on github, which wastes even more horizontal space, two source files are barely fitting side-by-side even with 80 columns.
I'm kind of surprised authors writing these long lines, which also will review those long lines in the future, and not put off by the inconvenience they're doing to themselves.
Tangentially related thought: Take my advice, don't go ultra-wide. Go with a large 4k. You get more pixels for cheaper. The only ultrawide that makes any sense is the 5k x 2k resolution one. These have more pixels than a single 4K. But they are expensive. Even then, a 16:9 5K monitor has more pixels. I personally use 3 x 27 inch 4K - which is cheaper than a single 5k Ultra-wide and gives you a TON more pixels.
I think 27" 4k with some scaling is a good spot indeed. 32" 4k is nice as well, if you scale down to 2560x1440, or 3008x1692. On 32" 2x scaling (1920x1080 is just too big, and native (3840x2160) is just too small. But if money is no problem, 3x 24" 4k, 2x 27" 5k, or 1x 32" 6k is really the endgame. That 2x scaling is just soooo crisp. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PPI doesn't translate to screen estate, though
And too many PPI won't make text easier to read, unless you magnify the screen, thus actually loosing PPIs. PPIs will display sharper pictures, provided that they have enough quality.
You don't get more real estate, indeed, since that depends on zoom level. However, depending on your setup and habits, you may actually gain some. In my case, I use 4k at 100% zoom. I don't care for window decorations, interface icons and so on, so it's not an issue if they're small.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the contrary, I have a 49" 32:9 monitor, and for a laptop it's wonderful. The support for a single monitor is just way better than any dual (or more) setup. I can just connect it directly to my laptop, and it just works. When I had two displays I needed a docking station, and truth is most of those out there suck. Unless you go for the top models, and then you've lost all the money you saved on cheaper monitors. I…
I think you could daisy-chain DisplayPort MST monitors, so that only first one would be connected to your laptop.
However, Macs have spotty support for this. I believe it works on the newest Mac books, but not older generations, and not the Mac mini?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I worry about all the code I don't know about. Who knows what other software I can't control relies on RGB layout. Maybe irrational, but I don't want to risk it. Especially since you gain nothing in return.
OLED often isn't RGB, and you gain a great deal there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it difficult to actually figure the proper position where the 27” Dell 4K (still very top notch) is just as far so that I can see it and not have to move my head left and right. Anything beyond this size may be OK for games, but too much space and too much windows is actually too much of cognitive load. It is not a surprise that many ppl (not me though) start to prefer full screen terminal rather than dozen wi…
I always thought that moving my head to look at another monitor isn’t really faster than pressing a key to make my fullscreen terminal appear, especially if we start taking cursor hunting into account
However, I also find it easier to recall where I was looking by moving my head between static content instead of having it change.
FWIW I use a 32" screen positioned so that I barely need to move my head to see it all, and try to have all things I'm looking at visible at the same time.
While this article presents it in a humorous way, some air traffic control systems actually do use a diagonally rotated screen, with that "long line" being lined up with the primary approach to the airport. The setup I got to observe involved large displays that worked with stylus input. These weren't ultra-widescreen displays; they were relatively standard aspect-ratio displays, rotated at an angle.