181–190 of 212 posts
Wonder how well various OSes will handle resolution jumps. The embarassing failure to scale GUI objects was acceptable in the technically-limited '90s, but in 2013 it seems ridiculous to have everything pixel-sized.
All the big ones (Mac, ios, win8, winphone, Ubuntu, android) support pixel doubling. And they're all a long way from dynamic scaling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not a fan of alt-tabbing either. I use 4 20" displays currently because I like the convenience of maximizing something on one display. Don't you miss that with one big desktop? There's no fundamental reason you would have to -- if you have a window manager that extends the "drag to the side to half-maximize" behavior that Windows 7 has to, say, include dragging to the corner to "quarter-maximize" (ideally, with…
Tangentially related, for anyone looking for this functionality on the Mac, do yourself a favour and get Cinch. http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
50" for my desktop. What? Most people I know can't even handle the current 30" monitors. It feels nicer having two 27" monitors from a not-grossly-exceeding-peripheral-vision viewpoint.
Like jfb says, different strokes. I use multiple 30" monitors on my two workstations and I would prefer a single 50" display. My wife's Seiki has more raw pixels than two of my 30" monitors. I admit that an ideal 50" display would be OLED and concave, but I'll keep those off my wish-list for the time being. I don't want the manufacturers to think I'm being unreasonable. High-DPI and large form-factor seem reasonable…
Yes. There are a few issues at play:
1. I want more screen space so I want a bigger monitor
2. My desk has a finite depth. For better posture the monitor should be far enough away that I don't need to move my head to see from a corner to any other corner
Multi-monitor set ups are probably worse, my physio sees a number of ppl who use them. But any big screen will have the same effect, encouraging neck and spinal issues.
I'm curious - if you need to put a big monitor further away and increase the font size to keep it legible, don't you lose most of the benefits of "bigger screen area" and gain only crisp rendering and clarity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very well. I'm only describing the people I know first-hand whom have said they are perfectly happy with small monitors. They are the same people who previously told me that TN LCDs were perfectly fine, and were content with convex CRTs before that. They didn't understand why I would complain about the low density iPad 2 LCD and didn't appreciate the appeal of high-DPI until they had a iPad 3 (or similar) in their ha…
I'm not a fan of alt-tabbing either. I use 4 20" displays currently because I like the convenience of maximizing something on one display. Don't you miss that with one big desktop?
Seems to me that if you have several open apps then to type into one of them you have to either move your hand to the mouse and click it or you have to alt-tab. Even if you have "focus follows mouse" then you still have to move the mouse over to the window before you can type…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangentially related, for anyone looking for this functionality on the Mac, do yourself a favour and get Cinch. http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/
Divvy is also widely used. http://mizage.com/divvy/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
50" for my desktop. What? Most people I know can't even handle the current 30" monitors. It feels nicer having two 27" monitors from a not-grossly-exceeding-peripheral-vision viewpoint.
Like jfb says, different strokes. I use multiple 30" monitors on my two workstations and I would prefer a single 50" display. My wife's Seiki has more raw pixels than two of my 30" monitors. I admit that an ideal 50" display would be OLED and concave, but I'll keep those off my wish-list for the time being. I don't want the manufacturers to think I'm being unreasonable. High-DPI and large form-factor seem reasonable…
The last computer monitor I bought was the original 24" Apple Cinema Display. I haven't used it for day to day computing in 7 years or so. The reason for that is because I bought a laptop. For the first year or so I plugged the laptop into the display but as I bought newer and newer laptops the difference in resolution got smaller. My current laptop's high DPI screen has almost quadruple the number of pixels as that display.
So, there are 2 reasons that I've not bought a large display.
1) I don't want to need it. If I get hooked on a large display, then I've killed the fundamental utility of the laptop—to be productive anywhere. If I suddenly need a 30" screen to feel as productive as "normal" then my laptop is useless to me. A tethered laptop is not portable any more. I really enjoy the freedom to work on my couch, in an office, coffee shop, or on a whim, out in the backyard on a nice day, without ever feeling like I'm compromised.
2) The current batch of 30" displays are not high DPI. Compared to my latop screen they look pixelated and downright primitive. That seems to be changing with these announced screens and I'm happy about that.
Also, there's technically a #3, which is that anything larger than my 24" monitor will not fit on the desk that I have (it has a self that isn't adjustable or removable). But that's kind of a weak reason and I could probably fix it if I really cared.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not a fan of alt-tabbing either. I use 4 20" displays currently because I like the convenience of maximizing something on one display. Don't you miss that with one big desktop? There's no fundamental reason you would have to -- if you have a window manager that extends the "drag to the side to half-maximize" behavior that Windows 7 has to, say, include dragging to the corner to "quarter-maximize" (ideally, with…
Tangentially related, for anyone looking for this functionality on the Mac, do yourself a favour and get Cinch. http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/
I primarily use it to map three finger click to middle mouse button, but when I discovered it also had the window-sizing-by-dragging-to-the-edge feature I turned it on and have been very happy with it..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not a fan of alt-tabbing either. I use 4 20" displays currently because I like the convenience of maximizing something on one display. Don't you miss that with one big desktop?
Forgive me for not understanding, but how does having multiple large monitors help avoid alt-tabbing? Seems to me that if you have several open apps then to type into one of them you have to either move your hand to the mouse and click it or you have to alt-tab. Even if you have "focus follows mouse" then you still have to move the mouse over to the window before you can type…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are some noises about higher framerate movie production; The Hobbit was the first, and it was not well received. Motion at 30fps and higher looks very different than motion at 24fps, and part of the resistance to HFR is simply unfamiliarity; however, a lot of shots in The Hobbit were not improved by the 48fps presentation; I think that we won't get good results until film projection is dead, and directors and D…
> a lot of shots in The Hobbit were not improved by the 48fps presentation But a few were. Outdoor pans, landscapes, busy scenes. There's a market shot in the beginning with about 8 mini-scenes in the frame, and you can look at any part of the film and see it far more clearly / less blurring than if it were filmed with any lesser tech. The shots that didn't work: indoor shots where you could see caked on makeup... it…
Awesome. I say this is a sign that the incumbent manufacturers are finally adapting to the heat brought on by Korean and Chinese newcomers. "Industry's most affordable Ultra HD monitor" is semantics. The Seiki 39" is still substantially cheaper, now at less than $500 on Amazon. Technically, that is a television, so I suppose "monitor" is a clever use of words by Dell. If Seiki drops an HDMI 2 version of their monitor…