Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

4K is for programmers

tiamat.tsotech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 342 posts

Re: 4K is for programmers

#151

Post by scotty79 »

r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

> At what point does the law of diminishing returns kick in?

You won't know until you try. I hesitated a lot about switching my CRT from 14" to 17". After half an hour of work going back felt like staring at ATM bulb shaped display.

I'd like to try very large monitors but it's pointless without higher resolution so I'll wait until I can buy 4K as a toy.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#152

Post by muro »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #70
muro wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK all 28'' 4k screens are TN, that's why they are so cheap. If you want IPS, it's $1300 for 24 (dell), or $3500 (dell, asus).

And the 32" inch $3500 ones are IPS on IGZO instead of traditional amorphous silicon.

Yes, sorry - I had a typo in previous comment, I meant $3500 for the 32'' from Dell and Asus.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#153

Post by marvin »

r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

I'm using a 30-inch monitor to program regularly, and it isn't nearly enough once you learn to use it properly. Have you really tried this out?

Re: 4K is for programmers

#154

Post by jheriko »

how is this better than multiple monitors? the support in Windows (and at least Ubuntu Linux) for e.g. maximising a window to fill a single monitor is excellent.

The other thing, with any article like this where Windows is not used for testing makes me skeptical. Most programmers do not work in offices developing on Macs or Linux machines by a very large margin. Working on a mac for iOS and OS X development is something we grudgingly do because Apple enforce it... in fact you could say that all programmers use Windows and be very close to being accurate.

I've never used multiple monitors on a mac to comment though - I can imagine the support being just as good as in Windows or Linux.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#155

Post by gaius »

scotty79 wrote: post #151
r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

> At what point does the law of diminishing returns kick in? You won't know until you try. I hesitated a lot about switching my CRT from 14" to 17". After half an hour of work going back felt like staring at ATM bulb shaped display. I'd like to try very large monitors but it's pointless without higher resolution so I'll wait until I can buy 4K as a toy.

Indeed. I remember in the 90s even going from 14" to 15" was noticeably better (running MacOS 7). 17" was better yet and the 19" on the Unix workstations - wow.

Now my Apple Cinema Display feels cramped and I'll probably add another...

Re: 4K is for programmers

#157

Post by Nursie »

User8712 wrote: post #121
kayoone wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id say in terms of productivity it adds almost nothing because the biggest things holding a programmers productivity back have nothing todo with display size. Better get rid of interruptions, procrastination, bad tools etc. That being said programmer happiness is elemental and a 42inch 4K screen would add to that for me :)

I feel like I'm less productive on multiple monitors. I've tried them a number of times, but they've never felt natural. I just prefer looking straight ahead, managing a single screen, and clicking between the few programs I'm running in the taskbar. Also, I like some room on my desk, and big monitor displays just seem overwhelming. Screen resolution is important though, otherwise everything just feels cramped. I'm p…

>> I feel like I'm less productive on multiple monitors. I've tried them a number of times, but they've never felt natural. I just prefer looking straight ahead, managing a single screen, and clicking between the few programs I'm running in the taskbar. Also, I like some room on my desk, and big monitor displays just seem overwhelming.

You might (maybe, just saying what I like) want to try one 'main' monitor and one subsidiary. Can be the same size or smaller. Main monitor is for the work you're focussed on, the other monitor is where you have documentation or other reference material you need while working. I quite like this pattern rather than just throwing programs all over the two screens.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#158

Post by dagw »

sentenza wrote: post #98
r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

I don't really understand how a TV can be needlessly large. Also, I don't understand why people still buy TVs in 2014. When I replaced my TV about 4-5 years ago, I bought a 500€ beamer and a 100€ retractable canvas. Sure, that beamer only has 1024x768, but today you'll certainly be able to buy something significantly better in a similar price range. With my living room PC connected to the beamer, my "screen" is 1.7 m…

A couple of friend of mine have have gone with that solution and to be perfectly honest the bad image quality really annoys me on the cheap setups. The one setup that I've seen and liked cost in excesses of 2500€. I'd much rather have a 40" TV with the best image quality possible than a crappy 80" image from a cheap projector.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#159

Post by dagw »

marvin wrote: post #153
r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

I'm using a 30-inch monitor to program regularly, and it isn't nearly enough once you learn to use it properly. Have you really tried this out?

I've tried a 30-inch monitor for a couple of days and to be honest I much prefer 2x24" monitors.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#160

Post by yitchelle »

sentenza wrote: post #98
r0h1n wrote: post #82

The article lists the "ideal size" for monitors at 50 inches, and the one for TVs at 100+ inches! While I'm sure it's great to have such massive screen real estate (I wanna get a 4K in 2014 too), I can't but help think this is the programmer equivalent of consumers buying needlessly large TVs. I work on a 24" desktop monitor and a 14" laptop one. How is 50" the "ideal size"? Even 39"? At what point does the law of di…

I don't really understand how a TV can be needlessly large. Also, I don't understand why people still buy TVs in 2014. When I replaced my TV about 4-5 years ago, I bought a 500€ beamer and a 100€ retractable canvas. Sure, that beamer only has 1024x768, but today you'll certainly be able to buy something significantly better in a similar price range. With my living room PC connected to the beamer, my "screen" is 1.7 m…

Try watching a projected picture on a canvas in brightly lit room. It can be difficult to view it if the room is not dimly lit.

TV is still king in these situations.

Post reply on HN