Live data from Hacker News

4K is for programmers

tiamat.tsotech.com

201–210 of 342 posts

Re: 4K is for programmers

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, it has more to do with your working memory than with speed or ease of navigation. If you are viewing more code at once (which a larger screen allows you to do) then you can be more productive at certain tasks. I find that large architectural changes, performance profiling, and complex debugging are particular scenarios that lend themselves well to a large screen. This is the point I was making to which you…

To your repeated point: It's been my experience that better knowing what the code is doing leads to improving it. I am not a smart or clever person. I can only see one focal point at a time. But with enough time (and a trivial screen resolution) I feel that I can understand and improve on something as complex as the operating system running my computer, which is some very big software with parts of it (big and small)…

> To your repeated point: It's been my experience that better knowing what the code is doing leads to improving it. I am not a smart or clever person.

Here is the example I am dealing with right now. I have spent the last few months designing and implementing a complex system. It consists of hundreds of components and tens of thousands of lines of code. This project is reasonably small and I can keep most of the mental model "in my head" at once. So it's appropriate to edit on my laptop screen — or any screen. I can usually think of which symbol I need to jump to and within seconds I can be positioned in the editor, at that symbol.

Today I have had to take that component and push it into the rest of the system, which is hundreds of thousands of lines of code and it is a codebase that I have created over three years. I can't keep this all in my head, and this is where having a large screen produces noticeable productivity improvements and speed improvements to problem solving.

It is not a matter of not being able to jump around the code instantly from my keyboard — I can do that easily. It is knowing and remembering where to go and what I'm supposed to be working on. It is trying to maintain context while handling the many hundreds of errors that come about due to the necessary integration, API and architectural changes.

When I have a large screen I can afford to maintain a long list of files in a column on the left, I can see more large files at once. This allows me to constantly refresh my memory. I can glance at the data in front of me to determine what symbol I need to jump to next. I often mentally blank out when dealing with this level of scale — that "what was I about to edit?" feeling. When I am only on my laptop screen I have to start pulling up code, tracing a path back through it to redevelop context. When I have a large screen I can (usually) rebuild this context by glancing at the existing information.

(Note that this is not a messy project, I have spent a long time and given very careful thought to its design. It is just large and necessarily complex because of what it has to do. A bigger screen makes it faster to develop large scale interactions in such a project.)

> Was that necessary?

I'm sorry about that. It wasn't.

> What's even better about the command line is that you can pipe input and output between applications.

I have nothing against the command line — I use it all the time. I just like to take the most efficient path when working and sometimes that is not the command line. But that is tangential to the large screen point above.

> I do. I lack the sensory to monitor more than a couple metrics at once. I prefer profiling data that can be captured and analyzed later.

I had meant to ask if you analyse your profiling data on the command line. Do you?

Re: 4K is for programmers

#202

> Today, you can still buy a 30-inch 2560x1600 display for over $1,000. Or you can get a 39-inch 3840x2160 display for $500. This choice is not even fair. Yes, you can buy a wonderful, physically adjustable, mountable, color calibrated, blissful contrast, delightful brightness control monitor with a great matte finish like the Dell 3014... or you can buy an absolutely awful 30hz, locked in place, blue tinted, horribl…

At work I have dual 30" Dell monitors, which I use with a tiling window manager (I use awesome [1]). To see the far right/left sides I almost have to roll the chair left or right so I tend to keep editor windows and browser windows where I'm actually reading text in my central field of vision, and keep other windows on the outer margins. Also they do consume nearly all my desk space, so sometimes I think a single lar…

I switched my dual monitor orientation to a primary 27" (iMac) running 2560x1440, with my secondary 24" running 1200x1920 in portrait orientation. It is, at first, disorientating to have the two monitors eschew but once you get used to it, the reduction in straight from looking far left or right out weighs the strange look. The added benefit is that you get 1920 pixels of vertical resolution for those times that you want to display long blocks of text without scrolling. Admittedly, I use that far less than I use it tiled with windows arranged over-under.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#203
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read officially no, but Apple frequently gives "official" specs that claim a feature isn't supported when really it is. For example, every macbook pro in the last 5 or 6 years that had replaceable RAM had an actual RAM limit that was double what Apple said was its RAM limit. I wouldn't be surprised if 4K works, albeit perhaps a little sluggishly.

Why would Apple do this? What possible reason could they have for selling their own product short?

Apple simply does not cater to the crowd that does aftermarket upgrades to their computers. The limits they list on the box are usually the top configurations they will sell you. They do not bother testing and certifying every combination of third party component that might happen to fit into the machine and work.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#204

> Today, you can still buy a 30-inch 2560x1600 display for over $1,000. Or you can get a 39-inch 3840x2160 display for $500. This choice is not even fair. Yes, you can buy a wonderful, physically adjustable, mountable, color calibrated, blissful contrast, delightful brightness control monitor with a great matte finish like the Dell 3014... or you can buy an absolutely awful 30hz, locked in place, blue tinted, horribl…

Thank you for the reality-check. I really do appreciate it and hope anyone reading my words reads yours as counterpoint.

I had tried to be fair-handed with my judgment of the Seiki but I admit that my desire for large form-factor displays coupled with Seiki delivering one that I can actually afford clouds my judgment some. I want high-quality large displays and the incumbent manufacturers have left me in the cold for a decade.

Not that it matters, but one area where I spoil myself is in monitors. I spend what I can afford (and then some, admittedly) on monitors in lieu of other luxuries. I own five 30" monitors, three of which are Dell U3011s. I love those monitors. As you point out, they ship from the factory with great color, a matte screen, and of course inputs that don't disappoint.

But on the flip-side, the 30" "professional" LCD monitor as exemplified by the Dell U3011 and U3014 has not decreased in price substantially since I picked up my first Dell 3007WFP, what was it, eight years ago?

Maybe it's telling that I have not yet replaced one of my home Dell monitors with a Seiki. But when my wife's Dell 30" died, we decided to give the Seiki a try. As I've said, the Seiki has several downsides. The 30Hz lag is foremost. It's noticeable and frustrating. But the screen size and delight of having so many pixels in a single display is so compelling. Also, after applying the Seiki firmware update, the backlight can be adjusted, allowing for better calibration.

It's not a perfect monitor. It's not even a great monitor. It's a good monitor and it does the thing I value most: give me pixels with which to see and interact with information quickly. As a programmer on a budget, it's my favorite monitor currently available. I really hope that competition heats up and better monitors are on the horizon. I will bite at opportunities to get large, high-DPI, high-quality, high-speed displays.

But for now, I personally would not buy the Dell 30" unless they severely cut the price. I'm keeping my eye on that because I am hopeful the new competition could start moving the higher-end prices downward, and that will make me happy.

(Incidentally, the U3014 is presently $1,600 at Newegg [1]. I could barely stomach the ~$1,000 price of 30-inch monitors eight years ago. In 2014, I can't bring myself to spend $1,600 for 2560x1600.)

[1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA25V0U169...

Re: 4K is for programmers

#205

> Today, you can still buy a 30-inch 2560x1600 display for over $1,000. Or you can get a 39-inch 3840x2160 display for $500. This choice is not even fair. Yes, you can buy a wonderful, physically adjustable, mountable, color calibrated, blissful contrast, delightful brightness control monitor with a great matte finish like the Dell 3014... or you can buy an absolutely awful 30hz, locked in place, blue tinted, horribl…

I had a 3014 at work and I stopped using it because it was terrible with Mac OS X. It had this thing where it would blue tint a box around any sustained motion on the screen, like a video being played. It also came out of the box blue tinted and with the sharpness cranked up. So while the Seido might not be great, the 3014 is no panacea either.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#206
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read officially no, but Apple frequently gives "official" specs that claim a feature isn't supported when really it is. For example, every macbook pro in the last 5 or 6 years that had replaceable RAM had an actual RAM limit that was double what Apple said was its RAM limit. I wouldn't be surprised if 4K works, albeit perhaps a little sluggishly.

Why would Apple do this? What possible reason could they have for selling their own product short?

Removing the amount of choices in front of people allows people to feel more confident about theirs.

If you give them the option for 4Gb, 8Gb, 16Gb and 32Gb instead of limiting to 16Gb lots of people will freeze and never make a choice or get frustrated when they see the markup for 32Gb and avoid buying altogether because of that.

In limiting the amount of upgradable RAM on their sales page they show you choices that are most likely going to be easy to sell.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#207
post #169

> Today, you can still buy a 30-inch 2560x1600 display for over $1,000. Or you can get a 39-inch 3840x2160 display for $500. This choice is not even fair. Yes, you can buy a wonderful, physically adjustable, mountable, color calibrated, blissful contrast, delightful brightness control monitor with a great matte finish like the Dell 3014... or you can buy an absolutely awful 30hz, locked in place, blue tinted, horribl…

Thanks for pointing this out -- the article seemed to completely overlooked the panel quality and configurability. I'm personally really looking forward to a proper UHD/4K over 30" that does 144hz with GSync, which I can use as my main desktop monitor. It'll finally be a reason to upgrade from my old Dell Ultrasharp. The Asus PQ321Q is almost there, it's just limited to 60hz.

You will be waiting a very long time. UHD@144Hz requires 40Gbit/sec of bandwidth. DisplayPort 1.3 (which is not generally available yet), only supplies 25Gbit. HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort 1.2 are 14 & 17, respectively.

http://emsai.net/projects/widescreen/bandwidth/

Re: 4K is for programmers

#208
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take my unicorn in black, too. I'm not a monitor manufacturer, just an opinionated blogger. But are you telling me that a matte surface would cost more to manufacture than a glossy surface? DPMI support costs a lot? Of my wishlist items, DisplayPort seems the toughest to this layperson, but even that doesn't seem unreasonable. In my earlier blog entry about the same monitor, I said I'd also be willing to pay a t…

> ...But are you telling me that a matte surface would cost more to manufacture than a glossy surface? Ex TV Product Planner here - yes matte costs more than glossy. If nothing else there is the volume but I think the production techniques for glossy are intrinsically cheaper too.

Thanks for posting this. It's good to finally have a rationale for why glossy has dominated matte in recent years beyond the one I've heard over and over ("glossy looks better at first glance in a Best Buy"). If it's truly a matter of price, I suppose it's fair that only professional monitors use matte screens.

I for one be willing to pay a modest premium for matte.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#209

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 someth…

Maybe you didn't read the whole thing? I use Windows on my workstation at the office and included two photos of that. It works just fine on Windows.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#210
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dell will beat them to it - the new Dell UltraHD, while only 28", is a proper desktop 4K monitor with what will (most likely) be far better color accuracy and usability, for $699. Seiki just dropped their price to $500 which is attractive, but I think the Dell's build quality and internals will be worth the $200 premium.

The dell 28 inch 4k monitor is also only 30hz though. The 60Hz ones are still more in the 1200-3000 range

The Asus 28" 4K is 60Hz @699, and the Lenovo 28" 4K is 60Hz @799. They won't be available until April, though.
Post reply on HN