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

221–230 of 342 posts

Re: 4K is for programmers

#221

Post by haar »

I feel like I must be in the minority here: I enjoy multiple (smaller, 28" max, sub-24" preferable) displays.

I run iTerm2 in full screen with Vim split alongside 2 or 3 console panes; I find the separation from the rest of my OS a blessing. The second screen I use for Chrome, HipChat, Flint, Sparrow etc; I still notice chat notifications, and to keep a eye on my dock (which displays all notification counts across my multiple programs) is a simple key combination if I'm in 'the zone' and don't wish to break out of my programming environment (iTerm2).

I've tried larger screens in the past, and found myself physically looking around the screen a lot more, simply due to having all my content splatted together.

Combine this with a keyboard-based window manager and the 1/2 - 1/4 screen segmenting and I feel much more organised and efficient than trying to manage a 30"+ monster of a screen.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#222

Post by count »

dgbsco wrote: post #215
kylec wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's some hacking that has to go on at the OS level with OSX to have any monitor > 27 inches. The trouble lies in that the operating system wants to natively believe that you're actually using a TV, not a monitor. To get it working you need to fool the OS into thinking that it's a monitor again: http://embdev.net/topic/284710#3027030

Note that's only for DisplayPort. I use DualLink DVI to my large screens, and it works great without any hacks.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#223

Post by stephen_g »

mahranch wrote: post #90
stephen_g wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it can only do 30Hz in UHD mode is probably one of the reasons it's so cheap - going to 60 or 120Hz is a two to four-fold increase in processing. It'll happen - it's just a matter of time (less than 18 months if Moore's law is anything to go by)

I'm sure they could do it now, no Moore's law required. The technology and parts are already available. I think the lack of 60-120Hz has more to do with keeping costs down. Low production costs translate to lower prices for the consumer. By selling these TVs at absolute rock bottom prices, they can sell them by the truck loads and, more importantly, make a name for themselves. These last couple weeks I've seen Seiki'…

>> I think the lack of 60-120Hz has more to do with keeping costs down

That's exactly what I meant - there have been displays for years that can do really high refresh rates at 4K, they have just been quite expensive.

Due to Moore's law, image processing ASICs with that kind of processing power should be as cheap as what's in the Seiki in a year or two.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#225

Post by josephlord »

bhauer wrote: post #208
josephlord wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...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.

It isn't the only reason, contrast ratio is higher too so it is needed to be competitive on specification too. If you can control the lighting so that it doesn't reflect to you it can be better as matte will scatter light in all directions. The intrinsic cost difference would be pretty small without the economies of scale I think. Matte would have to be special order panels and you wouldn't be able to pick them up on the spot market.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#226

Post by leoc »

4K isn't only for programmers though, or even only for programmers and a few other specialised technical or AV jobs. Bring the word of high-resolution monitors (ideally through demonstration) to your friends and relatives who are navigating tax law or writing papers about Beowulf: 4K is for them too. Doing any serious work or study in law, business or the humanities on a single small, low-resolution computer screen is horrible: it's like being forced to read only through a cardboard kitchen-roll tube. And the more people who are demanding reasonably-priced high-res monitor screens, the more likely manufacturers are to take note.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#227

Post by DrPhish »

leoc wrote: post #179
MetaCosm wrote: post #104

> 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…

Sad to say, for many programmers and other people who aren't AV types, the step up in resolution— plus the saving of over $500—is likely worth the dodgy colour and brightness. Many won't even really notice the badness. That said, some of the $600-ish mystery-meat 2560×1600 displays apparently have good display quality and so may be a stronger alternative to the Seiki.

I have 2 of these, and they have been 12 kinds of awesome:

http://www.amazon.com/Nixeus-27-Inch-Resolution-2560x1440-NX...

Adjustable (height and rotation) stand, pack in dual-link DVI cable, all 4 major inputs.

I am definitely an amateur when it comes to display calibration, but I'm pickier than your average bear and these have acceptable picture quality when dialed in

Re: 4K is for programmers

#228

Post by vadman »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #210
zaphoyd wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

All of these are using TN panels. TN's bad viewing angles in a 28" size must be a sight to behold.

Re: 4K is for programmers

#229

Post by jheriko »

bhauer wrote: post #209
jheriko wrote: post #154

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.

my bad. not sure how i missed that. must have reached a natural ending point at the bottom of my screen. :)

Re: 4K is for programmers

#230

Post by MetaCosm »

bhauer wrote: post #204
MetaCosm wrote: post #104

> 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…

First of all, you can get the U3014 for around $1100, less on sale. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00C2RPW8O/ref=dp_olp... ... additionally, it is a "professional" monitor (X-Rite tie in, factory calibrated, etc) and will likely maintain a premium price as corporations are the target customers.

Secondly, the Seiki is not a "good" monitor. It isn't even a "good" TV. The only thing Seiki has is pixel density and cheapness, it is awful in every other measurable way, without a doubt one of the worst panels I have ever purchased. I can't fathom how you can justify calling it "good". Excluding resolution -- can you even name a single thing you like about it, that you think is a cut above?

You can get a number of wonderful 27" inch (2560x1440+) in that same price point. With good inputs, colors, refresh rates, adjustability, brightness, yada, yada. They go as cheap as $350 now, but you can get GREAT ones (really great, not just pixel density) for around $500.

Questions: (1) How many hours do you spend really working on the Seiki... not your wife, not on the phone, not at home on your wonderful Dell monitors, not walking around, not just in the office, how many legitimate hours to you spend USING the Seiki? (2) Why do choose for your developers, why not given them a budget of X to buy whatever they want?

Post reply on HN