Live data from Hacker News

Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

dell.com

191–200 of 212 posts

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#191
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Inadequate" for gaming, yes. Inadequate for computing? Hardly. How about for watching movies? High framerates would obviously seem very important for gaming, but it's not clear how important they are to movies/shows. Your thoughts?

Displaying 24fps content on a 60fps screen repeats frames. If you repeat half the frames of the 25fps stream twice, and alternating half of the frames three times, then you get 60 frames per second, with a stream looking like: AABBBCCDDDEEFFF... This isn't perfect, since really each frame should be on the screen for exactly the same amount of time, which is why 120hz TVs came about -- 120 is evenly divisible by each…

So how does it work with games where the FPS is variable? Shouldn't the mismatch in FPS and HZ create a lot of problems?

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#192

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 use Spectacle because it's free and I hate having to pay for each feature on OS X that windows has by default. I miss Aero Snap so much, but Spectacle does a decent-enough job.

http://spectacleapp.com/

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#193

I'm confused. Under $1000 for the 28"? It goes on to say that the 24" is available for $1399...

Look at the model names again, the Ultrasharp are available today for $$$, but announced the Ultra series to be released early 2014 for $$.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#195
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-... Comment sections like this are why HN is called an echo chamber.

The original comment missed the point of the chart in the article you link: the increased pixel density is useless __at TV viewing distances__. When you go down to about 2 feet from the screen, 4k is pretty apparent on a 30 inch screen. A clearer chart is at [1], and the Carlton Bale's original article even has a handy calculator that lets you verify this [2]. 1: http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html 2: htt…

Thanks for posting this. It wasn't meant to be a snarky comment, but I did leave out some basic assumptions which I thought were obvious. "Usually" the larger the screen the further away most people will sit from there screen. Right now, I'm on a 21" monitor sitting about 3'2" (already out of the 2'6" for added benefit of a 4K screen if you take this chart as gospel) from the screen. If I went up to a 28" monitor, I would most likely move it back at least 6" so that I don't have to move my head and eyes around too much. That would put the screen about 3'8" from me which is within the range of full benefit of 1080p but outside the range of 4K for this size and viewing distance.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-... Comment sections like this are why HN is called an echo chamber.

Comments like yours are why people say HN's comments are degrading in quality. You can't even grasp the difference in viewing distance of a television versus a computer monitor, and the obvious impact that would have on how noticeable a particular pixel density is, yet you wrote a condescending comment. Unbelievable. Incidentally, given that displays seem to be continually trending larger, I expect that we'll eventua…

comment wasn't meant to be snarky, i just didn't think that i would have to give a thesis about why this wasn't newsworthy

but hey if you sit < 2' from a 28" and have no problems with that, then go out and grab you one

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "your", you mean "my", don't you? Also, you seem confused by these TV-related terms and only think of videos and games here; you'd have to be half-way blind not to see the difference between 75 and 150 PPI density with typical font sizes (computer fonts are usually a tad bigger than what's necessary just because of the lousy displays we have).

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-... Comment sections like this are why HN is called an echo chamber.

see my reply to was_hellbanned's comment

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#199

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…

topbanana already provided the key point in his response—visibility of a great deal of context. It's especially useful for programming, allowing for, for example, related code side-by-side. A large desktop also allows some user interface paradigms such as drag-and-drop to work more elegantly. Drag-and-drop on a small monitor is often frustrated by the need to first arrange the source and destination so that both are visible at the same time. Generally speaking, a large amount of desktop space allows you to spend less time fussing with windows to get at what you need and more time just working.

Re: Dell introduces 28" 4K Ultra HD Monitor for under $1K, shipping early 2014

#200
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> When you say you know people who can't handle a 30" monitor, do you mean that? They would refuse to use a 30" even if they were given one? I've only met a few people who are of that particular disposition, and I personally consider them odd. It's a weird self-flagellation or quasi-Luddism. 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 y…

I don't mean to criticize anything about your line of thinking because it sounds like you're doing what makes sense to you and you're happy. So who am I to tell you you're wrong?

However, I do feel that your description hints at the essence of what I was saying earlier: that avoiding a large monitor is somewhat like self-deprivation. You don't want to get spoiled by becoming accustomed to the increased productivity yielded by a large monitor with a large virtual desktop. You're a mobile worker, so that makes a lot of sense. I do most of my work at either my office or at home. So I have two modestly-powerful workstations with lots of monitors at each location (in total, I've spent about twice as much as I would have to buy a high-end laptop).

Because I am not a mobile worker, I have a particularly small laptop (a Surface Pro). I feel crippled when I try to do serious work on my laptop because the screen is so tiny and there's so much context hidden by windows stacked on one another.

In a further-out future, I hope that laptops (or whatever portable device we carry) can one day project a very large, very high-DPI display of their own, giving you and me the best of both worlds.

If I read you correctly, you'd love to have the increased productivity of a larger virtual workspace, but today's technology and your need to be mobile keep you thinking it's best to focus on mobility first. That makes a lot of sense.

I totally agree that the current batch of 30" displays are disappointingly low-resolution. So much agreement on that! Primitive, stale technology, stagnant for 8 years. But I think I've already said enough about that in this thread. :)

Post reply on HN