60hz refresh rate? That's unfortunate. Love the 3:2 aspect ratio. But I would expect at least 100 - 120hz these days.
Have to be able to see my compiler errors come in at true speed
BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
21–30 of 65 posts
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#2215:10 vs 16:9. I think that's enough difference to notice.
2560 x 1600 resolution is a bit disappointing though.
Too bad 1:1 display isn't common.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#23Looks good but 10 kg/23 lbs? I see a Samsung IPS for <8 kg. 50" 4K Fire TV for 9.3 kg. I guess we don't really move monitors around once we start using them, esp if mounted, so perhaps a non-issue.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#24Looks like they’re using the same panels as the Huawei Mateview. Only these ones are VESA mountable. 3:2 at such high resolution, for me is a great experience. I’ll maybe grab one for my work desk to run vertically as I can’t do the same with the Mateview
Obviously only an issue for Americans, but the Huawei Mateview isn't widely available due to the ban on Huawei products. It could be imported grey-market, but only at slightly inflated prices and without any warranty protection.
The BenQ monitor will be commercially available in the US.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#25is this retina? too bad its not
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#26I've read through this a few times and I'm still not sure what makes this specific for coders or how its different from other 4k monitors. Can someone explain what makes this monitor better for the average coder?
In theory, the following things: The 3:2 ratio suits reading and editing text, because our eyes have trouble following in lines of text that are too long (think about how a paperback page is shaped, or A4 or letter paper). The counter-argument is that 16:9 is actually better because it's functionally two 8:9 panels if you split the screen. The light on the back reduces eye-strain in dark environments by lighting a wa…
3:4 is a better ratio for reading and editing text. That's what Xerox chose for their Alto workstations.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#27is this retina? too bad its not
It's like a tenth the price of an Apple monitor.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
...Why is that better for programming than other ratios?
For every unit of height, there is 1.5 units of width. A traditional monitor is 16:9: that means for every unit of height, there is 1.77 units of height. It sounds like a small difference, but it means a ~15% increase in height. ex. my Visual Studio Code would show 70 lines of code instead of 60. This is an especially good tradeoff for code, because we tradtional line wrap at ~80 characters, which leaves large swaths…
Maybe I’m old, but traditionally monitors where 4:3 until mid to late 2000s when they shifted to 16:10 then 16:9.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#2960hz refresh rate? That's unfortunate. Love the 3:2 aspect ratio. But I would expect at least 100 - 120hz these days.
Vast majority of 120+ Hz displays are 1080p only. That's for gaming.
4k at 120 Hz will need DisplayPort 2.0 and a powerful GPU to provide that bandwidth (40 Gbit/sec).
Practically useless for its intended purpose (coding). Will increase the cost for no benefit. Waste of money.
Re: BenQ releases 3:2 aspect ratio 28 inch 4K+ monitor designed for programmers
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
In theory, the following things: The 3:2 ratio suits reading and editing text, because our eyes have trouble following in lines of text that are too long (think about how a paperback page is shaped, or A4 or letter paper). The counter-argument is that 16:9 is actually better because it's functionally two 8:9 panels if you split the screen. The light on the back reduces eye-strain in dark environments by lighting a wa…
3:4 is a better ratio for reading and editing text. That's what Xerox chose for their Alto workstations.
This is probably what you mean, but I wasn't sure and then did the math: and if you take two 3:4s and put them side by side (as is being contemplated with 16:9 being split into two 8:9 panels) you get 6:4 aka 3:2 (so, this monitor).
Frankly, though, while I probably agree for "reading", with my "coding" I'm very happy taking 16:10 (which is a pretty standard monitor size and I want to say is much more common than 16:9, at least on laptops) and splitting it into two 8:10s (which is itself a pretty familiar aspect ratio).