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

Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

dell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 370 posts

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#271

Post by pragmatick »

InMice wrote: post #193
madmod wrote: post #157

I have 3 27" 5k monitors in portrait and a 32" 4k horizontal above those. It is all mounted with vesa cheeseplates to manfrotto magic arms on t slot aluminum attached to a C stand with manfrotto super clamps. I also have two genelec studio monitors which sound amazing. All of that cost less than this one monitor.

I get bonkers annoyed using just two monitors with macos or windows. multi monitor management... nothing behaves how i want it to, apps never open where they should etc etc. I havent tried it on desktop linux enough to know if it's any better - maybe at least id assume have the most configuration control on linux. How do you do it? I always give up in frustration. 100% would keep the genelecs :)

I'm using DisplayFusion on Windows and am very happy with it. Haven't found anything similar on Linux that works as well.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#273

Post by paranoidrobot »

My desk has 2x 27" and 1x 43" Dell monitors. Unfortunately the new work MacBook only supports two external displays so one of those 27 sits idle.

What used to be nice is now a case of constantly shuffling windows, not made easy by MacOSs janky window handling.

I've been looking for a second 43" to replace the 27"s but the high price and sub-par quality of the 43 is making me wait.

I am also finding it difficult to find monitor arms that will carry such large and heavy screens. The 43 is already at the limit of the one reasonably priced arm I found and a definite struggle to mount.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#274

Post by masklinn »

swiftcoder wrote: post #108
masklinn wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to a smartphone it's not just poor it's complete dreck. Smarphones are in the 400s.

Do you hold your 32" monitor the same distance from your face as you hold your smartphone?

I fail to see how that is relevant as I neither introduced nor advocated for smartphone pixel density?

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#275

Post by masklinn »

LtdJorge wrote: post #140
swiftcoder wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you hold your 32" monitor the same distance from your face as you hold your smartphone?

Exactly, that’s the point

That’s not a point it’s nonsense thought termination.

There’s a gulf between 130 dpi and 460 dpi, and in that gulf there are densities which stop being poor at monitor viewing distances.

That smartphone densities are excessive for that purpose does not make middling standard densities good.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#276

Post by perfmode »

madmod wrote: post #157

I have 3 27" 5k monitors in portrait and a 32" 4k horizontal above those. It is all mounted with vesa cheeseplates to manfrotto magic arms on t slot aluminum attached to a C stand with manfrotto super clamps. I also have two genelec studio monitors which sound amazing. All of that cost less than this one monitor.

Like that? https://gemini.google.com/share/3dbf617a1e07

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#277

Post by adrian_b »

RichardCA wrote: post #151
adrian_b wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any fonts look much better on a monitor with a higher resolution and the size of the fonts must not vary with the resolution of the monitor. A 4k monitor always provides more legible text than an 2560x1440 monitor. The size of the fonts used by your documents is specified in typographic points, e.g. 12 points or 14 points. This corresponds to a fixed size on the screen, regardless of the screen resolution. The increa…

I used to work in my mom and dad's print shop when I was a kid. 6 picas in an inch, 12 points in a pica, and by the time you go home your hands smell like hypo. That should give you an idea of how old I am. For a kid I was passably good at setting up headlines for paste-up, but I never had to be the one who used an X-Acto Knife. I'll die on the hill where 2K is better than 4K if your livelihood depends on having to s…

I agree that on monitors with insufficient resolution ancient bitmap fonts can be sharper, because they are free of artifacts caused by mismatch between the shape of the letters and the pixel grid.

Your problem is precisely that you use monitors with a too low resolution. On monitors with a high enough resolution, you approach the quality of printed paper and you can use monospace fonts that are more beautiful than any bitmap fonts, without being able to perceive the pixels.

The only problem is that big monitors also need a bigger resolution and the combination of big size with big resolution can be expensive.

While for a size of 27" or 32" the 4k monitors can be quite cheap, I believe that at such sizes a 5k resolution is the minimum for good text rendering, and 5k monitors remain expensive.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#278

Post by masklinn »

jorvi wrote: post #57
masklinn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly they're not super common which makes them expensive, and I don't think I've seen any that wasn't 16:9. The world has decided to go with refresh rates rather than resolution.

Which is the right choice because our eyes cannot resolve that kind of DPI at that distance. Past 2880p on most desk monitor viewing distances or past 1080p on most TV viewing distances, you hit steeply diminishing returns. Please, please let's use our processing power and signal bandwidth for color and refresh rate, not resolution. This is also why I think every console game should have a 720p handheld 'performance'…

> Which is the right choice because our eyes cannot resolve that kind of DPI at that distance.

If you can’t resolve that kind of DPI at that distance you need to get an appointment because you require glasses. The low end of normal vision stops differentiating around 175 dpi at 50cm. The difference is very noticeable (and disturbing) on contrasted detailed features like text without subpixel rendering (or when the subpixel rendering does not match the physical structure of the display).

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#279

Post by masklinn »

ghshephard wrote: post #214
seiferteric wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a Samsung neo g9 57" which is like 1/2 an 8k monitor (or 2 4k monitors side-by-side) which is sweet since I use picture-by-picture mode to have my work computer on one side and my personal computer on the other side.

I have the SAMSUNG 49" Odyssey Neo G9 G95NA - but despite spending literally dozens of hours - I was never able to get text to work clearly on it - either Mac or PC - tried both the DisplayPort, HDMI - tried all the (many) HDMI cables I had at home, and a couple expensive Monoprice cables, firmware updates, monitor resets, every setting I could figure - no luck. Text is just ... fuzzy in a way that it isn't with any…

Is it an oled display? It’s likely that the subpixel rendering does not match the physical display, so the subcolors are in the wrong location making the text worse instead of better (in the case of macs Apple entirely removed subpixel rendering some years back so there is no solution whatsoever, Apple on standard density always looks like shit).

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#280

Post by swiftcoder »

masklinn wrote: post #274
swiftcoder wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you hold your 32" monitor the same distance from your face as you hold your smartphone?

I fail to see how that is relevant as I neither introduced nor advocated for smartphone pixel density?

Then what was the intent of your comment? There's no point to making a 400dpi 32" display (even if that were remotely physically possible).
Post reply on HN