The state of external retina displays • Hacker News Board

Re: The state of external retina displays

#331

Post by bbbobbb » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 4:42 PM UTC

Liron wrote: post #329

urthor wrote: post #73

> Ridiculous Option: Apple Pro Display XDR I'll admit, a monitor that costs more than my first car is beyond affordable for 99% of the population. But saying that, many of the people reading this are pulling truly exotic salaries right now. After devoting untold hours to reaching the top of their profession. Let's say you're a professional earning $300k plus in software. You're often working 100% remote, using your m…

People aren’t thinking clearly about this because of how cheap all monitors are. Here’s how I think about it: For a software engineer, all monitors are worth $100k+. This particular monitor is worth $110k+. So yes, spend an extra few $k to get the best.

How exactly did you arrive at that conclusion?

Why would a consumer product that I can get for $800 would be worth $100k for me, thus justifying overpaying for it? Am I supposed to buy $50k wallet because I take it everywhere now? Or $250k glasses because I wear them all day?

Re: The state of external retina displays

#332

Post by happynacho » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 6:11 PM UTC

I've found running 4K @ 2x/200% scaling "retina" to be the best price/performance option right now. 5K displays are nowhere to be seen and 6K/8K have absurd prices.

My dream monitor would be a dual-5k super-ultrawide, even at 60Hz. That's at least 5 years away if not 10.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#333

Post by salamandersauce » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 6:36 PM UTC

minimaul wrote: post #106

xyzzy123 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some work tools get treated like capital or heirloom and some get treated like consumables . Scissors or a hand plane are decent "heirloom" items. Potentially you can retire with the same one you started with, or pass them down. Electric drills start to lean toward consumable. Battery tech changes over the years and they do wear out in non-fixable ways. Screen and computer tech advances so fast that 5 years is a "goo…

This is a good comment in general, but: > I think it can still make sense, but very often when people buy the premium in computers or displays they are getting the same thing everyone else gets 30-50% cheaper 1 year later. I'd normally agree, but the article's point is that this isn't happening with displays - we're stuck at 4K as the best available except for a handful of displays that are still expensive even years…

Resolution is only a single spec. Other things like viewing angles, response time, refresh rate,brightness, HDR, etc. have been getting better and better for less. A premium 1080p monitor from 15 years ago will not be nearly as good as a modern reasoanbly priced one.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#334

Post by ece » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 7:04 PM UTC

nickjj wrote: post #312

ece wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1.5x also gives you the same real estate as 1440p but with higher PPI but I don't know how crisp that will be given the scaling ratio. 1.5x is nice on a 27 inch 4k with 14+ fonts. HiDPI monitors do seem to have bloom, so slightly bigger fonts with higher DPI are good to have.

For reference I'm at 25" 1440p with a font size of 9 using Consolas. Things look pretty crisp at native scaling and also very comfortable to read with no strain. In terms of viewing space this fits (4) side by side code windows at 80 characters with a little bit of breathing room.

Yep, 27" 4k at 1.5x (plasma) I can have 50/50 or 60/40 with font size 14 and get 110+ characters, not just 80. 60/40 would be for an IDE with a bar or two on the side and still get almost 110 columns in the editor/console comfortably without eye strain. With 144 DPI fonts on plasma (using Hack), fonts seem plenty crisp to me down to size 5.

For screen size, I think there is some screen size that's most comfortable to view, and I want to say that's like ~40% of the human FOV... so, I think a 24" monitor and 15" laptop are most comfortable for me, but 27" might be a bit nicer if you're using it for media as well.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#335

Post by wswope » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 7:20 PM UTC

jagger27 wrote: post #216

jasonladuke0311 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just got a 32”, 4K, 120hz monitor for $1000.

4K isn't dense enough for proper 2x scaling at that size though. You have to go fractional, which is okay, but not great.

Yeah, who could ever imagine using a 1080p 32” monitor…

Re: The state of external retina displays

#336

Post by kecupochren » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

binbag wrote: post #322

Why is it so difficult to get the right screen for a mac, relative to how easy it is with Windows? Is this a proactive design choice by Apple, or just a lack of care?

The issue is subpixel antialiasing. it got removed in Big Sur and hence nonretina screens have blurry fonts.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#337

Post by BoorishBears » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:59 PM UTC

wswope wrote: post #335

jagger27 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4K isn't dense enough for proper 2x scaling at that size though. You have to go fractional, which is okay, but not great.

Yeah, who could ever imagine using a 1080p 32” monitor…

It's pretty awful.

I got Dell's "5k" ultrawide before the XDR, and at the time M1 Macbooks couldn't do fractional scaling at that high of a resolution.

The result was essentially a wider 32" 1080p screen. And while the text was crisp, the space efficiency was absolutely awful.

I can't even imagine the 16:9 version of that...

Re: The state of external retina displays

#338

Post by BeFlatXIII » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

johnwalkr wrote: post #270

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #267

What's the smallest 4K (external, I don't want your meme laptops with 4k displays in the recommendation pool) monitor currently on the market?

There's a variety of 15.6" portable monitors, most seeming to have the same specs and obviously based on some laptop panel.

I had completely forgotten about those when I wrote my question. IIRC, Dell makes a 24" 4K monitor, but I can't think of having ever encountered a 22" monitor at 4K.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#339

Post by ayushnix » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 9:05 PM UTC

yrral wrote: post #19

Why is Dell has a 32 inch 8k display which is ~280 ppi in stock. https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/dell-ultrasharp-32-8k-m...

> Why is I regret buying a 27 inch 4K monitor each and every day.

Sure, the PPI is much better than my 24 inch 1200p Dell Ultrasharp but a 27 inch 4K needs wither fractional scaling, which is a mess, or scaling fonts, which makes UI elements look weird.

24 inch 4K and 27 inch 5K should be a standard but all monitor OEMs are interested in making shitty gaming monitors.

Re: The state of external retina displays

#340

Post by ece » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 9:19 PM UTC

nickjj wrote: post #312

ece wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1.5x also gives you the same real estate as 1440p but with higher PPI but I don't know how crisp that will be given the scaling ratio. 1.5x is nice on a 27 inch 4k with 14+ fonts. HiDPI monitors do seem to have bloom, so slightly bigger fonts with higher DPI are good to have.

For reference I'm at 25" 1440p with a font size of 9 using Consolas. Things look pretty crisp at native scaling and also very comfortable to read with no strain. In terms of viewing space this fits (4) side by side code windows at 80 characters with a little bit of breathing room.

I miss read a bit when replying in the other comment, for 4 side-by-side 80 column windows, you'd need to bring the font size to 9, which isn't as comfortable as 14 for me in my side-by-side setup, but then 1.25x is also an option.