Live data from Hacker News

Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

dell.com

61–70 of 370 posts

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#61
post #58
post #21

This has pixels the size of my hand, and it fully covers my field of view. Not my cup of tea. What I do recommend (having bought one) is the Kuycon G32p, 32 inches @ 6K. Incredible quality and unbelievable value for money ( https://clickclack.io/products/in-stock-kuycon-g32p-6k-32-in... ).

If you just want 32 inches @ 6K there are cheaper options around, such as the ASUS ProArt PA32QCV: https://www.asus.com/us/displays-desktops/monitors/proart/pr... ASUS is a more well known brand. It doesn’t imitate the Apple aesthetic. (It does seem like the resolution differs: 6016×3384 vs 6144×3456.)

That has a lower resolution though. Not by much but it’s a weird panel.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#62

The smaller sizes would be nice if they had a 16:10 option. 16:9 just isn't a very nice aspect ratio imo, the extra height on 16:10 is much better.

Yes, I will never buy 16:9 again. On laptops 16:10 is already quite often and sometimes even 3:2 (Framework, Surfacebook).

For my desktop I am looking forward to getting a 3:2 monitor like the Benq RD280U

https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/programming/rd280u.html

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For context - this 51" monitor has 22% less pixels than the 32" Apple Pro Display XDR.

But those are retina pixels right? Like what is the max resolution of that display?

Retina pixels what? Pixel is a pixel, density _of pixels_ is what you're looking for

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No scaling required? Great!

Spot the Linux user ;)

More accurately, you have spotted not a Linux user in general, but a user of certain Linux distributions, which in my opinion have inadequate display configuration settings.

I am also using only Linux on all my desktops and laptops, and I have never used any display with a resolution less than 4k, for at least the last 12 or 13 years.

Despite of that, I have never encountered any problems with "scaling", because in Linux I have never used any kind of "scaling" (unlike in Windows, which has a font "scaling").

In the kind of Linux that I have been using, I only set an appropriate dots-per-inch value for the monitor, which means that there is no "scaling", which would reduce graphic quality, but all programs render the fonts and other graphic elements at an appropriate size and using in the right way the display resolution.

I configure dots-per-inch values that do not match the actual dpi values of the monitors, but values that ensure that the on-screen size is slightly larger than the on-paper size, because I stay at a greater distance from the monitor than I would keep a paper or a book in my hand (i.e. I set higher dpi values than the real ones, so that any rendering program will believe that the screen is smaller than in reality, so it will render e.g. a 12 point font at a slightly bigger size than 12 points and e.g. an A4 page will be bigger on screen than an A4 sheet of paper; for instance I use 216 dpi for a 27 inch 4k Dell UltraSharp monitor).

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#65
post #21

This has pixels the size of my hand, and it fully covers my field of view. Not my cup of tea. What I do recommend (having bought one) is the Kuycon G32p, 32 inches @ 6K. Incredible quality and unbelievable value for money ( https://clickclack.io/products/in-stock-kuycon-g32p-6k-32-in... ).

I have the Apple 6K 32” Pro Display XDR and a Kuycon 5K 27”. Both are great. Apple was $6,500 and the Chinese version was $400 on EBay plus the $100 stand. Kuycon has more types of input, and a remote. Frame and display quality are on par for a dev.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this looks like a rip off of another monitor that I can't quite put my finger on...

And no extra charge to have an adjustable stand! How do they make money?

No need to recoup R&D costs.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#68
post #35

I never got into the ultra wide thing. Where the 8K monitors at?? We've been stuck on 4K for ten years!

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.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#69

I just setup mine today, and I am not sure I recommend it. I went from a 40" to a 52", and I'm just moving my head waaay too much and my shoulders hurt. It is curved, but very little imo, it's almost like it's flat. I'm going to try it for a week before making the call on whether to return it. I feel like this needs a workflow where you do work in the middle and use the fringes for other applications that you rarely…

I sometimes think that my 40" is too much because the extra space just ends up hosting distracting junk like Slack. I also have a mild take that large screens make screen real estate cheap so less thought goes into user interface design. There's plenty of room just stick the widget anywhere!

It'd be pretty interesting to compare how much the amount of information one can cram onto their ~27" screen has changed between 2005 and 2025, with the comparison points between between a Mac running OS X 10.6 and a Mac running macOS 26, which I think is a particularly salient and apples-to-apples comparison since Apple was selling 30" 2560x1600 displays back then, which are close cousins to modern 27" 2560x1440 displays.

My gut feeling is that the difference would be around 30-40%. Information density of the UI of OS X 10.6 and contemporary software was much higher than today's tabletized "bouncy castle" style UI.

Re: Dell UltraSharp 52 Thunderbolt Hub Monitor

#70
I've found ideal monitor size and resolution depends greatly on viewing distance and relative position. I use a 38" ultra-wide and it's almost too wide - but I have it 'floating' on an adjustable monitor arm so it's only about 24" from my eyes and a bit higher than most monitor stands would allow. The monitor arm is key because once I put a full ergo split keyboard at a comfortable arm-rest distance, a normal monitor stand sitting on the desk would force the monitor to be too far back.

For the full breadth of a 52" monitor to be comfortably viewable for detail work, I'd have to be farther back enough that the difference between 4K and 6K wouldn't be meaningful. It's kind of like how 8k resolution can provide meaningful value in a head-mounted display two inches from your eyeballs, but 8k on a 65" living room TV seven feet away from your couch viewing position is pointless because even those with 20/10 vision can't resolve the additional detail at that distance.

For detail work I find my best ergo seating position is up close with my legs tucked well-under the desk and my stomach almost touching the edge of the curved desk inset. This allows my forearms to be supported comfortably on the desk. I also have my desk surface a little lower than most and my Aeron chair a little higher, putting the top of my legs almost touching the underside of the desktop.

Post reply on HN