it's 4:4:4 chroma at 60hz so it's great for gaming too. and has a lower response rate than you'll get with TVs.
Highly recommended and it's hard to use anything smaller now.
Without using display scaling I wouldn't go lower than 40" and I think maybe even closer to 50" is ideal in terms of keeping the scale comparable between other periphial monitors. a 48" curved display would probably be perfect.
Many, too many BDM4065UC monitors suffer from "flashing" black and then, more than occasionally, starting back at 30Hz instead of 60Hz (dp 1.2 connection). Fixing that requires 1-2-3 monitor power cycles, and when the display is in a "bad mood" it can happen 3/4 times per hour.
Source: I own and use a BDM4065UC which I'm about to return, and I've been able to test another (previously owned) one, where the owner, who had a totally different setup from me (mbpro retina 2015 is my workstation, his own was a custom-built desktop with nvidia card); many other people on various forums complain about that, and Philips support seems to know about the issue perfectly.
I have been interested in BDM4350UC and/or BDM4037UC as well, but both have been reported to suffer from extreme ghosting/persistence; I'm now looking forward to buy an LG 43UD79-B.
What I agree is: a large monitor makes the difference. Not in the workflow per se, but in how much eye strain, headache, back pain (from slouching to get closer to the screen) and so on you get at the end of the day - which is almost inexistent with such large displays. Even if it's $700 for the LG, that's well spent money.
Huh, I guess I'm lucky then. The only problem with my BDM4065UC is that at the upper left corner, the leftmost column of pixels is obscured by something (as if the panel was bent slightly backwards at the edge).
Possibly it's a problem from a batch of them, but such batch seems rather large. I don't like that myself, because the BDM4064UC would simply be a great monitor for programming work at that price point.
I've experienced similar with the first BDM40, it dropping the DP1.2 support and needing to open up the OSD to revert back to DP1.1 and again to DP2.2 to resolve, in addition to extreme ghosting.
Please update if you do end up investing in a new replacement, the LG especially.
I wonder how that TV performs for "monitor" tasks like automatic input switching.
I have a Sony x720e for my macbook for work and my PC for light gaming. It has graphics and gaming modes that have low input lags, but there is a really annoying quirk where when you turn the tv on it has normal (high) input lag until you switch to another mode then back to graphics mode. This means every time you turn on your PC (or plug in your laptop) you have to:
1. Turn on the TV
2. If necessary, switch inputs
3. Options -> Scene Select -> up arrow, down arrow
1 and 2 are annoying since monitors do that automatically but the TV doesn't. 3 is really annoying but hopefully is fixed in a firmware update...
Other than that the screen looks great.
I'm hoping for time to hack on an arduino with an IR LED to automate those steps, haha.
Offtopic, but this is very interesting. I have this sort of problem as well, but with color rendering. Not on a Sony, but on a Philips (50PUT6400). Makes me think that they might use a common platform for their entry-level TVs.
Interesting enough, over the summer at Microsoft, they were actually switching out for the 4k TVs. It wasn't that bad tbh. Definitely different. The Surface Books couldn't handle it very well (they didn't have GPUs) but the work stations did great.
3 affiliate links actually. It’s probably not the absolute best, but nuance makes for tedious writing. The general pattern of a 40+ inch 4K display is definitely worth a shot. If you find a better one for price/performance, I’d love to hear.
I had a 28/27" 4k monitor, but like the author I found it far too small (the pixel size) to use comfortably. Unfortunately I was working with legacy applications that didn't support scaling and couldn't adjust the DPI. I have no doubt it would be much nicer at 125/150%.
One thing that is certain is that people have different preferences. Certainly some people would enjoy the tiny pixels of the 27" 4k monitor at 100%.
My current setup is 2x24" 1920x1200 monitors. I have considered 3x24, 1x Ultra wide or 2x Ultra wide, but I'm not convinced I'd get the same comfort. I think that 3x 24, or 2x ultra wides would require to much head rotation to be comfortable.
I prefer the vertical break in the screen since it makes snapping windows easier. I'm starting to think that I might prefer a bit more real estate, as I often collapse the vertical file menu in my editor for a little extra room.
I second the author's recommendation. I work with iMacs (5k) all day and I can tell you there were a number of times I simply wished I had gotten an iMac Pro with a bigger screen instead. However, one thing to watchout though when getting these cheap TVs is to be mindful of the color reproduction. Most of them will enhance the colors to make it appear vivid and pleasing to the eyes. So, if you're thinking of doing stuff like logo design, Photoshop, you're gonna find it very hard.
As long as your eyelashes don't touch the display, it's ok.
Some people have cut their long eyelashes to be able to get a larger field of view in Virtual Reality...
And I find my 13 inch laptop too large :) I loved the 11 inch Macbook but the res was too low; 1920x1200 as I have now is nice, but 11 or 10 inch screen would be better.
Don't buy a cheap TV for programming if you're not constrained by money. You can get 40" monitors for a bit more, and you won't need to fight the firmware and also you can get a better panel. Also, PWM is worse if you're sitting close. Uniformity of backlight (bleed) also matters.
Currently the display you want to get around 40" is the Philips BDM4037UW, which has no PWM, relatively low input lag and backlight bleed is low.
There are some cheap 43" 4K monitors (Philips and LG), but they're lower quality e.g. LGs have PWM.
I jumped on the Philips BMD40 train immediately at launch for £600 a few years back, the ghosting is an absolute nightmare.
A huge boon for productivity having come from multiple 27" 1440p monitors before, and the BDM40 is something I might recommend for somebody looking to get in and get in cheap.
I'll definitely be splurging for something better next time however.
There’s also the latency between the input coming over HDMI and actual rendering on screen. Some of the cheaper TVs are in the 70-150ms range, and you will notice that when your mouse keeps moving after your hand stops.
Just as an alternative - I have one of these[0] iiyama panels after hearing bad things about the Phillips.
Have to say I'm very happy with it.
No ghosting, really excellent colour (once calibrated), minimal backlight bleed (it's not an IPS panel so has less bleed anyway) and 4k at 60hz.
Been using it for just over a year now. Only thing it does is pure blacks on pure whites can streak a little when scrolling. So very large and thick pure black text on pure white background will leave a very short trail. Normal text doesn't do this, it has to be large areas of black on white. It's actually not annoyed me much as it use this happened only very very rarely on some websites but it's a limitation.
Not sure it's best for gaming (though I've played Mass Effect and Rocket League with no issues) but for productivity work it's been great.
TVs have very different matrices compared to monitors (and mobile displays too) in physical pixel layout. TV matrices tend to have much larger "border width" and colored cells more prominently spread, which pushes closest optimal viewing distance further. I personally find text on TVs very tiring for the eyes.
I have been using 3 inexpensive 4K 40” TVs for my home computer for a year now. I love the insane amount of real estate and the accessible price (<$1K is great).
I’d love it if someone made extremely large format displays (100”+ at 3:1 aspect ratio) for computer use. Not sure how large the market would be, but one giant display is nicer than 3 separate one so.
The TV mounted on blocks and the Hackintosh suggest the author is willing to compromise and using a TV as a monitor confirms it. Don't get me wrong, I also run a Hackintosh and have had monitors stood on boxes, crates and books over the years, but when it comes to displays I really don't think you should compromise.
I have converted many professionals away from TVs because when you can actually have real quality monitors to compare them too it's usually a no-brainer to abandon the cheap TV. No trick, no incentive for me, just the better choice. It is also why every employee in our company has a pair of IPS displays.
I've looked at 4K TVs as options for a monitor multiple times, from the early Seiki TVs that hit at the start of the pricing change to what's been on offer for Black Friday, don't do it to yourself unless you are spending most of your time gaming/consuming content on the same system or just using it to monitor things.
If you are going to be sat in front of displays for 10,000 hours a year working/focusing (like many of us I am sure) then investing in something like a pair of Dell U3415W, LG UM95 or LG 31MU97Z-B will give you a much nicer experience. Totally appreciate that isn't a $300 solution, but as professionals we should invest in (or demand from your employer) good tools.
To those of you who are using 4K TVs, it is obviously hard to get in front of these monitors and see the difference, but if you can you should - you've already made the choice to go for something better than a cheap 22" 1080P monitor, there are a lot of options to create a great environment to do your best work.
The article is just pure marketing anyway for referrals, so make of that what you will.
You didn't actually say _why_ monitors are better for the author's use case: programming. "A much nicer experience" - how? in what way? is this quantifiable in any way?
There are flicker-free (no PWM at all, or at least no PWM at mid and hi brightness) models, and you can find (unfortunately that's usually not that simple because vendors are mostly hesitate to specify it) a model with minimal possible brightness low enough for comfortable programming work.
This is a very limited sample size but I own and use a 50" 4K monitor from Wasabi Mango and a 50" 4k tv from Samsung. The off-brand monitor's text is quite a bit clearer. I'm not sure if that's just a settings issue, but I have spent quite a bit of time playing with the TV's settings and the text is consistently less clear than the monitor's.
I code on a pair of Samsung 4K 55" Curved TVs, and enjoy them immensely. What am I missing out on with your IPS advice? I don't do graphical/visual work, and you didn't mention anything specific about why a high-end monitor is better. I am also not sure what use case you're championing, nor what your employees use their expensive monitors for.
Would be curious what your use cases are, and what the differences are that you've experienced vs 4K TVs as monitors. I moved up from 6 x 27" 1080P monitors and like this arrangement far better. No fussing with multiple video cards, fewer bezels, and gained the equivelant of 2 1080P screens into the bargain. All for $1300, 1/4 of the prior setup cost.
Our employees are sat 50cm from their 27" 1440p monitors, they sit at 1.2M/4ft desks and look at text for 5-6 hours a day. So in this context TVs are not suitable, and would be never considered for our office environment. Some are free to choose what they want and have 4K monitors, everything is Dell Ultrasharp for simplicity. There is a mix of portrait and landscape used. I'd suggest quality 4K over cheap 4K, but we don't provide that for all our employees as it is unnecessary, but I do deal with a lot of other businesses and it has been very uncommon for me to see 4K TVs in the workplace here in the UK.
I've had IPS monitors for 15 years and maybe it's in my head at this point compared to high end TVs and TN panels, but I wouldn't use anything else nor would I subject those I expect to drive revenue for me to do so. It's a key tool that is often an afterthought.
End of the day whatever works for you, but I have seen first hand people have huge TVs on a desk thinking they are getting some kind of gain and then they look up and down all day long or squint to see whats on it. A lot of people have to be forced to adhere to good ergonomics and healthy use of computers.
Hardware is cheap compared to what we pay for software, SaaS, pension and perks for our staff so it's something we are good on.
A 4K 40” screen has similar dot pitch and is smaller than a pair of 27” 1440p screens. The main advantage is it has no bezels so it’s more flexible.
Also, many TVs are 60Hz IPS displays, but you have to do some research to find ones that display in 4:4:4 color. After that the main difference between the two is the firmware on the device, some things like VESA power saving work differently.
TVs can be cheaper because they have larger economies of scale than monitors. It doesn’t have much to do with the underlying technology.
It seems like you don’t know as much as you think you do about display technology.
I tried the Samsung 40" 4K monitor route and the worst part about it (other than being a tad too large) is dealing with the "smart tv" software. Immensely annoying.
Cool, I'll continue to see us purchase quality, proven, monitors as we expand and require more hardware rather than start dropping large consumer TVs on peoples desks.
I'd also like to see a photo of this setup, and I'd like to understand how you work on this.
I have a 27" 4K monitor at 150% scaling and it feels 'big enough', I was considering getting a second but then I'd have the bezel in the middle, so three would probably be better, but then I'd have to turn my head a lot to see the outer screens, so it seemed a bit pointless.
Maybe I'm an outlier, but I prefer to have applications full screen and just focus on that one thing. I also don't work with videos playing in the background as I find that very distracting, music is ok as I can zone out (and then realise for the last hour I've had headphones on with nothing playing), so I don't need to see a whole Spotify playlist, artwork and recommendations when I'm writing code.
If I'm doing web development, I'll have Vim in a terminal full screen, and when I need to test something live I'll switch to Chrome - my screen is big enough that I can have the page and debugger open side by side without it feeling squashed. I have tests and the compiler running in another tmux tab, so the terminal bell will alert me if something needs my attention there.
:) I basically divide the screens into 8 1080P windows. A "basic workday" for me is usually:
1. Chrome with Email, hangouts, and other administrata
2. A second Chrome with web dev.
3. A third 1080P with the web inspector for above.
4. An SSH window to the nodejs server
5. pgAdmin to postgres
6. VSCode
7. Xencenter if I'm juggling VMs around
8. Choice of: another chrome for goofing off, or a bunch of smaller windows with git bash, filesystem windows, or other little distractions like spotify.
It's hard to tell from this photo (lol messy desk) but I sit about 80cm from the screens. There are some downsides:
I'm too close to the TVs for gaming -- they're too bright even at minimum brightness setting. One "all white" explosion cutscene and my eyes will hurt. I'm in the habit of closing my eyes when I sense impending white-out.
The "curved" monitors are only subtly curved, and I still fly them in a "Vee" configuration. I could've saved $200 by just going with 2 flat monitors. It seemed cooler at the time than it is.
I see others talking about fighting firmware and whatnot, but these MU650Ds from Costco (which I'm told are identical to MU6500s, but re-numbered to avoid price-matching...shrug?) just worked out of the box. Setting the "device" to PC HDMI and the TV took it from there. I dinked with the color settings to taste.
It's weird, my laptop is an XPS13 with the 3200x1800 screen, and when I try to do ANY splitscreen work, I find myself edging closer or squinting. I don't wear glasses, but I think I must just be a "not a HiDPI" guy. square inches on screens are cheap and cheerful.
I haven't found it hard to focus on a "tile" to work.
It's nice to step through the node debugger by flicking VSCode fullscreen, hunting and pecking through the 100-line-high code, all on the right side while the SSH/Chrome/Chrome debugger/pgsql windows sit on the left and I can watch them whirr with each step. Works for me anyway.
Nice setup. I personally like to have three monitors, so the center one is in the middle and I don't have to turn my head.
ATM I have a fairly old 32" 1080p TV as my middle screen.
It becomes hard to find the desk space for three monitors when you get to a 40" middle screen though. I prefer having multiple monitors than a single larger monitor. I haven't decided how I'm going to upgrade yet.
Oh how I wish the 16:10 aspect ratio hadn't been abandoned. Every time I get an urge to upgrade my home monitor, I remember it's 1920x1200 and I'll never find another like it.
Last time I bought a laptop, all the reasonably priced ones had 1366x768 displays. I hate it! The pixels are very visible. Finally picked up a 14" 1920x1080 Chromebook for web use and I couldn't be happier, it's so much nicer looking.
> Oh how I wish the 16:10 aspect ratio hadn't been abandoned. Every time I get an urge to upgrade my home monitor, I remember it's 1920x1200 and I'll never find another like it.
A kilobuck will get you a 30" 2560x1600 Dell UP3017.
Oh I know they're still out there. But as you've noticed, the price makes them totally impractical. The lack of selection also means you're less likely to find the exact monitor to make you happy.
16:10 is the best aspect ratio still to me as well. I have a hard time upgrading my 24" Dell 1920x1200 Monitor. I refuse to have the limited vertical space of a 16:9. Sure it's just 1 aspect ratio off, but to me it makes a huge difference.
Right on the spot for me. Having my tasks divided between monitors (and always knowing which monitor to look at for program x) is great. I feel like it helps my workflow a lot :-)
Same here. I'm the only person at my company working off a single (27" 4k) display. I'm using Windows 10 so I can switch desktops with ctrl-win-left/right arrow. It's pretty much the first time I've been truly happy with my setup.
I've had a UM95 for several years and just bought a cheap 4K 40" tv (Samsung MU7000) to replace it as my primary. They have equivalent pixel density and the tv has nicer colors and contrast with less backlight bleed (VA panel instead of IPS) and more real estate. The only advantages the UM95 has are the displayport input and the screen being more matte.
Economics of scale - many more TVs sold than computer monitors.
Add to that the different features - higher DPI, refresh rate, contrast ratios, etc. Cutting edge features such as NVidia G-Sync and the similar feature from AMD don't come cheap.
If you enjoy a low density of 110 pixels per inch, then this is for you.
I'm much happier with the high-DPI displays in my ThinkPad Yoga 460 WQHD and MacBook Pro Retina 15".
I don't like pixels, and I don't want to see them any more. I want to see the text and graphics I'm working on, not pixels.
So when I wanted a second monitor to go with those machines, I got a 24" 4K display. At 187 pixels per inch, it's a reasonably close match to the 210-220 pixels per inch on the laptops.
I use this monitor in portrait mode next to the laptop display. A portrait mode monitor combined with the laptop monitor is great. I've got a wide screen when I want it, and a tall screen when I want that. It's ideal for reading documentation and especially PDF files, because an entire page fits on the portrait screen. Larger monitors are not very practical in portrait mode.
I'm not concerned with cramming the maximum amount of stuff on my screen. I run the monitors at 225% scaling in Windows, and the default Retina scaling in macOS. So text is about the same size it would be on a lower-DPI monitor, just much sharper and crisper.
After I got my first taste of high DPI with that MacBook, I swore I'd never go back to a low DPI display. It is so nice to not have to look at pixels any more.
Everyone has different vision, of course! If you don't mind my asking, what is your viewing distance to the screen?
One big consideration for me: I'm 65, so my eyes are not able to focus back and forth to different distances like a younger person.
My solution is a pair of single vision prescription lenses, adjusted to the distance to my monitor(s). I need to be able to use the laptop all on its own, so that determines the focus distance: about 20".
Because of that, I also place any secondary monitor at about the same distance from my eyes, otherwise it would be out of focus. I can't go changing glasses to look at a different monitor. :-)
A 24" 4K display works nicely for this, and as I mentioned it's small enough to work really well in portrait mode.
So I have two recommendations for any programmer. If you haven't used a portrait mode monitor, try it out alongside your laptop display. It's a very practical setup.
But more importantly, if you find yourself gravitating toward lower-DPI monitors, it may be time for a vision check and a good pair of single vision prescription glasses adjusted for your monitor distance (again, about 20" if you ever need to use a laptop by itself). I put off doing this for years - I always thought of myself as the kind of person who "didn't need glasses."
When I finally got the prescription lenses, it was a real eye-opener - pun intended!
Of course if I take off my glasses, then every monitor looks the same. But with proper correction, my vision is better than 20/20.
With my prescription computer glasses, the difference between low DPI and high DPI is like night and day. I can see every pixel on a low DPI monitor, while high DPI monitors look beautiful to me.
Please, everyone: do yourself a huge favor and get your vision checked and get some single vision prescription glasses if they are called for. It's hard to overstate the difference this will make in your quality of life.
Edit: Not sure why you were downvoted for a reasonable comment. It's true that your vision will get worse as you get older. Even if nothing else goes wrong, you lose your ability to focus your eyes dynamically. The lenses harden up and lock into a specific focal distance.
However, many of these vision changes are correctable. Progressive lenses are a great solution for "out and about" use. You can look up and down to see far and near things. They aren't very good for computer use, and that's where the single vision lenses come in.
It is a minor nuisance to switch back and forth between the computer glasses and the progressives, but being able to see clearly makes it all worth it.
I tried varifocals once, gave up on them immediately. They just didn't work for me, I was always trying to see something through the wrong part of the glasses. Now I have two pairs, one for normal distance and one for computer work.
No, this is a huge myth. I’m getting older (42) and my eye sight is getting worse, and I can still tell the difference between 110 and 220. Heck, I could easily tell the difference between 150 PPI and 220 (a hitachi 28” 4K vs. a iMac retina 5K).
Coding without seeing pixels in font rendering is just bliss, it is too hard to go back.
Yes, for me 1920x1080 on say a 20-inch is the absolute minimum with these LED monitors that are all the rage now. Even the old CRTs looked better with a lower pixel density; I wonder why
The CRTs looked better because there was more "bleed" from pixel to pixel. A great example I found to describe it was if you were in the iOS ecosystem when the iPhone 4 came out, every outdated iOS app looked terrible. The 4 had the same screen size but double the PPI of the previous generations. An outdated app looked better on a <4 than it did on a 4 because the bigger pixels of the earlier phones bled into each other more while the 4 created crisper edges that were incredibly jarring.
Why do you want to throw out other people's monitors when they're working fine for them? (Source: I also have a 40" 4K monitor at home, both for coding/reading and gaming.)
I thought the same as my vision isn't exactly great, but you can tell the difference and I wouldn't go back. At least between my old ThinkPad T440 (1440x900) and my 15" rMBP that is.
I don't want to repeat the same comment too many times in this thread, so I'll just mention it one more time here. If you can't see the difference between a low DPI and high DPI display, it's time for a vision check and a good pair of prescription single vision computer glasses.
This is like a reading prescription, but adjusted for a farther distance. Reading glasses are typically adjusted for a 16" focal distance. That's much closer than you would use a computer. If you use a laptop on its own without an external monitor, that's usually about 20".
I took my ThinkPad to my optometrist the first time I did this, so we could be sure of the correct distance. When I saw how crisp and clear my screen was with the prescription, compared to the blurry mess I'd been suffering with... if I may indulge in a pun, it brought tears to my eyes.
I can think of another possibility, which is that in order to compare a 1080p display and a 4k display properly, you need to ensure that both displays are reasonably calibrated for quality. TVs out of the box are tuned in a mode I think of as "claw your eyes out" mode, with horrid preprocessing and sharpening and all kinds of other things designed to make the TV pop out in the display room, with no regard what it does to the underlying video signal or your eyes over time. Two displays in different resolutions, both left in this mode, may look roughly equally crappy when you're sitting at home feeding it a normal video signal, rather than a crafted demo. The article alludes to this when it mentions turning down the sharpening, but typically the "mode" the TV ships in initially will do other things too, like pop the saturation up and such.
The first thing you'll want to do with a new TV is to take it out of that mode. The "correct" mode depends on the TV and some internet searching can help you out, but putting it in the cinema/movie mode is at least a first good guess.
Finally, of course, you need to feed the 4K monitor a good 4K signal, or the 4K monitor isn't going to look any better. And as the article mentions, that's sometimes easier said than done, because HDMI can't always handle it.
If after all that, you can't tell the difference at all between 4K and 1080P at point blank range on a monitor setup like that, you may have eye issues, yes, absolutely. And you may still find that you don't much care about 4K. I've got 4K on my laptop, which is nice in a couple of ways, but in general I'm really rather "meh" on it for development work. I've got two 1080P monitors at work and prefer that to a 4K setup. But I also don't care about pixelization very much compared to a lot of people, and never have. I used to read books on my 160x160 monochrome Palm Pilot, and I guess everything looks good after spending my formative years on a Commodore 64 with a 1980s vintage television. But I do at least see the difference and can easily understand why others have other opinions.
I can certainly see the difference between low- and hi-DPI, but thanks to subpixel rendering (which unfortunately is going out of style because of hi-DPI displays), it doesn't really bother me - call me old-fashioned, but I'm more bothered by the waste of pixels. 2560x1440 is a pretty good resolution for a monitor, and nowadays it's crammed into the 5" display of a phone, just so that it looks pretty. Ok, unless you use it for VR, then even more DPI would be nice...
Just put the TV further away, it has a similar effect to increasing the DPI, but also it reduces the amount of optical accommodation your eyes need to do (ie eye muscles stretching your lens flatter), which reduces eye strain and must surely reduce progression of myopia. 14 hour days with no eye cramp. I think 4k is starting to approach the upper useful limit of detail you would want on a rectangular monitor that you look at without moving your head, it's a nice bump over 1080p. 1080p upscaled to 4k also looks better than 'raw' 1080p.
That would work well if you can always use the TV/monitor at a farther distance.
This wouldn't be an option for me. Although I do usually work at my home office, I also need to be able to use a laptop on its own when I'm traveling or just want to get out for a while. So that determines the 20" focus distance I need.
With single vision prescription glasses tuned for that distance, my eyes don't have to do any of the optical accommodation you mention. My glasses are set up to let my eyes be relaxed at 20"; there's no strain of my eye muscles trying to adjust to a different distance.
There was a site I was reading some time ago that mentioned with glasses, the geometry of your eyes converging on point nearby (ie slightly 'cross-eyed') doesn't correspond with the eye muscles relaxed, for focusing at 'infinity'. The 'control systems' are likely coupled. I've used glasses with smaller screens, and I've noticed my eyes behaving a bit strange (perhaps seemed harder to focus) when alternating between glasses/no glasses. No idea if there are any other consequences. Maybe it's fine.
Enough screen real estate that you don’t feel pressured to add another monitor, high enough DPI to look good, low enough to not need scaling, connects to USB C MBP with one wire for video, charging, and a USB 3.0 hub.
Why would you be against adding another monitor. When I have two monitors I benefit from angling them so that each one is perpendicular to my face as I turn it to look. The larger the screen, the lower percentage of that screen is perpendicular.
>I had a 34 inch with a second 27”, but a single 38” hits the sweet spot of not needing another monitor.
For a short while I had the second screen with the 38” screen but it was just overkill (the 38” alone is enough to cover a large portion off the usable area of my desk, so the 27” mostly just sat out of view)
I tried 24"/1200p, 27"/1440p, 27"/4K/150% scaling, 32"/4K/125% scaling, and now settled on 43"/4K/0 scaling.
The DPI looks like 1080 on a 21" years ago again, but the real estate is enomorous and I certainly don't mind it. Sure pictures/movies on 40" is not as pixel rich as a 32" 4K or 27" 4K, but you'd have to mount multiple to match the real estate of a 43" monitor.
It's true though the scaling makes text larger but not reducing DPI as the picture looks much better on a 27"/32" than the 43". But without scaling, my aging eyes can handle anything greater than 110 PPI. https://www.sven.de/dpi/
I use a 28" 4K and have used a 40" 4K TV for programming in the past.
The 40" had total crap quality but still had some advantages in terms of usable screen real estate.
There are a bunch of 40+ real monitors now though: Dell P4317Q, AOC C4008VU8, LG 43UD79-B, Philips BDM4037UW - they are all using the same panels as TVs I assume, but hopefully the higher quality ones, and their electronics will be designed for computer use.
If you were good with a 1920x1080 at 24 inches you get then same pixel dentsity with a 4K at 48 inches. I've been looking for a 50" curved TV but might have to settle for a 55" which will be fine for my slightly older eyes. I grew up typing my code on an analog TV so I'm good with any modern monitor. Having said that, 2 24" side by side is nice. Turning one of them into portrait mode is sometimes nice. Having one giant display where I can lay all my stuff out like a real desktop would be awesome.
That doesn't come in a curve does it? Since I want to layout the desktop similar to a multi-monitor setup I figure the curve will help to angle the sides in. Do you find it awkward to look at windows far off to the side with a flat monitor that size?
I have a 24" FullHD monitor next to a MBP 15". The picture on the former is so poor compared to the latter that I only use it for reading email and web browsing, and do all the code work on the 15" high-DPI screen.
Under Linux, situation is not as bad, since you can persuade xft to optimize font rasterization for readability. OSX makes the choice towards glyph shape fidelity, though, even at lower point sizes, which results in horrible anti-aliasing blur.
Possibly related: some Macs render terribly blurry text when the monitor color profile is not to their liking--look for the "sRBG" toggle, and toggle it.
I use curved 55" UHD from Samsung as a TV/monitor; you need to keep your distance from it as being very close the picture is a bit weird (first you need to turn your whole head as it's too much for eye movement only, second there are wide FOV distortions; like when you put your head close to a normal monitor). The dynamic range is much lower than EIZO/LG pro monitors, colors are washed out; generally, it's fine for SteamBox and playing games and as a real-world preview of how a movie/photo would look like on a real consumer device, but you won't get anywhere near pro quality a proper monitor gives you (even when you enforce 4:4:4 mode instead of default 4:2:2). I have 3x 4k displays (30.5", 28" and 55"), can't go lower than 30" now...
But I would want to sit twice as far away from the 48" screen, so that much pixel density isn't so necessary. (Actually, I have trouble actually picturing working on a 48" screen, the distance would be awkward...)
He wasn't referring to the distance away from the screen, but rather the size of the screen -- if you quadruple the area of the screen from 24 inches to 48 inches and also quadruple the number of pixels then there are the same number of pixels per unit area, which means if you get a larger screen and it is too large, just use a subset of it and you can emulate any smaller-sized screen without having larger pixels.
I also use a 40" 4K TV. The vast majority of what I do on my computers is text-based, which means that after the text is easily readable, I don't get any real gain from increasing the pixel density of the same shapes, but I get a lot of gain from having more text and types of textual things on the screen at once (as the article author apparently does, as well).
Until recently, I used a 40" 4K monitor. For whatever reason, TVs handle input switching much, much more smoothly than monitors do: If I have two machines hooked up to different inputs of a monitor, and reboot the one I'm working on, the monitor will often spontaneously choose to show me the other input. A TV in the same situation will happily show "no signal" and stay where you told it to stay. I've only tried two brands of monitor (Planar and Philips), admittedly, but they behave identically in ignoring the manually-set input if some other input seems more interesting. :/ I had been using a Philips 40" 4K monitor for a couple years, and the frustration with input switching drove me to the same Spectre TV from the article, which is frankly worse in every picture-quality-related metric than the Philips, but doesn't instantly switch inputs when signal is interrupted, or blank and reblank the screen 2-12 times when it hasn't been on for a while.
I know it is a new/budget brand, but I've now purchased 3 different TCL 43S405's (work, home, wife's work). It is a 43" 4k monitor, with low lag, low motion blur and 60hz refresh rate. I've been extremely happy with them (once you turn on game mode and turn off HDR). $350 before black friday, they're $300 at Target right now.
Also, if you want a fantastic site to compare tvs/monitors apples to apples, you can't beat rtings.com. They grade every device on the same rubric so it is easy to compare and contrast. You can even tell it which qualities you care about most (or what use case) and they rate them accordingly.
I still haven't found anything that can render code as nicely as a good bitmapped font on a non-HiDPI display can look. I do sometimes code on a retina MacBook Pro, and it's OK, but it's nowhere near as nice to look at as a good non-smoothed coding font on my 110 ppi desktop display.
Obviously, different people will have different tastes here.
That only goes if you're willing to fight the firmware all the time. Bonus, crap colours if it's a cheap TV. Doesn't matter for programming, but if you occasionally do anything else besides shuffling text around...
I thought this would be the case, but I have been really pleasantly surprised by the quality. I watched some 4k60 videos on YouTube on this thing and thought they looked great. I have not done any gaming with it though. A photographer or graphic artist could probably find fault, but for me, it is very satisfactory.
Hmm. I’ve been using WindowSpace for years for snapping and centering, but it doesn’t support customization beyond sizing sides and corners. I will check out divvy.
Does anyone use a projector for this? I have occasionally used a macboook monitor and 10' projector + screen(made of Fomrica countertop) as a duel screen setup, but I have always wanated to rig up some kind of multiple mini-projector office setup with duel or tiple screens.
Went from 3x 1920x1080 monitors to a 43" 4k IPS display a little over a year ago and has been great once used to it. Tiling 6 apps using divvy works nicely.
Lately I have found myself wishing there was a wider format 5760 x 2160 screen of about 37-43" for 6 full HD screens-worth. But can't have everything I guess.
Agreed -- I find that a single large high-res display works better for my purposes. 32" at 4K is exactly right for three side-by-side 1280xY windows, which means that browsers will display full desktop-sized sites. Text isn't too small with the 32", so no scaling required. Divvy makes window management much faster, with little mouse interaction required.
I have two 27" 2560x1440 displays at work, but I find it counterproductive to look side-to-side constantly to see what's on the other screen.
I've been using a 44" 4K TV for around two years as my main monitor and it's been great. The only very minor pain point is having to manually turn the TV off and on via the remote in the right order so that Windows 10 doesn't reset my window layout. The Visio TV I use has 1 of the 5 HDMI ports set aside to not route through its image processor which means text stays very clear.
My biggest concern is that TVs generally don't have a good refresh-rate relative to monitors. Have you noticed any lag/annoyances in that department? Do you have a link to the TV you use?
I actually prefer having dual monitors over one big monitor. I dedicate certain tasks to certain monitors, and that divide helps me quickly find what I need.
It's also nice to have the physical separation for some reason I can't really describe. My brother has a similar setup to the one in the article, and I just never really liked using it.
Just personal preference I'm sure.
(I also fear my eyesight might be too bad to have a big monitor in 4k, with things being rather small text)
For my setup, I prefer having (bright) IPS monitors. Not too large, I'm fine with my 24" 1080p monitors.
216 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 86.2 ms ] threadhttps://www.amazon.com/Philips-BDM4350UC-43-Inch-IPS-LED-Mon...
it's 4:4:4 chroma at 60hz so it's great for gaming too. and has a lower response rate than you'll get with TVs.
Highly recommended and it's hard to use anything smaller now.
Without using display scaling I wouldn't go lower than 40" and I think maybe even closer to 50" is ideal in terms of keeping the scale comparable between other periphial monitors. a 48" curved display would probably be perfect.
Terrible VR accident... punched it while playing Superhot? ;)
Source: I own and use a BDM4065UC which I'm about to return, and I've been able to test another (previously owned) one, where the owner, who had a totally different setup from me (mbpro retina 2015 is my workstation, his own was a custom-built desktop with nvidia card); many other people on various forums complain about that, and Philips support seems to know about the issue perfectly.
I have been interested in BDM4350UC and/or BDM4037UC as well, but both have been reported to suffer from extreme ghosting/persistence; I'm now looking forward to buy an LG 43UD79-B.
What I agree is: a large monitor makes the difference. Not in the workflow per se, but in how much eye strain, headache, back pain (from slouching to get closer to the screen) and so on you get at the end of the day - which is almost inexistent with such large displays. Even if it's $700 for the LG, that's well spent money.
Please update if you do end up investing in a new replacement, the LG especially.
I have a Sony x720e for my macbook for work and my PC for light gaming. It has graphics and gaming modes that have low input lags, but there is a really annoying quirk where when you turn the tv on it has normal (high) input lag until you switch to another mode then back to graphics mode. This means every time you turn on your PC (or plug in your laptop) you have to:
1. Turn on the TV
2. If necessary, switch inputs
3. Options -> Scene Select -> up arrow, down arrow
1 and 2 are annoying since monitors do that automatically but the TV doesn't. 3 is really annoying but hopefully is fixed in a firmware update...
Other than that the screen looks great.
I'm hoping for time to hack on an arduino with an IR LED to automate those steps, haha.
One thing that is certain is that people have different preferences. Certainly some people would enjoy the tiny pixels of the 27" 4k monitor at 100%.
My current setup is 2x24" 1920x1200 monitors. I have considered 3x24, 1x Ultra wide or 2x Ultra wide, but I'm not convinced I'd get the same comfort. I think that 3x 24, or 2x ultra wides would require to much head rotation to be comfortable.
I prefer the vertical break in the screen since it makes snapping windows easier. I'm starting to think that I might prefer a bit more real estate, as I often collapse the vertical file menu in my editor for a little extra room.
Currently the display you want to get around 40" is the Philips BDM4037UW, which has no PWM, relatively low input lag and backlight bleed is low.
There are some cheap 43" 4K monitors (Philips and LG), but they're lower quality e.g. LGs have PWM.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-BDM4037UW-00-40-Inch-Monito...
I have it on my desk right now and ghosting is really, really bad. Static contrast ratio is best in class, second only to oled monitors.
If you are looking for large office/work monitor only or you can borrow one with no strings attached, go for it. Otherwise stay away.
A huge boon for productivity having come from multiple 27" 1440p monitors before, and the BDM40 is something I might recommend for somebody looking to get in and get in cheap.
I'll definitely be splurging for something better next time however.
Have to say I'm very happy with it.
No ghosting, really excellent colour (once calibrated), minimal backlight bleed (it's not an IPS panel so has less bleed anyway) and 4k at 60hz.
Been using it for just over a year now. Only thing it does is pure blacks on pure whites can streak a little when scrolling. So very large and thick pure black text on pure white background will leave a very short trail. Normal text doesn't do this, it has to be large areas of black on white. It's actually not annoyed me much as it use this happened only very very rarely on some websites but it's a limitation.
Not sure it's best for gaming (though I've played Mass Effect and Rocket League with no issues) but for productivity work it's been great.
Pretty cheap too!
[0] https://www.amazon.co.uk/iiyama-X4071UHSU-B1-ProLite-MVA-Mon...
I’d love it if someone made extremely large format displays (100”+ at 3:1 aspect ratio) for computer use. Not sure how large the market would be, but one giant display is nicer than 3 separate one so.
I have converted many professionals away from TVs because when you can actually have real quality monitors to compare them too it's usually a no-brainer to abandon the cheap TV. No trick, no incentive for me, just the better choice. It is also why every employee in our company has a pair of IPS displays.
I've looked at 4K TVs as options for a monitor multiple times, from the early Seiki TVs that hit at the start of the pricing change to what's been on offer for Black Friday, don't do it to yourself unless you are spending most of your time gaming/consuming content on the same system or just using it to monitor things.
If you are going to be sat in front of displays for 10,000 hours a year working/focusing (like many of us I am sure) then investing in something like a pair of Dell U3415W, LG UM95 or LG 31MU97Z-B will give you a much nicer experience. Totally appreciate that isn't a $300 solution, but as professionals we should invest in (or demand from your employer) good tools.
To those of you who are using 4K TVs, it is obviously hard to get in front of these monitors and see the difference, but if you can you should - you've already made the choice to go for something better than a cheap 22" 1080P monitor, there are a lot of options to create a great environment to do your best work.
The article is just pure marketing anyway for referrals, so make of that what you will.
Would be curious what your use cases are, and what the differences are that you've experienced vs 4K TVs as monitors. I moved up from 6 x 27" 1080P monitors and like this arrangement far better. No fussing with multiple video cards, fewer bezels, and gained the equivelant of 2 1080P screens into the bargain. All for $1300, 1/4 of the prior setup cost.
I would love to see a photo of this setup. It sounds simultaneously awesome and ridicules!
I've had IPS monitors for 15 years and maybe it's in my head at this point compared to high end TVs and TN panels, but I wouldn't use anything else nor would I subject those I expect to drive revenue for me to do so. It's a key tool that is often an afterthought.
End of the day whatever works for you, but I have seen first hand people have huge TVs on a desk thinking they are getting some kind of gain and then they look up and down all day long or squint to see whats on it. A lot of people have to be forced to adhere to good ergonomics and healthy use of computers.
Hardware is cheap compared to what we pay for software, SaaS, pension and perks for our staff so it's something we are good on.
/ramble over
Also, many TVs are 60Hz IPS displays, but you have to do some research to find ones that display in 4:4:4 color. After that the main difference between the two is the firmware on the device, some things like VESA power saving work differently.
TVs can be cheaper because they have larger economies of scale than monitors. It doesn’t have much to do with the underlying technology.
It seems like you don’t know as much as you think you do about display technology.
I have a 27" 4K monitor at 150% scaling and it feels 'big enough', I was considering getting a second but then I'd have the bezel in the middle, so three would probably be better, but then I'd have to turn my head a lot to see the outer screens, so it seemed a bit pointless.
Maybe I'm an outlier, but I prefer to have applications full screen and just focus on that one thing. I also don't work with videos playing in the background as I find that very distracting, music is ok as I can zone out (and then realise for the last hour I've had headphones on with nothing playing), so I don't need to see a whole Spotify playlist, artwork and recommendations when I'm writing code.
If I'm doing web development, I'll have Vim in a terminal full screen, and when I need to test something live I'll switch to Chrome - my screen is big enough that I can have the page and debugger open side by side without it feeling squashed. I have tests and the compiler running in another tmux tab, so the terminal bell will alert me if something needs my attention there.
:) I basically divide the screens into 8 1080P windows. A "basic workday" for me is usually:
1. Chrome with Email, hangouts, and other administrata 2. A second Chrome with web dev. 3. A third 1080P with the web inspector for above. 4. An SSH window to the nodejs server 5. pgAdmin to postgres 6. VSCode 7. Xencenter if I'm juggling VMs around 8. Choice of: another chrome for goofing off, or a bunch of smaller windows with git bash, filesystem windows, or other little distractions like spotify.
It's hard to tell from this photo (lol messy desk) but I sit about 80cm from the screens. There are some downsides:
I'm too close to the TVs for gaming -- they're too bright even at minimum brightness setting. One "all white" explosion cutscene and my eyes will hurt. I'm in the habit of closing my eyes when I sense impending white-out.
The "curved" monitors are only subtly curved, and I still fly them in a "Vee" configuration. I could've saved $200 by just going with 2 flat monitors. It seemed cooler at the time than it is.
I see others talking about fighting firmware and whatnot, but these MU650Ds from Costco (which I'm told are identical to MU6500s, but re-numbered to avoid price-matching...shrug?) just worked out of the box. Setting the "device" to PC HDMI and the TV took it from there. I dinked with the color settings to taste.
It's weird, my laptop is an XPS13 with the 3200x1800 screen, and when I try to do ANY splitscreen work, I find myself edging closer or squinting. I don't wear glasses, but I think I must just be a "not a HiDPI" guy. square inches on screens are cheap and cheerful.
I haven't found it hard to focus on a "tile" to work.
It's nice to step through the node debugger by flicking VSCode fullscreen, hunting and pecking through the 100-line-high code, all on the right side while the SSH/Chrome/Chrome debugger/pgsql windows sit on the left and I can watch them whirr with each step. Works for me anyway.
$0.02 :)
ATM I have a fairly old 32" 1080p TV as my middle screen.
It becomes hard to find the desk space for three monitors when you get to a 40" middle screen though. I prefer having multiple monitors than a single larger monitor. I haven't decided how I'm going to upgrade yet.
These all sound ridiculously low dpi - mid 80s.
My 17" pre-retina MBP does 1920x1200 - 130-something dpi and that's so old Apple don't sell parts for it any more.
How on earth are you using these or the previous ones, that everything, and particularly text, isn't just atrocious to look at?
Distance from the display is as important as DPI when discussing pixel clarity.
Last time I bought a laptop, all the reasonably priced ones had 1366x768 displays. I hate it! The pixels are very visible. Finally picked up a 14" 1920x1080 Chromebook for web use and I couldn't be happier, it's so much nicer looking.
A kilobuck will get you a 30" 2560x1600 Dell UP3017.
I dislike multi-monitor setups. Dunno if it’s the bezels or what. A single unbroken surface feels better to me.
For a VC company’s web forum, some HNers sure find making money offensive :D
I tend to tile my windows and use the different displays for the different 'flavours' of my work.
No distractions from another screen, just focus on one single task. Also, no turning my head all the time.
Presumably on a time machine so you can go back and repeat 52 of those days.
Or put another way: there's only ~8760 hours in a year total. Most people (~ 40 hours a week types) work around 2000 hours a year.
Something to do with marketing and how the two businesses differ (TVs B2C, monitors B2B)?
Or are there actual major differencies in the tech? Like what panel is used or something like that?
Add to that the different features - higher DPI, refresh rate, contrast ratios, etc. Cutting edge features such as NVidia G-Sync and the similar feature from AMD don't come cheap.
https://mybroadband.co.za/news/hardware/145753-why-computer-...
I'm much happier with the high-DPI displays in my ThinkPad Yoga 460 WQHD and MacBook Pro Retina 15".
I don't like pixels, and I don't want to see them any more. I want to see the text and graphics I'm working on, not pixels.
So when I wanted a second monitor to go with those machines, I got a 24" 4K display. At 187 pixels per inch, it's a reasonably close match to the 210-220 pixels per inch on the laptops.
I use this monitor in portrait mode next to the laptop display. A portrait mode monitor combined with the laptop monitor is great. I've got a wide screen when I want it, and a tall screen when I want that. It's ideal for reading documentation and especially PDF files, because an entire page fits on the portrait screen. Larger monitors are not very practical in portrait mode.
I'm not concerned with cramming the maximum amount of stuff on my screen. I run the monitors at 225% scaling in Windows, and the default Retina scaling in macOS. So text is about the same size it would be on a lower-DPI monitor, just much sharper and crisper.
After I got my first taste of high DPI with that MacBook, I swore I'd never go back to a low DPI display. It is so nice to not have to look at pixels any more.
One big consideration for me: I'm 65, so my eyes are not able to focus back and forth to different distances like a younger person.
My solution is a pair of single vision prescription lenses, adjusted to the distance to my monitor(s). I need to be able to use the laptop all on its own, so that determines the focus distance: about 20".
Because of that, I also place any secondary monitor at about the same distance from my eyes, otherwise it would be out of focus. I can't go changing glasses to look at a different monitor. :-)
A 24" 4K display works nicely for this, and as I mentioned it's small enough to work really well in portrait mode.
So I have two recommendations for any programmer. If you haven't used a portrait mode monitor, try it out alongside your laptop display. It's a very practical setup.
But more importantly, if you find yourself gravitating toward lower-DPI monitors, it may be time for a vision check and a good pair of single vision prescription glasses adjusted for your monitor distance (again, about 20" if you ever need to use a laptop by itself). I put off doing this for years - I always thought of myself as the kind of person who "didn't need glasses."
When I finally got the prescription lenses, it was a real eye-opener - pun intended!
Of course if I take off my glasses, then every monitor looks the same. But with proper correction, my vision is better than 20/20.
With my prescription computer glasses, the difference between low DPI and high DPI is like night and day. I can see every pixel on a low DPI monitor, while high DPI monitors look beautiful to me.
Please, everyone: do yourself a huge favor and get your vision checked and get some single vision prescription glasses if they are called for. It's hard to overstate the difference this will make in your quality of life.
Edit: Not sure why you were downvoted for a reasonable comment. It's true that your vision will get worse as you get older. Even if nothing else goes wrong, you lose your ability to focus your eyes dynamically. The lenses harden up and lock into a specific focal distance.
However, many of these vision changes are correctable. Progressive lenses are a great solution for "out and about" use. You can look up and down to see far and near things. They aren't very good for computer use, and that's where the single vision lenses come in.
It is a minor nuisance to switch back and forth between the computer glasses and the progressives, but being able to see clearly makes it all worth it.
Though I’m dreading the day I have to get varifocals.
Coding without seeing pixels in font rendering is just bliss, it is too hard to go back.
This is like a reading prescription, but adjusted for a farther distance. Reading glasses are typically adjusted for a 16" focal distance. That's much closer than you would use a computer. If you use a laptop on its own without an external monitor, that's usually about 20".
I took my ThinkPad to my optometrist the first time I did this, so we could be sure of the correct distance. When I saw how crisp and clear my screen was with the prescription, compared to the blurry mess I'd been suffering with... if I may indulge in a pun, it brought tears to my eyes.
The first thing you'll want to do with a new TV is to take it out of that mode. The "correct" mode depends on the TV and some internet searching can help you out, but putting it in the cinema/movie mode is at least a first good guess.
Finally, of course, you need to feed the 4K monitor a good 4K signal, or the 4K monitor isn't going to look any better. And as the article mentions, that's sometimes easier said than done, because HDMI can't always handle it.
If after all that, you can't tell the difference at all between 4K and 1080P at point blank range on a monitor setup like that, you may have eye issues, yes, absolutely. And you may still find that you don't much care about 4K. I've got 4K on my laptop, which is nice in a couple of ways, but in general I'm really rather "meh" on it for development work. I've got two 1080P monitors at work and prefer that to a 4K setup. But I also don't care about pixelization very much compared to a lot of people, and never have. I used to read books on my 160x160 monochrome Palm Pilot, and I guess everything looks good after spending my formative years on a Commodore 64 with a 1980s vintage television. But I do at least see the difference and can easily understand why others have other opinions.
This wouldn't be an option for me. Although I do usually work at my home office, I also need to be able to use a laptop on its own when I'm traveling or just want to get out for a while. So that determines the 20" focus distance I need.
With single vision prescription glasses tuned for that distance, my eyes don't have to do any of the optical accommodation you mention. My glasses are set up to let my eyes be relaxed at 20"; there's no strain of my eye muscles trying to adjust to a different distance.
There was a site I was reading some time ago that mentioned with glasses, the geometry of your eyes converging on point nearby (ie slightly 'cross-eyed') doesn't correspond with the eye muscles relaxed, for focusing at 'infinity'. The 'control systems' are likely coupled. I've used glasses with smaller screens, and I've noticed my eyes behaving a bit strange (perhaps seemed harder to focus) when alternating between glasses/no glasses. No idea if there are any other consequences. Maybe it's fine.
Enough screen real estate that you don’t feel pressured to add another monitor, high enough DPI to look good, low enough to not need scaling, connects to USB C MBP with one wire for video, charging, and a USB 3.0 hub.
IMO the perfect monitor.
I had a 34 inch with a second 27” monitor, but a single 38” hits the sweet spot of not needing another monitor
>It’s a 38” 21:9
>I had a 34 inch with a second 27”, but a single 38” hits the sweet spot of not needing another monitor.
For a short while I had the second screen with the 38” screen but it was just overkill (the 38” alone is enough to cover a large portion off the usable area of my desk, so the 27” mostly just sat out of view)
Plays nice with my PC and 2015 macbook pro.
Very happy.
The DPI looks like 1080 on a 21" years ago again, but the real estate is enomorous and I certainly don't mind it. Sure pictures/movies on 40" is not as pixel rich as a 32" 4K or 27" 4K, but you'd have to mount multiple to match the real estate of a 43" monitor.
It's true though the scaling makes text larger but not reducing DPI as the picture looks much better on a 27"/32" than the 43". But without scaling, my aging eyes can handle anything greater than 110 PPI. https://www.sven.de/dpi/
The 40" had total crap quality but still had some advantages in terms of usable screen real estate.
There are a bunch of 40+ real monitors now though: Dell P4317Q, AOC C4008VU8, LG 43UD79-B, Philips BDM4037UW - they are all using the same panels as TVs I assume, but hopefully the higher quality ones, and their electronics will be designed for computer use.
Under Linux, situation is not as bad, since you can persuade xft to optimize font rasterization for readability. OSX makes the choice towards glyph shape fidelity, though, even at lower point sizes, which results in horrible anti-aliasing blur.
Until recently, I used a 40" 4K monitor. For whatever reason, TVs handle input switching much, much more smoothly than monitors do: If I have two machines hooked up to different inputs of a monitor, and reboot the one I'm working on, the monitor will often spontaneously choose to show me the other input. A TV in the same situation will happily show "no signal" and stay where you told it to stay. I've only tried two brands of monitor (Planar and Philips), admittedly, but they behave identically in ignoring the manually-set input if some other input seems more interesting. :/ I had been using a Philips 40" 4K monitor for a couple years, and the frustration with input switching drove me to the same Spectre TV from the article, which is frankly worse in every picture-quality-related metric than the Philips, but doesn't instantly switch inputs when signal is interrupted, or blank and reblank the screen 2-12 times when it hasn't been on for a while.
Well, that went a bit off track.
Also, if you want a fantastic site to compare tvs/monitors apples to apples, you can't beat rtings.com. They grade every device on the same rubric so it is easy to compare and contrast. You can even tell it which qualities you care about most (or what use case) and they rate them accordingly.
http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/tcl/s-series-4k-2017-s405
Obviously, different people will have different tastes here.
40" is roughly 1.5625 times in area of a than 32" though...
Yes, TN is even worse. One must have an IPS panel! :-)
(I hear, though, that TN, and maybe VA, might be preferred by some for high-performance gaming situations, due to a lower latency.)
Tech specs are an easy way to compare stuff, but they don't always say everything.
Lately I have found myself wishing there was a wider format 5760 x 2160 screen of about 37-43" for 6 full HD screens-worth. But can't have everything I guess.
I have two 27" 2560x1440 displays at work, but I find it counterproductive to look side-to-side constantly to see what's on the other screen.
It's also nice to have the physical separation for some reason I can't really describe. My brother has a similar setup to the one in the article, and I just never really liked using it.
Just personal preference I'm sure.
(I also fear my eyesight might be too bad to have a big monitor in 4k, with things being rather small text)
For my setup, I prefer having (bright) IPS monitors. Not too large, I'm fine with my 24" 1080p monitors.