I didn't try, the LG still works great! That said, I've never had a problem with any returns at Costco, customer service is part of their DNA thankfully.
I could write the opposite article on how a 40" 4K is overrated and a 34" ultra wide is what to use instead. Main one being the bottom and top of the monitor is too low / too high so your primary windows will always be in a bad spot if you use that 3x2 layout he shows.
I guess you could write a window manager to move that primary window every 20 minutes to a new location in the 3x2 grid so you aren't fixated in one place.
The other issue is are 6 windows really useful? I could find 3 or maybe 4 useful but then your windows get huge and it's kind of overwhelming to concentrate on them. Either way you slice it I think it's hard to manage such a large screen if you're not constantly selling yourself on the imagined productivity of it.
As someone who uses 3 monitors, I really wish they'd make an ultrawide that had 3 panels. Using an ultrawide in the center with a third monitor off to the side is too awkward.
I'm not really big on either ultrawides or 4k TVs for productivity usage.
Ultrawides don't play as nice with OS workspace management and can't provide physical partitioning/prioritization (e.g. primary windows on main screen virtual desktops, auxiliary windows on secondary screen virtual desktops). They also tend to not measure up to regular monitors in terms of specs.
4k TVs put heavy constraints on desk arrangement to get satisfactory perceived sharpness and UI scale and come with all sorts of extraneous TV junk (unless you go with an ultra-basic or signage model, which are anemic in terms of panel capabilities).
My preferred setup would be 2x 16:10 30-32" monitor or a single 16:10 30-32" monitor accompanied by a 1:1 or 5:4 secondary monitor that's height-matched to the primary monitor, but that's not practical so I go with the pretty-standard setup of 2x 16:9 27" monitors. If I absolutely had to go with a TV-like setup though, I think it'd be with a BFGD (big format gaming display), because the panels on those are more monitor-like and they don't have all the cruft that TVs tend to come with.
Yeah I bought a ultra wide and make it work with Fancy Zones on Windows Power Toys but dual 16:10 is still the best because it plays nice with the OS by default. I think default window management still has along way to go to suit all the different options out there.
The dual 16:10 you get two "prime" windows in the center and 2 aux windows out wide. where as with a 34" 1200p ultra wide you get 2 prime left and right or 1 prime and 2 aux with Fancy Zones, or 3 "aux". If you consistently find yourself needing 3 or 4 full size windows then the ultra wide is not ideal unfortunately.
The large 4k is just miserable because there's no ideal natural prime window location like I top posted further down.
I feel like this is a good place for me to plug my Fancy Zones fork, which supports maximizing windows within zones. The latest alpha also supports full-screening videos within zone boundaries.
It is surprising that no one will sell me a reasonable pixel density ultrawide. I have 2x 27" 4k monitors, which look great, but that setup is overwhelmingly large in my home. I got a 34" ultrawide and it's a nice compromise between screen real estate and desk real estate, but the resolution is mediocre.
Your preferred setup sounds like one of the layouts of my current ultrawide monitor: one primary window at 2/3 the width, and a secondary window at 1/3. But a single ultrawide gives you flexibility - easily switch to a 50/50 split or 100% width if you're working with something that requires it (or has a really big sidebar).
I'm using Magnet on MacOS so I don't know how easy a 1/3 split would be in other operating systems. If you get an ultrawide or a large TV, setting up some kind of window management tool is probably required.
That setup sounds workable, but dual screens is almost non-negotiable for me because it allows entire sets of primary/secondary windows to be mixed and matched on the fly just by changing spaces (I use macOS primarily as well). It's very powerful, because it cuts the overhead of window management down to almost nothing without adding any key shortcuts or gestures beyond what I'd be using anyway.
For snap functionality on the rare occasion it's needed, I use Moom because it's probably the most unobtrusive of those types of utilities. No Aero Snap to unintentionally activate or draw spurious rectangles and no extra key shortcuts, just a little bubble that pops up when hovering over the green traffic light. macOS also has very similar snapping functionality built in so when working on a stock configuration system I'm still mostly at home.
As mentioned in my other posts, the big difference is the second set of virtual desktops that's afforded by a second monitor, as well as physical prioritization of secondary, tertiary, etc windows.
It also means you have a far wider selection of models at your disposal for both screens – in my case I like my primary monitor to be HiDPI while the secondary monitor can be a more run of the mill 1440p 27" monitor that you might find at a yard sale.
I ran dual 23" 1080p monitors for a long time, and then went BFGD. Acer Predator 43" 4K, which I split into four quadrants. I also have a 27" 4K (but I run it at 1440p for readability) vertical monitor to the right, which is used almost exclusively for an editor.
Both are driven via a single (each) USB-C --> DP cable. The Predator doubles as a gaming monitor for my desktop. I couldn't be happier with my setup.
I use an LG 42.5" monitor that didn't have all the TV junk. Instead it has a single USB-C I can connect and use as a hub for kb+mouse. It also has Display port and 2 HDMI inputs (and maybe a dilplayport out that I don't know how to use).
One mode I find useful for casual gaming is the 2560x1440 @59.9 Hz which uses native pixels and results in a very usable gaming view with huge distraction-free black matte border.
I do the same. Cheap 4K TV (HDR, 60Hz) gives you much more screen estate. 43 inch is big enough to keep the DPI scaling on 125%. I am very happy with this setup
Not to poop on the big screen party, but from an ergonomic standpoint that does not look like a great idea[1]. Such a big screen at that distance will likely make your head tilt back slightly and your eyes look up and may wreak havoc on your neck and eyes.
I’ve been using a 43” display for 2-3 years, and a 2x2 quad setup before that. The single 43” display is better for ergonomics than the quad setup and I haven’t had an issue. Most of what I actively work on is at eye level, while the stuff up high are mostly things I just need to quickly glance at or use for 20 seconds here and there. If I need to interact with it more, I just drag it down to the middle of the screen. I don’t even think about it really.
I use a 27" 4K IPS @ 144Hz. I upgraded from a 60HZ 1440p at the same size, and it was a massive upgrade. Once you go to this pixel density, it's hard to go back. Similarly to 120Hz, if you do any sort blender / modeling, or other graphical applications - it's a completely different experience.
Both the pixel density and refresh rate, coupled with a backlight onto the wall, reduce the eye strain so much. I can't imagine sitting a foot away from a TV.
Not previous poster, but I have a Samsung LS28AG700NNXZA
Some monitors have fans? That's news to me, I've never had a monitor that did. Didn't know they were common enough to make it an explicit deal breaker.
I got a 4K display and regret it. Going back to 2K because 4K:
- requires lots of wasted processing power
- hard to see without messing with fonts (again, more processing power)
- have to zoom in to work with pixel precision
- not many programs/games actually support 4K resolution
- older games look terrible
- only good for LOOKING at photos, rarely actually editing (again, because of constant zooming)
- probably good for 4K movies, but 4K BDs are almost impossible to watch on a PCs
I'd move to 2K CRT.
PPI is more important than layout/size to me. 43" @ 4k is 102 PPI which is ridiculously low when sitting at a desk. (just over arms length away from the monitor).
My minimum is 150 PPI (which is ~ 4k @ 28"). If I wasn't so cheap I'd probably just get the LG ultrafine/Apple studio display, but might compromise and get a 5k2k 34".
I wouldn't mind a higher PPI, but with subpixel text rendering I find that the text quality is good enough for me. I'm hoping the TV resolution arms race will continue until 8K is the new normal like 4K is now. Then you will have large displays with good pixel density.
I used to have 4x1080p monitors for work. I switched it out for a 43” 4K. It’s a dramatically better experience and no different than if those 1080p screens were roughly 21” in terms of the pixels. Not having screen borders is fantastic.
I’m not doing a bunch of photo, video, or design work where I need the pixels to vanish, and while I’ve never looked for pixels, I’ve never noticed them either. The screen isn’t nearly as sharp as on my MacBook Pro, but I don’t need it to be.
Being able to make a window tall or wide (or both) without having to have a complicated monitor setup and move windows around is very nice. I use both of these options on a daily basis and can’t imagine being without them now.
My only issue is that when I share my screen I need to use the laptop display, so people can actually read what I’m showing. When I do that everything feels very cramped and I can’t see much at once. I honestly don’t know how people live with small screens.
I think if I want to up the PPI, I would have to start looking for an 8K display. Maybe once they come down in price that will be in my future. This actually gives me a reason to pay attention to that market, because as a television, sitting 10+ feet away, I don’t see much of a point to 8K.
Used to have the multi monitor setup but switched to a single LG (apple) 27" 5K. Could not be happier. Right size that does not require me to move my head and crisp text. I agree 100% that PPI is king here.
So many windows and so much to look at seems like the opposite of productivity. I’m not about to go back to an 80x24 dumb terminal but I don’t think my measured productivity has improved by the same factor as the number of pixels on my display. At some point you pass the limit of what your brain can focus on and the clutter just turns into busy-ness.
No joke. I have very good eyesight and bought a 4K 32" display to run at @1x. When I started using the display, I had no issue with the pixel pitch, but the extra cognitive load of being able to see so much at once was such a downside that I've went back to my 27" 1440p display and I'm much happier.
For music production and video editing, ultrawides are a Godsend to me. Being able to see a big timeline without the division in the middle as i was used to when using dual monitor setups, covers any drawback.
I am going the opposite direction, a more squarish monitor just came out from LG. Its awesome! I run one 30 inch monitor as main, and the Dual Up which is 26 wide by 28 tall as my code monitor to the side. So much better than my old 27 inch monitor in portrait orientation.
I tried 43” 4K for a while, but it did not work out for me. Using the sides and corners was inconvenient as it required keeping head turned. I noticed I was mostly just keeping stuff in the middle.
Maybe it would have worked better with some more tuning and good window manager. For example keep Slack in corner, bring it center for chatting, put back to corner.
I’m only using side displays for logs or something I don’t need to refer to often and can see by side vision. Same for large “viewport” angles like tv right in front of me. Can’t stand turning my head or reading at an angle (even if it’s good-angle ips). However you arrange your screens, the field of your effective sight remains the same.
Multiple displays is just a physical solution to the core issue: desktop window managers and software and hardware suck. You can’t have an event-transparent overlay of a compiler/runtime output over your ui testing area, you can’t have windows that slide in from the side on a hotkey or a click, showing quick status when “holstered”. You can’t reveal/popup a window when text in it matches a regex. You can’t assign a hotkey to a browser tab. You can’t custom-dpi a specific window. You can’t have drawers with links in them that are already preloaded and ready to refer to. You can’t have a special set of keys to launch, raise or shift windows temporarily. You can’t scroll on a keyboard. It’s all stupid and fixed even with advanced WMs, or requires programming comparable with creating a new WM and most apps from scratch. And it’s always arcane combination of two-three-four keys, most of which live in rural areas of your keyboard.
Funny thing is, 3d games figured it out with huds, OSD messages, consoles, choice wheels, trivial panning, zooming and movement, “physical” buttons and switches, and 3d itself.
Multiple displays have a tremendous advantage that cannot be matched in software, namely that you can adjust each monitor to its use-case. The portrait monitor I use for web browsing is adjusted very differently than the one I use to game, or the one I use for TV.
I think it really depends what you’re using it for. I look at multiple log windows all day and do some platform development when there’s time, and having a screen that fits 3 useable panels of logs across it has been the single biggest improvement to my professional work since switching to a MacBook a decade ago. I went for the Philips 50” with an inbuilt KVM switch, and it has worked flawlessly.
I would wish for a higher refresh rate but they released one with that about a year after I got mine, so if you’re in the market, get that one.
I tried the 32” 4K, Samsung odyssey 49” ultrawide, 43” 4K tv, and settled on my current Dell 40” 5k2k ultrawide.
For me, the 32” is not wide enough (I use a Mac) and the 43” 4K tv is too tall (neck strain). The Samsung 49” is too wide and not enough vertical space. The Dell 40” is great—-it as tall as a 32” 4K but has 50% more horizontal space. Combined with Rectangle I can split it into 3x2 or 4x2 or 1/4,1/2,1/4 easily. It’s pricy but imo it’s worth it.
You had me at "Ultrawide monitors are overrated" and lost me at "TV". Ultrawides are indeed a forced meme, and they take away height unnecessarily, but I've always heard TV panels were not as good as monitor panels, particularly wrt latency.
56 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 116 ms ] threadThis will protect you from the consequences of burn-in and more for 5 years.
(Assuming the terms haven't changed since I last bought one in 2020.)
I guess you could write a window manager to move that primary window every 20 minutes to a new location in the 3x2 grid so you aren't fixated in one place.
The other issue is are 6 windows really useful? I could find 3 or maybe 4 useful but then your windows get huge and it's kind of overwhelming to concentrate on them. Either way you slice it I think it's hard to manage such a large screen if you're not constantly selling yourself on the imagined productivity of it.
Ultrawides don't play as nice with OS workspace management and can't provide physical partitioning/prioritization (e.g. primary windows on main screen virtual desktops, auxiliary windows on secondary screen virtual desktops). They also tend to not measure up to regular monitors in terms of specs.
4k TVs put heavy constraints on desk arrangement to get satisfactory perceived sharpness and UI scale and come with all sorts of extraneous TV junk (unless you go with an ultra-basic or signage model, which are anemic in terms of panel capabilities).
My preferred setup would be 2x 16:10 30-32" monitor or a single 16:10 30-32" monitor accompanied by a 1:1 or 5:4 secondary monitor that's height-matched to the primary monitor, but that's not practical so I go with the pretty-standard setup of 2x 16:9 27" monitors. If I absolutely had to go with a TV-like setup though, I think it'd be with a BFGD (big format gaming display), because the panels on those are more monitor-like and they don't have all the cruft that TVs tend to come with.
The dual 16:10 you get two "prime" windows in the center and 2 aux windows out wide. where as with a 34" 1200p ultra wide you get 2 prime left and right or 1 prime and 2 aux with Fancy Zones, or 3 "aux". If you consistently find yourself needing 3 or 4 full size windows then the ultra wide is not ideal unfortunately.
The large 4k is just miserable because there's no ideal natural prime window location like I top posted further down.
https://github.com/peddamat/PowerToys/releases/tag/v0.58.7-m...
The Power Toys devs have an issue open regarding this feature, and we're figuring out next steps: https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/279
I'm using Magnet on MacOS so I don't know how easy a 1/3 split would be in other operating systems. If you get an ultrawide or a large TV, setting up some kind of window management tool is probably required.
For snap functionality on the rare occasion it's needed, I use Moom because it's probably the most unobtrusive of those types of utilities. No Aero Snap to unintentionally activate or draw spurious rectangles and no extra key shortcuts, just a little bubble that pops up when hovering over the green traffic light. macOS also has very similar snapping functionality built in so when working on a stock configuration system I'm still mostly at home.
It also means you have a far wider selection of models at your disposal for both screens – in my case I like my primary monitor to be HiDPI while the secondary monitor can be a more run of the mill 1440p 27" monitor that you might find at a yard sale.
Both are driven via a single (each) USB-C --> DP cable. The Predator doubles as a gaming monitor for my desktop. I couldn't be happier with my setup.
One mode I find useful for casual gaming is the 2560x1440 @59.9 Hz which uses native pixels and results in a very usable gaming view with huge distraction-free black matte border.
Anything else has required some substantial modification to how I work or forced a less-than-ideal ergonomic situation.
[1] https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/office/monitor_po...
Both the pixel density and refresh rate, coupled with a backlight onto the wall, reduce the eye strain so much. I can't imagine sitting a foot away from a TV.
I'm still waiting for one who doesn't have a fan in it.
Which o e do you have?
Some monitors have fans? That's news to me, I've never had a monitor that did. Didn't know they were common enough to make it an explicit deal breaker.
The first displays were just super expensive and the second generation consumer gamer displays have fans in it.
I also was surprised that a display can have a fan but was a no go for me as displays normally live very long.
I will have a look at yours and the LG one :-)
No fan, includes a wall backlight. Surprisingly cheap for a G-Sync 4k @ 144Hz - $699 not on sale.
- requires lots of wasted processing power - hard to see without messing with fonts (again, more processing power) - have to zoom in to work with pixel precision - not many programs/games actually support 4K resolution - older games look terrible - only good for LOOKING at photos, rarely actually editing (again, because of constant zooming) - probably good for 4K movies, but 4K BDs are almost impossible to watch on a PCs I'd move to 2K CRT.
My minimum is 150 PPI (which is ~ 4k @ 28"). If I wasn't so cheap I'd probably just get the LG ultrafine/Apple studio display, but might compromise and get a 5k2k 34".
I’m not doing a bunch of photo, video, or design work where I need the pixels to vanish, and while I’ve never looked for pixels, I’ve never noticed them either. The screen isn’t nearly as sharp as on my MacBook Pro, but I don’t need it to be.
Being able to make a window tall or wide (or both) without having to have a complicated monitor setup and move windows around is very nice. I use both of these options on a daily basis and can’t imagine being without them now.
My only issue is that when I share my screen I need to use the laptop display, so people can actually read what I’m showing. When I do that everything feels very cramped and I can’t see much at once. I honestly don’t know how people live with small screens.
I think if I want to up the PPI, I would have to start looking for an 8K display. Maybe once they come down in price that will be in my future. This actually gives me a reason to pay attention to that market, because as a television, sitting 10+ feet away, I don’t see much of a point to 8K.
Being able to just make one window full screen really helps me concentrate. Having a second screen constantly doing stuff just broke my focus.
When I need multiple Windows I can just tile with a window manager.
https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-28mq780-b
Maybe it would have worked better with some more tuning and good window manager. For example keep Slack in corner, bring it center for chatting, put back to corner.
Multiple displays is just a physical solution to the core issue: desktop window managers and software and hardware suck. You can’t have an event-transparent overlay of a compiler/runtime output over your ui testing area, you can’t have windows that slide in from the side on a hotkey or a click, showing quick status when “holstered”. You can’t reveal/popup a window when text in it matches a regex. You can’t assign a hotkey to a browser tab. You can’t custom-dpi a specific window. You can’t have drawers with links in them that are already preloaded and ready to refer to. You can’t have a special set of keys to launch, raise or shift windows temporarily. You can’t scroll on a keyboard. It’s all stupid and fixed even with advanced WMs, or requires programming comparable with creating a new WM and most apps from scratch. And it’s always arcane combination of two-three-four keys, most of which live in rural areas of your keyboard.
Funny thing is, 3d games figured it out with huds, OSD messages, consoles, choice wheels, trivial panning, zooming and movement, “physical” buttons and switches, and 3d itself.
I would wish for a higher refresh rate but they released one with that about a year after I got mine, so if you’re in the market, get that one.
For me, the 32” is not wide enough (I use a Mac) and the 43” 4K tv is too tall (neck strain). The Samsung 49” is too wide and not enough vertical space. The Dell 40” is great—-it as tall as a 32” 4K but has 50% more horizontal space. Combined with Rectangle I can split it into 3x2 or 4x2 or 1/4,1/2,1/4 easily. It’s pricy but imo it’s worth it.