I got a decent dual monitor setup at work (dual 27" QHD's) but at home I want to do a single 30-34" 4k display because fuck bezels.
My macbook pro can drive 4k@60hz, and my desktop with a 7970 may(?) be able as well.
I wanna get a most bang for the buck.
What does Sup Forums think of the QNIX for $420?
It seems to check all the boxes:
32" matte screen
4k
IPS
HDMI 2 / DP1.2 @60hz
Other urls found in this thread:
vitiy.info
twitter.com
>30-34
>programming
a TV
>programming
>4k
>40"
lol.
get a 24 or 27" 4k monitor. you basically get a 24" retina display. put it in portrait orientation and it's perfect for programming.
40" monitors are retarded. stop listening to retarded gamers.
>4k monitor
>for programming
for what fucking purpose
see high density displays give you sharper text, which make reading code and documentation much, much nicer.
Resolution/real estate is key.
I'd rather get AIDS than have to scroll constantly through an editor.
I'd like to see two or three windows side by side, possibly, VM's, output windows, loggers, porn.
Real estate is important as fuck, pic related.
I didn't think of the density factor. This could be a problem. I was worried that a 27/28" 4k display may be too brittle and hard to read.
>sharper text
nigger 1080p is fine. your precious little eyes won't suffer.
>real-estate
just get two fucking monitors you retarded mongoloids. there is no objectively good reason to get a 4k monitor for programming.
jesus you special snowflakes are retarded
>a 27/28" 4k display may be too brittle
can you try adjectives that make sense?
>1080p is fine
we literally have had this discussion for more than 4 years now. if you don't work, or don't work with text, then stop posting. so many retards like you seem to have no idea what you're talking about, but insist on giving your kneejerk input.
>if you don't work, or don't work with text
>"m-muh text has jagged edges when i zoom in on it 4x!!!! or when my face is literally inches from the screen!!!!!!!"
jesus you fucking crybabies. i imagine you've never worked a day in your life because any employer would think that your inability to look at a 1080p screen is completely asinine.
idk m8, after 15yrs of professional software development, I have just progressed into bigger displays/better hardware and better chairs.
Call me crazy.
what kind of fucking workflow lives in that?
why don't you check out the blog that this guy ripped the image from here:
vitiy.info
your false dichotomy would probably be more effective on someone your age. i never said 1080p is unusable or that i'm unable to work with it. i'm saying that a higher density screen is so much better that it's worth upgrading.
honestly though, i've never heard of any employer in a tech company considering a $400 monitor lavish enough to second guess the request. if your boss is equivocating about spending that little money on your working space, you're probably worthless to him.
Thanks for the clicks.
1080p 21.5 is still best monitor.
They are cheap, you can have 3, 4 or even 6 of them.
>They are cheap, you can have 3, 4 or even 6 of them.
gamers, everybody
why combine 3 honda civics when you can feasibly have 1 lexus?
You can order your minions drive Honda Civics to different places. At once.
>21.5"
Sure is 2007 here.
so in this analogy you're saying you give your monitors to other people you hire and tell them to work with their respective monitors?
That is absolutely retarded.
No, the analogy is that smaller monitors can display more workspaces at once, even if the workspace itself is smaller.
Single monitor pleb?
if you're programming, you tend to want to focus on one or two things at once. maybe have 2 monitors, but more than that and the consensus among people that have used them for a while increasingly becomes that it was overkill. some people even go back to 1 monitor.
get a pair of monitors. one for coding, one for documentation or other general purpose stuff.
I find often that I need a lot more context than one monitor could provide with even left-right snaps.
One browser window for docs/stackoverflow/storyboard.
One window for IDE, but more often 2.
One window for screen with terminals.
One window for browser in which I debug.
Another for dev tools window detached from it. If I pair with someone remote, I need to dedicate a monitor to see their screen.
if you can't be as productive with a cheapo 1080p monitor, then i guarantee that your boss will have some questions as to why you feel that you need a 4k monitor.
but then again you wouldn't know, because you haven't worked a day in your life.
It's definitely not for everyone, but there's no question that you're able to see more lines of code w/o scrolling.
If you are more productive like this, by all means do it. I do think this is natural progression.
Just get an ultrawide
I missed a return there but you see where this is going.
Sometimes I find myself with 6 WebStorms and 2 Visual studios open. It's not often that I actually work with more than 2 at once, but I just keep them open there.
the natural progression isn't toward larger monitors. that much should be obvious from the trend the rMBP started. we've been seeing pixel densities climb in monitors leading up to desktop monitors. 4k 40" monitors are just repurposed televisions that samsung et al. wanted to sell to PC gamers. the future is in 4k and 5k monitors under 30".
But why?
I don't game, so I don't care about all those bezels. Multiple monitors provide more space to tuck and snap windows.
>640kb of RAM is all anyone will ever need
>I'm never going to use more than 250GB of disk space
>Wireless mice are a stupid meme
>Beige is the perfect color for a desktop. Anything else is gay.
>USB will never get widely adopted. FireWire is superior.
>Why would anyone want touchscreen?
>1366x768 MASTER RACE
An ultrawide can act as 2 monitors when you need them and just 1 when you don't.
Nice strawman.
Op is probably extremely productive with a single CGA 480x320 monitor.
Op wants to push the envelope. Quit crying like you have to cut him a check for a monitor.
Fag.
don't forget, this is Sup Forums
3440x1440
>1440 means lots of scrolling.
16x10 would be awesome....21:9 misses the point.
Really? That's nice then.
Is it a hardware mode?
>if you can't be as productive with a cheapo 1080p monitor, then i guarantee that your boss will have some questions as to why you feel that you need a 4k monitor.
lol okay
I can't wait until hololense is good enough that I can just have a fuck huge monitor to do my work on through the screen. VR might be too enclosing.
Yes, you can set it to pretend it's 2 monitors in the monitor's settings.
sick bait friendo.
What the fuck can be gained by just making text sharper on a 27" monitor? You're still seeing the same amount of text as you would on a 27" 1080p monitor (provided that everything isn't just fucking tiny, in which case it would be even harder to read shit).
There is no fucking functional gain.
good luck waiting on that. you and your fellow VR enthusiasts seem to think VR that's usable in that context is just around the corner, as if you haven't been even vaguely aware of all the barriers between us and that future.
I loved the idea coming from a 1600x900 9" screen. But then I realized they use all these pixels for more detail instead of more content.
That's great. I would never leave it.
>What the fuck can be gained by just making text sharper
for one thing, it's less fatiguing on the eyes. you don't feel the need to take breaks as often.
again, this is something you couldn't really understand unless you had a job that involved reading and writing text. i don't expect you to understand.
pony posting from late 2011
shit man has it really been that long?
Wait, no, it was 1600x768.
It'll happen in 10-15 years or so. Just need another breakthrough in batteries, optics, and processing.
>reading text on a screen is fatiguing if it's even slightly, unnoticeably blurry
jesus, just quit now you jobless faggot. buy some glasses if your vision really is that bad.
you could set the monitor to display as 2880x1800, but then all the criticism they said in that idiot screenshot would apply.
but one of the biggest boons of the rMBP is that now resolution settings are just an abstraction. i can set it to "look like" 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 or 1440x900. it's a bizarre change from the norm to be able to arbitrarily choose the working space like this without any substantial penalty. same with a 24" 4k monitor.
But you can set it as two 4:3 monitors for that exact reason.
it sounds like you need glasses if you don't appreciate sharper text. and honestly at this point several people have singled you out as a retard. what do you do for a living?
"Boss, I'm sorry, but I can't work under these conditions."
>"What? Someone in the office harassing you? Do you feel like your benefits aren't good enough?"
"N-no...It's none of that..."
>"Then what is it, user?"
"My....My monitor doesn't have 4K resolution, and the text is slightly blurry...It really fatigues my eyes."
>"....Get the fuck out of my office user."
We know your name now, faggot Matt Baha. Maybe you should remove your shipping address before screencapping.
>You can look at text that is imperceptibly jagged without being fatigued
>I can't do that
>Therefore you must have bad eyesight
Jesus christ, did you learn that kind of retard logic? Or does your retarded brain cook it up without any sort of stimulation?
>what do you do for a living?
Software Engineer. I read code and documentation all day, every day. Even on weekends. No fatigue because I'm not some special snowflake faggot like you.
you're going back to the strawman thing i see. that's fine, but i replied to your retarded interpretation in . the conversation literally went like this
>hey boss can i get a 4k monitor?
>sure. wait how much is it?
>about 400. maybe 450 with tax?
>sure. hey, why 4k?
>text's sharper. easier on the eyes.
>should i get one?
>it's a little bit of a mess on older laptops. you only get 30Hz, which can look jerky. maybe when you get a new laptop
>hmm. okay
>text that is imperceptibly jagged
again buddy you need to see an optometrist.
...
>He's still trying to make anyone believe that he has a job and isn't just some fat, retarded loser in some person's basement.
>You can look at text that is imperceptibly jagged without being fatigued
>I can't do that
>Therefore you must have bad eyesight
That's literally the definition of inferior eyesight. Maybe not inferior in the sense that Hitler would've had you gassed, but definitely inferior compared to the people that see the difference.
You are literally just seeing things that aren't there.
Even as I'm writing this text right now on my 1080p, 144hz monitor, there are no jagged edges.
You need a bullet to the temple.
would it help if i showed that i was a student at a top 5 university? would it help to show you a W-2 from a recent internship?
do you have any evidence that you're a software engineer (and not a freelancer on upwork or some shithole calling himself that)?
Nice shitpost, retard.
>You are literally just seeing things that aren't there.
Jesus Christ
>t. mactoddler
I think you glossed over the word "imperceptibly" in there.
A synonym of that word is "unnoticeable."
That's okay though, clearly you haven't had much luck in the education system.
What are you arguing? That higher density smartphones are a gimmick? That higher density tablets are unnecessary? That the same is true in laptops?
I just want to know what the logical end of your position is. Is there a logical end?
Gas yourself, shit for brains.
Oh wow! We went from "I have a job!" to "I'm a student at a top 5 university!"
Jesus kid, stay in school. Chances are you'll flunk out, but at least you can say you tried. Leave the big boy work to the rest of us who actually graduated college and went on to be functioning members of society.
Do they have 144Hz 4K monitors yet?
The whole point of your "imperceptibility" argument is that it's not perceptible, but it's widely agreed outside of your bedroom/office/basement that it's perceptible. That leaves the question of why you can't perceive it, and that's usually answered in an optometrist's office.
i never said i have a job. you did. i just said that i'm not talking from this suspiciously elaborately described basement you seem to have just "imagined".
Whoops. Meant this for
High density smartphones are definitely just for marketing purposes. 1440p is not very prominent on a 5-6" screen.
That's all I needed to hear. Thanks.
autist fight, autist fight!
>mactoddler
>telling anyone else to get gassed
lmao
the inconsistent background colors hurt my eyes.
I'm not the guy you were arguing with. You aren't seeing the difference between 1080p and 1440p at 5.5" unless your eyes are 6 inches way from the screen. It serves no purpose other than to drain the battery faster.
see
>I'm not the guy you were arguing with.
then why the fuck did you answer? holy fuck how was it not clear that i only wanted to know his endgame views on this?
Did I interrupt your private anonymous conversation?
i was only interested in seeing where that one guy's hardline views take him. just because you can respond doesn't mean anyone gives a fuck what your opinion is.
>Everyone needs to know my take on this! What?! Why aren't people sucking my dick for posting???
Get over yourself, princess.
Don't bother. These are the kind of retards who see any tech with specs that have higher numbers as "improvements," regardless if they actually are or not.
Their dainty little eyes will just get too tired and they'll need a rest.
If you're arguing against Ops original premise, then you sir are the re-tard.
In the future when you post about this it would help if you would be upfront and say that you think higher density smartphone screens than the 480x320 displays we had up till 2009/2010 are all gimmicky bullshit.
In this case, higher numbers equates to more lines of code within sight, which to some degree means more efficient reading/coding.
>I alone decide who gets to respond to me and for what purpose
Give up on imageboards.
there are two discussions going on at the same time. one is whether to have higher resolution monitors. the other is whether those higher resolution monitors should come in a denser package or not.
so the choices are 1080p, 4k at 30-40", or 4k at ~24-27".
the OP was asking for 4k monitors in the 30-40" range (basically only marginally more dense than a conventional monitor),
and some others are arguing that you're being indulgent or something for getting anything more than 1080p.
and and some others are arguing that you should get 4k but that it should be in the 24-27" range for higher pixel density.
the second and third group got into some kind of nigger/autist argument, but i'm not sure if one is just retarded, or both, or if one is being a troll, or what.
>Wahhhhhhhh someone's not interested in my opinion WAHHHHHHHHH
nobody will ever miss a redditor leaving.
Reddit sounds more up your alley than Sup Forums.
wow that's original
>QNIX
Be sure to buy an EVGA card too, it'll make the insurance claim easier.
Nigger even on a 40 inch 4k tv shit looks way more fucking crisper than on a 19inch monitor at 900p despite being only 20 dpi denser than the former.
fucking beautiful summary.
minor correction: Op is interested in 30-34" monitors
>4K
>Under 30
No, 32 is the sweet spot, just like 30 was for 2560x1600
ah sorry. i think i saw someone mentioning 40" monitors, but that might've been someone in group 2 or 3 just saying random shit.
This website goes even further back.
If you're working 8hrs+ a day, in a fucking cubicle, 10" away from an artificial illuminated screen, go and fucking spend $1k and get a name brand top of the line display. And an Aeron chair too.
Funny how people cheap out on important things.