4 ms·

50+ with bad eyes, and I think the difference between 4K and 1080p is still very noticeable on a 15.6" laptop, in terms of sharpness. Having said that, most pe

50+ with bad eyes, and I think the difference between 4K and 1080p is still very noticeable on a 15.6" laptop, in terms of sharpness. Having said that, most people probably set the text magnification on a 4K screen to be the same as a 1080p screen, so any real estate gains tend to be a wash. Since getting presbyopia several years ago, I had single vision glasses prescribed for using a computer. So when I am using a computer, as long as the screens are around 21" to 27" away from my eyes, everything is sharp. It sucks having an extra pair of glasses (and remembering to swap them when not using a computer), but I would go nuts if I didn't have them.

ayushnix 5y ago
> Having said that, most people probably set the text magnification on a 4K screen to be the same as a 1080p screen, so any real estate gains tend to be a wash. If someone's buying a laptop with a 4K display for real estate, he's probably misinformed. You buy a 4K display on a laptop for the pristine ~293 PPI vs a mediocre ~146 PPI on a 1080p display which would look even worse considering it would need fractional scaling while the 4K display would work with integer scaling.
- slantyyz 5y ago
  > 1080p display which would look even worse considering it would need fractional scaling That depends on the OS though, right? I don't know about Linux or Mac, but I'm pretty sure that if you scale on Windows, you're still running at the native resolution, but the UI elements get scaled. Nothing should look weird. At least that has been my experience on Windows... outside of apps that don't follow Microsoft's scaling guidelines.
  - ayushnix 5y ago
    Yes, that might be the case, but I don't want to be dependent on the implementation differences of different operating systems. I like Apple's approach in this case. Enforce the usage of HiDPI displays by default with at least ~200 PPI which needs integer scaling. Instead of trying to work around the issue, they simply bypass it, which is what I'll do in the future.
    - slantyyz 5y ago
      Fair enough. I prefer the flexibility that Windows' Hidpi implementation offers over being constrained to Apple's method, but different strokes for different folks.

ayushnix 5y ago

> Having said that, most people probably set the text magnification on a 4K screen to be the same as a 1080p screen, so any real estate gains tend to be a wash. If someone's buying a laptop with a 4K display for real estate, he's probably misinformed. You buy a 4K display on a laptop for the pristine ~293 PPI vs a mediocre ~146 PPI on a 1080p display which would look even worse considering it would need fractional scaling while the 4K display would work with integer scaling.

slantyyz 5y ago
> 1080p display which would look even worse considering it would need fractional scaling That depends on the OS though, right? I don't know about Linux or Mac, but I'm pretty sure that if you scale on Windows, you're still running at the native resolution, but the UI elements get scaled. Nothing should look weird. At least that has been my experience on Windows... outside of apps that don't follow Microsoft's scaling guidelines.
- ayushnix 5y ago
  Yes, that might be the case, but I don't want to be dependent on the implementation differences of different operating systems. I like Apple's approach in this case. Enforce the usage of HiDPI displays by default with at least ~200 PPI which needs integer scaling. Instead of trying to work around the issue, they simply bypass it, which is what I'll do in the future.
  - slantyyz 5y ago
    Fair enough. I prefer the flexibility that Windows' Hidpi implementation offers over being constrained to Apple's method, but different strokes for different folks.