4 ms·
> What I notice is that despite aspect ratios becoming wider, the monitors have pretty consistently also become taller in absolute measure. Dell 3007WFP and th
by NathanielK 5y ago
> What I notice is that despite aspect ratios becoming wider, the monitors have pretty consistently also become taller in absolute measure.
Dell 3007WFP and the Apple Cinema HD display were both ~16" tall. They're over 15 years old now. They were a expensive at the time, but they're still taller than most modern 16:9 and "27:9" displays available now.
>What I don't understand is why I'd ever want 1920x1440 (4:3) monitor over 2560x1440 (16:9) one, unless I'm really space constrained
I want a 4k 4:3 screen. If you're going to dream, why not dream big? 3840x2880 please. I have a CRT that syncs to 2560x1920 and I already enjoy it for a few odd things.
- zokier 5y agoModern 31.5" 16:9 (common 4k size) are essentially as tall as 30" 16:10 of yore.
- NathanielK 5y agoThat's true, it's just a nuisance to set UI scale on them. 1.5x works, but feels like 1440p and everything isn't that much sharper. 1x is like using FHD on a small laptop where you need to squint for everything, and 2x is just two big.