11 ms·

I just purchased 2 of the 6Ks and I am keeping both. AMA. I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or

I just purchased 2 of the 6Ks and I am keeping both. AMA. I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. I am using them in a dual display configuration with an M1 Macbook Pro via TB4 and a Windows PC with an RTX 4090 via DisplayPort. The KVM feature makes switching back and forth a breeze. I am using 175% scaling (in Windows) and I don't think 8K with 1:2 scaling would give suitably sized OS components for me, so it would be fractional scaling either way. The startup time doesn't matter in practice because they still wake up from sleep instantaneously. The mini-DP IN port would be inconvenient but Club3D makes a bi-directional adapter that makes it regular DisplayPort for about $20. I am fine with the camera defaulting to ON for Windows Hello to work in my 2 computer setup. My only serious complaint is the piss poor speakers and the fabric covering them. I would also prefer a glossy display, but in practice I just don't find it makes any difference. I arrange my office for no reflections anyhow, which results in an equivalent experience. Additionally, the Dell 6K has excellent blacks. It has much better blacks than any IPS panel I have used.

j45 3y ago
I have 3 24" Benq 2K video grade monitors running at 2560x1440 giving me nearly 11 million usable pixels. It has a huge boost in productivity for me. 4K TVs only seem to become usably readable with Chroma 4:4:4 at 38" or above, ideally curved, to get 4 usable 1920x1080 quadrants. When the screen sizes go smaller, absolutely detail and quality increases, but for software development or text centric work is concerned, am I missing something when it comes to 6K or 8K Monitors?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  32" displays are a sweet spot in size for me as long as the pixel density is >200 ppi, but more for graphics applications than text editors. For 3D applications especially, it's very beneficial to have a lot of area on one screen since the GUI default layouts tend to fit best on 16:9 screens or close to that and larger screens give you larger multi-viewport layouts. 24 inch displays just couldn't come close here. 32" allows me to work in a 4 viewport layout all day long. It's also nice in IDEs, but my main purpose is various graphics applications. And sure I could fiddle endlessly with multi-display layouts but that's such a time suck and every application is completely different so I wouldn't bother no matter what my screen size is.
  - j45 3y ago
    It makes total sense for graphical applications especially with 3d and the emergent VR/AR stuff and something I'll have to keep in mind. 24 definitely can be a bit tight, but realistic for 3 monitor setup. If I was going with only 2 monitors for software development, or mainly text work, there are nice 2K monitors that are about 25" that are perfect. I have two older 27" 2K monitors as well and they tend to be too big in the long run, and 3 were untenable.
- the_pwner224 3y ago
  The point isn't to have more pixels, it's to have more detailed pixels. You use scaling to get whatever display size you want. 4k 27" with 2x scaling is effectively the same size as 1080p 27". But one looks like absolute crap, the other is reasonably sharp and detailed. Text is much better with higher PPI. And 4k27" is just 160 PPI, the 6k 32" monitors are 220 PPI so text is very crisp. I don't know about other OSs, but fractional scaling "just works" on KDE Linux. The size of displayed content has nothing to do with the pixels you have. You control the physical screen size (inches) and scale factor to get the content size you want, and you buy as many pixels as you can afford to get good quality at that size. There's a parent comment on this submission talking about how his 8k 32" monitor is visibly better than 6k 32" for text sharpness; TFA says the same thing. You really want as many pixels as you can afford to buy. Of course, the minimum (densest) content size you can use is constrained by PPI, low PPI won't be able to display very small content.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    Yeah I love my 4K 24" monitor but nobody seems to be making them anymore :'( especially at this price point ($250). It's the minimum DPI I'd consider HiDPI. Really worried about it breaking at some point. I wish I had bought two. 27" 4K just won't cut it. And I don't want a monitor that big anyway.
    - stock_toaster 3y ago
      My Dell P2415Q is thankfull still kickin' (knock on wood). I have had my eye on an LG[1] out there at 24" 4k (currently about 300usd) -- as that size/resolution has been the sweet spot for me for the last few years. I'm planning to pick one of these up and stick it in a closet just to have on hand in case the Dell dies on me. [1]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LPNKFK0 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LPNKFK0
      - doublepg23 3y ago
        Wow that Dell P2415Q looks very tempting for replacing my junk 1080p 24” work gave.
- brailsafe 3y ago
  I'm using a 30" Dell Ultrasharp which would be slightly less dense than yours. It's great, but I'd just like the same visual appeal as the macbook pro I have plugged into it. Text looks far better
LoganDark 3y ago
> The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. For context, my MacBook from 2015 had a PPI of 220, so this comment is extremely accurate.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Also, the current Apple Studio Display and Apple XDR Pro Display are both 218 ppi.
  - watersb 3y ago
    218 ppi matches the native displays on current Macs. The Dell 8k has 288 pixels per inch, which is 4x the detail of the original Mac. Macintosh 128k was released with a 72 ppi display, so every pixel was the size of a "point", a unit used in more traditional, paper-based graphic design.
    - larusso 3y ago
      The history of the point [1] is equally interesting and messy. Back in school, my old teachers (mostly old printing machine operators, and typesetters) preferred Apple over anything else especially because of the native 72ppi vs windows normal 96ppi. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_(typography) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_(typography)
      - watersb 3y ago
        And these days, 96 ppi is the de facto standard, via the CSS specification: https://webplatform.github.io/docs/tutorials/understanding-css-units/ https://webplatform.github.io/docs/tutorials/understanding-c... It's as if the Windows spec were retconned into being the historical norm all along, but I need to dig around to find the origin story here... Why 96 dpi? My simple guess is that 96 is also divisible by 12, and thus easy to split up into 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 18, 24 parts... you also have eight pieces in 72 for every nine pieces in 96. 72 = 8 x 9 = 2^3 * 3^2 96 = 32 x 3 = 2^5 * 3 Huh. Never really realized that...
amatheus 3y ago
Would you mind elaborating on the cables and connections? Do you plug a DisplayPort and an usb cable from windows and get kvm working? The monitors are daisy chained?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  > Do you plug a DisplayPort and an usb cable from windows and get kvm working? Yes. There is one upstream USB-C port on each display that is used for this purpose. > The monitors are daisy chained? Daisy chaining with Thunderbolt 4 (not Thunderbolt 3) is supported, but when daisy chaining the second display will only do 4K@60Hz or 6K@30Hz. For this reason, I plug both Thunderbolt 4 cables directly into my Macbook Pro M1, both on the left side of the laptop so it's a clean setup. Thankfully, the included Thunderbolt 4 cables are plenty long enough to reach across to the laptop positioned on either side. Apple's displays include such short TB cables that you'd have to buy another longer one to do this. In addition, you may want to know that HDR mode is great but only supported with HDMI for some reason and I haven't found any DP->HDMI adapters that support it which rules out dual HDR displays with an RTX 4090 which only has 1 HDMI port. I think this is due to HDR needing HDMI 2.1. But I can have 1 monitor connected with HDMI for HDR when I need it. I just haven't bought a long HDMI cable for that yet. The KVM switching could support that setup just the same.
zamadatix 3y ago
32" is an extremely common size for 4k at 100% scaling so I can see the desire for 8k using 200% scaling at the resolution. 225-250% would probably be more "proper" densities for such a display but many like to go a bit under standard scale.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- FpUser 3y ago
  What would be more proper in this case is to make it 64" display. Otherwise it is just a waste of resources. But one can not sit in front of 64" monitor at a normal viewing distance. I would guess except some very limited niches 8K PC monitor makes little sense
  - vladvasiliu 3y ago
    I don't think so. From where I'm sitting, I can see the rainbow effects of antialiasing on my 4k 32" monitor. The easiest way to observe this is some skinny light text on a dark background. Other than that, I'm quite happy with my screen real-estate. So, I would indeed love it to have a higher resolution. I could probably use a somewhat bigger screen, a bit further away, that would do a better job as a TV the rare times I use it as such (don't have an actual TV). But all in all, I just want smaller pixels. Others are talking about higher refresh rates, but for my use case it wouldn't be as useful since I rarely drag things around (I use a TWM) and don't use smooth scrolling in apps.
    - lloeki 3y ago
      > I can see the rainbow effects of antialiasing on my 4k 32" monitor Are you talking about subpixel rendering? Leveraging individual R G and B dots needs knowledge of the layout to achieve increased resolution, and the algorithm should be adjusting (best effort) to compensate for human colour perception with knowledge of the subpixel layout + subpixel size. But usually it might be that the screen has a different layout than the OS picked, e.g RGB vs BGR, vertical vs horizontal, or it has a peculiar layout like RGBG. See down the page for an example when it doesn't match, which usually gives the perceptual effect you described https://www.grc.com/ctwhat.htm https://www.grc.com/ctwhat.htm At some point though I found with increasing DPI there's diminishing returns to go subpixel and it's simply easier and just as good to go grayscale AA and be done with it.
uptown 3y ago
Ugly camera blob up top bother you at all?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Not enough to have a lower resolution display, and if a higher refresh rate will get rid of it then that is news to me. Will it?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  I think I misunderstood this question earlier so here's another go at it... Aesthetically, no. I am grateful that there aren't any gamer aesthetics involved, but my desk is not a showroom; it's a workspace. However, the cloth that wraps the speaker cluster seems cheap, like it could rip or get pilly over time. That is the only aspect that bothers me. I like that the cameras are attached because they are very nice cameras and support Windows Hello and I prefer not having a corded camera balancing on my displays.
TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago
There’s an app called Synergy that lets you seamlessly move mouse and keyboard input between devices, if you ever feel the need to run the Mac and the Windows machines side by side rather than using a KVM switch.
- brailsafe 3y ago
  But... it can be a bit spotty. A physical KVM will be far better.
  - grogenaut 3y ago
    do they make kvms for moving the mouse between screen borders or just switching displays / inputs to a seperate pc?
    - brailsafe 3y ago
      Not sure, but that's definitely a particular thing Synergy does alright. I do find it's a bit meh still between OS' but only in some cases where you might have a full-screen game open on one computer and other non-full-screen content on another.
      - grogenaut 3y ago
        I personally just use a kvm to switch between computers on my desk with monitors that are dedicated to them because of issues with synergy. But also synergy doesn't work with vpns.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Have you tried that? How does it actually work? Does it not add lag? I use a USB switch connected to both displays for my input devices so I can switch between screens/computers: https://a.co/d/ckNXGpt https://a.co/d/ckNXGpt
  - engie 3y ago
alanbernstein 3y ago
Can you elaborate on the kvm/switching feature? My current monitor is awful for that, I really just want a dedicated "cycle input" button. Or ideally, an N-position slider switch, but I can't imagine anyone would ever build such a thing.
- spockz 3y ago
  We have ultrawides at the office that send usb to the source of video in auto mode but also has a button to override that and you press it to toggle between targets. Not sure about brand and model. Can check it when in the office.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  The built-in kvm feature is very basic and I don't even setup the keyboard shortcuts because that requires software to be installed on the computers. Basically it just lets me switch between computers with 2 quick button presses on each monitor. I use an additional usb 3.0 switch from CableMatters so my peripherals can be switched between each display incase I want to have both computers up side by side. If you only need 4K, there is this extremely badass TESmart KVM switch that I have used before and would highly recommend. It also has a cycle mode. It's $700 but the thing supports 3 4K monitors and 4 computers and works exactly as described. https://www.tesmart.com/products/4-port-triple-monitor-hdmi-kvm-switch-4k-60hz-control-4-pcs-3-monitor-with-hdcp-edid-1?msclkid=ea7ce08102101a2d79ed8422959dde1e https://www.tesmart.com/products/4-port-triple-monitor-hdmi-...
  - lrem 3y ago
    Extremely badass but still 60Hz :( I wonder if I’ll ever find a way to drive 4k@144Hz and switch inputs without the current cable replugging ritual.
    - Rebelgecko 3y ago
      The best option I've found is to hook both computers up to a USB-only KVM, and plug them in via separate video cables to the monitor. Then set up the computers to tell the monitor to change inputs (via DDC commands, which most but not all monitors support) when you change devices on the KVM There's software to help do this automatically (https://github.com/haimgel/display-switch https://github.com/haimgel/display-switch)
aftbit 3y ago
Does it support DDC over i2c? I want at least sleep mode, input, and brightness control.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Sorry, I am not quite sure what that is. Sleep works great with my PC (motherboard is ASRock WRX80 Creator) and M1 MBP, but I can only adjust brightness through the OSD.
  - Toutouxc 3y ago
    There’s a Mac app called Lunar that uses DDC (a protocol for sending commands to a screen) to allow you to adjust the brightness and volume of an external monitor with the usual keys on your MacBook keyboard (in clamshell mode at least) or with a slider. Very convenient, can’t recommend enough.
    - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
      Oh OK sorry but yeah I wouldn't use that. If this is usually supported on Dell monitors, I would bet it works on these. Personally, I rarely adjust brightness on my desktop displays and my ZMK keyboard volume buttons work reliably cross-platform.
      - Toutouxc 3y ago
        I you don’t need it, you don’t need it, but I don’t understand the first sentence. Many different displays support DDC, my Philips at home does and the Dells and I think BenQ that we have at the office do too.
        111111IIIIIII 3y ago
        My macbook is my work laptop and we're encouraged to minimize installing extra software. I wish my personal was a mac as well, but I had to abandon macs when they abandoned me by not upgrading the mac pro for like a decade then kept me away by later ending support for eGPUs.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wesapien 3y ago
Does the refresh rate go higher if you configure it to 4k or 2k?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Sorry I haven't tried and not near them atm, but I am quite confident it does not.
- morsch 3y ago
  I don't think so https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/cae72f76 https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/cae72f76
LeafItAlone 3y ago
Thanks for providing all of that information. Maybe I missed you answering this: What do you do with the monitors? Do you work with images, videos, code, etc.?
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  My day job is software development for creativity/art related software and I do a lot of visual creative work on the side, both personally and professionally. I use the PC for 3D rendering.
qwerty456127 3y ago
> I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. I am using them in a dual display configuration I don't even understand all this ppi hype, nor even dual displays anymore. I always used dual-triple displays in the past but nowaways I just bought a single table-size (49-inch or something like that) 4k display and put it right in front of my desk just to use it in a plain old 100% mode (no "hi-dpi" scaling, just tweaked some font sizes in editors' configs). This way it effectively replaces 4 displays with a single seamless space - no additional frames, no constraints, almost no head turning, beautiful tiling (when on Windows - PowerToys' FancyZones are great).
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  If I were just using text editors, I would do something similar. However, many people do other things with computers besides edit text. DCC applications are obnoxious on displays larger than 32" and reducing the window size just leaves you with little border areas for multitasking. It's just sloppy. So 2x 32" is a pretty obvious choice here.
  - qwerty456127 3y ago
    I don't edit much text in the way people here would mostly imagine (like when your job predominantly is coding/terminal), I'm a GUI lover. What I hate the most, however, is switching windows (and turning head to look at another monitor feels just slightly better), also scrolling - I want everything I currently work with (+ a player window for a background vibe + two messengers) to be open side by side shown fully. Because as soon as I switch the context (like hiding a window to see another one full-screen) I often immediately forget what I was doing/thinking, like when you exit a room [1], this harms my productivity tremendously. By the way, I once noticed that vertical stacking of 2 monitors feels much better for me that when I place them side by side horizontally. This is why a single big (big in both ways, also vertically) display works much better than fancy ultra-wide monitors for me. What is DCC? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorway_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorway_effect

j45 3y ago

I have 3 24" Benq 2K video grade monitors running at 2560x1440 giving me nearly 11 million usable pixels. It has a huge boost in productivity for me. 4K TVs only seem to become usably readable with Chroma 4:4:4 at 38" or above, ideally curved, to get 4 usable 1920x1080 quadrants. When the screen sizes go smaller, absolutely detail and quality increases, but for software development or text centric work is concerned, am I missing something when it comes to 6K or 8K Monitors?

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
32" displays are a sweet spot in size for me as long as the pixel density is >200 ppi, but more for graphics applications than text editors. For 3D applications especially, it's very beneficial to have a lot of area on one screen since the GUI default layouts tend to fit best on 16:9 screens or close to that and larger screens give you larger multi-viewport layouts. 24 inch displays just couldn't come close here. 32" allows me to work in a 4 viewport layout all day long. It's also nice in IDEs, but my main purpose is various graphics applications. And sure I could fiddle endlessly with multi-display layouts but that's such a time suck and every application is completely different so I wouldn't bother no matter what my screen size is.
- j45 3y ago
  It makes total sense for graphical applications especially with 3d and the emergent VR/AR stuff and something I'll have to keep in mind. 24 definitely can be a bit tight, but realistic for 3 monitor setup. If I was going with only 2 monitors for software development, or mainly text work, there are nice 2K monitors that are about 25" that are perfect. I have two older 27" 2K monitors as well and they tend to be too big in the long run, and 3 were untenable.
the_pwner224 3y ago
The point isn't to have more pixels, it's to have more detailed pixels. You use scaling to get whatever display size you want. 4k 27" with 2x scaling is effectively the same size as 1080p 27". But one looks like absolute crap, the other is reasonably sharp and detailed. Text is much better with higher PPI. And 4k27" is just 160 PPI, the 6k 32" monitors are 220 PPI so text is very crisp. I don't know about other OSs, but fractional scaling "just works" on KDE Linux. The size of displayed content has nothing to do with the pixels you have. You control the physical screen size (inches) and scale factor to get the content size you want, and you buy as many pixels as you can afford to get good quality at that size. There's a parent comment on this submission talking about how his 8k 32" monitor is visibly better than 6k 32" for text sharpness; TFA says the same thing. You really want as many pixels as you can afford to buy. Of course, the minimum (densest) content size you can use is constrained by PPI, low PPI won't be able to display very small content.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  Yeah I love my 4K 24" monitor but nobody seems to be making them anymore :'( especially at this price point ($250). It's the minimum DPI I'd consider HiDPI. Really worried about it breaking at some point. I wish I had bought two. 27" 4K just won't cut it. And I don't want a monitor that big anyway.
  - stock_toaster 3y ago
    My Dell P2415Q is thankfull still kickin' (knock on wood). I have had my eye on an LG[1] out there at 24" 4k (currently about 300usd) -- as that size/resolution has been the sweet spot for me for the last few years. I'm planning to pick one of these up and stick it in a closet just to have on hand in case the Dell dies on me. [1]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LPNKFK0 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LPNKFK0
    - doublepg23 3y ago
      Wow that Dell P2415Q looks very tempting for replacing my junk 1080p 24” work gave.
brailsafe 3y ago
I'm using a 30" Dell Ultrasharp which would be slightly less dense than yours. It's great, but I'd just like the same visual appeal as the macbook pro I have plugged into it. Text looks far better

LoganDark 3y ago

> The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. For context, my MacBook from 2015 had a PPI of 220, so this comment is extremely accurate.

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Also, the current Apple Studio Display and Apple XDR Pro Display are both 218 ppi.
- watersb 3y ago
  218 ppi matches the native displays on current Macs. The Dell 8k has 288 pixels per inch, which is 4x the detail of the original Mac. Macintosh 128k was released with a 72 ppi display, so every pixel was the size of a "point", a unit used in more traditional, paper-based graphic design.
  - larusso 3y ago
    The history of the point [1] is equally interesting and messy. Back in school, my old teachers (mostly old printing machine operators, and typesetters) preferred Apple over anything else especially because of the native 72ppi vs windows normal 96ppi. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_(typography) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_(typography)
    - watersb 3y ago
      And these days, 96 ppi is the de facto standard, via the CSS specification: https://webplatform.github.io/docs/tutorials/understanding-css-units/ https://webplatform.github.io/docs/tutorials/understanding-c... It's as if the Windows spec were retconned into being the historical norm all along, but I need to dig around to find the origin story here... Why 96 dpi? My simple guess is that 96 is also divisible by 12, and thus easy to split up into 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 18, 24 parts... you also have eight pieces in 72 for every nine pieces in 96. 72 = 8 x 9 = 2^3 * 3^2 96 = 32 x 3 = 2^5 * 3 Huh. Never really realized that...

amatheus 3y ago

Would you mind elaborating on the cables and connections? Do you plug a DisplayPort and an usb cable from windows and get kvm working? The monitors are daisy chained?

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
> Do you plug a DisplayPort and an usb cable from windows and get kvm working? Yes. There is one upstream USB-C port on each display that is used for this purpose. > The monitors are daisy chained? Daisy chaining with Thunderbolt 4 (not Thunderbolt 3) is supported, but when daisy chaining the second display will only do 4K@60Hz or 6K@30Hz. For this reason, I plug both Thunderbolt 4 cables directly into my Macbook Pro M1, both on the left side of the laptop so it's a clean setup. Thankfully, the included Thunderbolt 4 cables are plenty long enough to reach across to the laptop positioned on either side. Apple's displays include such short TB cables that you'd have to buy another longer one to do this. In addition, you may want to know that HDR mode is great but only supported with HDMI for some reason and I haven't found any DP->HDMI adapters that support it which rules out dual HDR displays with an RTX 4090 which only has 1 HDMI port. I think this is due to HDR needing HDMI 2.1. But I can have 1 monitor connected with HDMI for HDR when I need it. I just haven't bought a long HDMI cable for that yet. The KVM switching could support that setup just the same.

zamadatix 3y ago

32" is an extremely common size for 4k at 100% scaling so I can see the desire for 8k using 200% scaling at the resolution. 225-250% would probably be more "proper" densities for such a display but many like to go a bit under standard scale.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
FpUser 3y ago
What would be more proper in this case is to make it 64" display. Otherwise it is just a waste of resources. But one can not sit in front of 64" monitor at a normal viewing distance. I would guess except some very limited niches 8K PC monitor makes little sense
- vladvasiliu 3y ago
  I don't think so. From where I'm sitting, I can see the rainbow effects of antialiasing on my 4k 32" monitor. The easiest way to observe this is some skinny light text on a dark background. Other than that, I'm quite happy with my screen real-estate. So, I would indeed love it to have a higher resolution. I could probably use a somewhat bigger screen, a bit further away, that would do a better job as a TV the rare times I use it as such (don't have an actual TV). But all in all, I just want smaller pixels. Others are talking about higher refresh rates, but for my use case it wouldn't be as useful since I rarely drag things around (I use a TWM) and don't use smooth scrolling in apps.
  - lloeki 3y ago
    > I can see the rainbow effects of antialiasing on my 4k 32" monitor Are you talking about subpixel rendering? Leveraging individual R G and B dots needs knowledge of the layout to achieve increased resolution, and the algorithm should be adjusting (best effort) to compensate for human colour perception with knowledge of the subpixel layout + subpixel size. But usually it might be that the screen has a different layout than the OS picked, e.g RGB vs BGR, vertical vs horizontal, or it has a peculiar layout like RGBG. See down the page for an example when it doesn't match, which usually gives the perceptual effect you described https://www.grc.com/ctwhat.htm https://www.grc.com/ctwhat.htm At some point though I found with increasing DPI there's diminishing returns to go subpixel and it's simply easier and just as good to go grayscale AA and be done with it.

uptown 3y ago

Ugly camera blob up top bother you at all?

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Not enough to have a lower resolution display, and if a higher refresh rate will get rid of it then that is news to me. Will it?
111111IIIIIII 3y ago
I think I misunderstood this question earlier so here's another go at it... Aesthetically, no. I am grateful that there aren't any gamer aesthetics involved, but my desk is not a showroom; it's a workspace. However, the cloth that wraps the speaker cluster seems cheap, like it could rip or get pilly over time. That is the only aspect that bothers me. I like that the cameras are attached because they are very nice cameras and support Windows Hello and I prefer not having a corded camera balancing on my displays.

TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago

There’s an app called Synergy that lets you seamlessly move mouse and keyboard input between devices, if you ever feel the need to run the Mac and the Windows machines side by side rather than using a KVM switch.

brailsafe 3y ago
But... it can be a bit spotty. A physical KVM will be far better.
- grogenaut 3y ago
  do they make kvms for moving the mouse between screen borders or just switching displays / inputs to a seperate pc?
  - brailsafe 3y ago
    Not sure, but that's definitely a particular thing Synergy does alright. I do find it's a bit meh still between OS' but only in some cases where you might have a full-screen game open on one computer and other non-full-screen content on another.
    - grogenaut 3y ago
      I personally just use a kvm to switch between computers on my desk with monitors that are dedicated to them because of issues with synergy. But also synergy doesn't work with vpns.
111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Have you tried that? How does it actually work? Does it not add lag? I use a USB switch connected to both displays for my input devices so I can switch between screens/computers: https://a.co/d/ckNXGpt https://a.co/d/ckNXGpt
- engie 3y ago

alanbernstein 3y ago

Can you elaborate on the kvm/switching feature? My current monitor is awful for that, I really just want a dedicated "cycle input" button. Or ideally, an N-position slider switch, but I can't imagine anyone would ever build such a thing.

spockz 3y ago
We have ultrawides at the office that send usb to the source of video in auto mode but also has a button to override that and you press it to toggle between targets. Not sure about brand and model. Can check it when in the office.
111111IIIIIII 3y ago
The built-in kvm feature is very basic and I don't even setup the keyboard shortcuts because that requires software to be installed on the computers. Basically it just lets me switch between computers with 2 quick button presses on each monitor. I use an additional usb 3.0 switch from CableMatters so my peripherals can be switched between each display incase I want to have both computers up side by side. If you only need 4K, there is this extremely badass TESmart KVM switch that I have used before and would highly recommend. It also has a cycle mode. It's $700 but the thing supports 3 4K monitors and 4 computers and works exactly as described. https://www.tesmart.com/products/4-port-triple-monitor-hdmi-kvm-switch-4k-60hz-control-4-pcs-3-monitor-with-hdcp-edid-1?msclkid=ea7ce08102101a2d79ed8422959dde1e https://www.tesmart.com/products/4-port-triple-monitor-hdmi-...
- lrem 3y ago
  Extremely badass but still 60Hz :( I wonder if I’ll ever find a way to drive 4k@144Hz and switch inputs without the current cable replugging ritual.
  - Rebelgecko 3y ago
    The best option I've found is to hook both computers up to a USB-only KVM, and plug them in via separate video cables to the monitor. Then set up the computers to tell the monitor to change inputs (via DDC commands, which most but not all monitors support) when you change devices on the KVM There's software to help do this automatically (https://github.com/haimgel/display-switch https://github.com/haimgel/display-switch)

aftbit 3y ago

Does it support DDC over i2c? I want at least sleep mode, input, and brightness control.

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Sorry, I am not quite sure what that is. Sleep works great with my PC (motherboard is ASRock WRX80 Creator) and M1 MBP, but I can only adjust brightness through the OSD.
- Toutouxc 3y ago
  There’s a Mac app called Lunar that uses DDC (a protocol for sending commands to a screen) to allow you to adjust the brightness and volume of an external monitor with the usual keys on your MacBook keyboard (in clamshell mode at least) or with a slider. Very convenient, can’t recommend enough.
  - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
    Oh OK sorry but yeah I wouldn't use that. If this is usually supported on Dell monitors, I would bet it works on these. Personally, I rarely adjust brightness on my desktop displays and my ZMK keyboard volume buttons work reliably cross-platform.
    - Toutouxc 3y ago
      I you don’t need it, you don’t need it, but I don’t understand the first sentence. Many different displays support DDC, my Philips at home does and the Dells and I think BenQ that we have at the office do too.
      - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
        My macbook is my work laptop and we're encouraged to minimize installing extra software. I wish my personal was a mac as well, but I had to abandon macs when they abandoned me by not upgrading the mac pro for like a decade then kept me away by later ending support for eGPUs.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

wesapien 3y ago

Does the refresh rate go higher if you configure it to 4k or 2k?

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Sorry I haven't tried and not near them atm, but I am quite confident it does not.
morsch 3y ago
I don't think so https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/cae72f76 https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/cae72f76

LeafItAlone 3y ago

Thanks for providing all of that information. Maybe I missed you answering this: What do you do with the monitors? Do you work with images, videos, code, etc.?

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
My day job is software development for creativity/art related software and I do a lot of visual creative work on the side, both personally and professionally. I use the PC for 3D rendering.

qwerty456127 3y ago

> I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. I am using them in a dual display configuration I don't even understand all this ppi hype, nor even dual displays anymore. I always used dual-triple displays in the past but nowaways I just bought a single table-size (49-inch or something like that) 4k display and put it right in front of my desk just to use it in a plain old 100% mode (no "hi-dpi" scaling, just tweaked some font sizes in editors' configs). This way it effectively replaces 4 displays with a single seamless space - no additional frames, no constraints, almost no head turning, beautiful tiling (when on Windows - PowerToys' FancyZones are great).

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
If I were just using text editors, I would do something similar. However, many people do other things with computers besides edit text. DCC applications are obnoxious on displays larger than 32" and reducing the window size just leaves you with little border areas for multitasking. It's just sloppy. So 2x 32" is a pretty obvious choice here.
- qwerty456127 3y ago
  I don't edit much text in the way people here would mostly imagine (like when your job predominantly is coding/terminal), I'm a GUI lover. What I hate the most, however, is switching windows (and turning head to look at another monitor feels just slightly better), also scrolling - I want everything I currently work with (+ a player window for a background vibe + two messengers) to be open side by side shown fully. Because as soon as I switch the context (like hiding a window to see another one full-screen) I often immediately forget what I was doing/thinking, like when you exit a room [1], this harms my productivity tremendously. By the way, I once noticed that vertical stacking of 2 monitors feels much better for me that when I place them side by side horizontally. This is why a single big (big in both ways, also vertically) display works much better than fancy ultra-wide monitors for me. What is DCC? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorway_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorway_effect