4 ms·
100% disagree. I went with 2 4K monitors years ago. When I switched to an ultra wide lat year it was a night a day difference. I wish I never bought 2 4k monito
by wil421 3y ago
100% disagree. I went with 2 4K monitors years ago. When I switched to an ultra wide lat year it was a night a day difference. I wish I never bought 2 4k monitors (or dual monitors at all). Ultra wide is perfect and has a more functionality than a massive piece of each monitor's border in the dead center of your vision.
- graphe 3y agoDid you go with one large 4k monitor in front like he said?
- penguin_booze 3y agoI, too, am in the ultrawide camp now. I initially bought a 4k monitor. The default rendering was too small for my eyes. My Linux didn't support fractional scaling; 200% scaling kind of defeated the purpose of having a 4k monitor in the first place--net real estate I got felt the same. I then returned it and went for a flat 34" monitor (HP X34), and I'm happy for it.
- thfuran 3y agoYeah, bezels midfield is no good. That's why three monitors is where it's at. Or perhaps one of those 32:9 ones. But many window managers make it easier to deal with multiple monitors than one enormous one.
- blocko 3y agoThere's some jank involved depending on which combo of x/wayland, window manager, and compositor you're using, but if you can manage to get virtual monitors working on an ultrawide it's great. A lot of recent models also support "picture by picture" mode, allowing you to connect two separate inputs to the monitor and avoid doing anything in software.
- Brian_K_White 3y agoThey said one big one front and centered, and one to the side. Who voluntarily sticks a gap right in front of themselves?
- dheera 3y agoI use 2 4K monitors, often with one connected to work computer and one connected to personal computer. When I'm not working I sometimes connect the work computer display to a Chromecast or as a 2nd monitor to personal computer. Work computer is much shittier than personal computer and doesn't support 2 monitors.