4 ms·

I'm curious which resolution people would rather have: 1920x1920 or 2560x1440?

by sciurus 12y ago

rootbear 12y ago
For modern wide monitors, I prefer 16:10, or 2560x1600. On my linux system at home I have two 1600x1200 monitors and I like that arrangement for coding. Having lots of vertical space for tall editor windows is a Good Thing. This square monitor would be interesting to try out.
KhalPanda 12y ago
2560x1440. My eyes are positioned horizontally in my head, giving a "wide" field of view. So a widescreen monitor always feels more comfortable. Unless anyone has a single, perfectly round eye in the middle of their face, I don't know why you'd want a square monitor. :) That's my opinion, anyway!
- themodelplumber 12y ago
  Great, now I'm going to reflect on my physiology every time I see an Instagram photo. (Good point though)
- baddox 12y ago
  Since we're comparing two monitors with the same number of pixels, I'd probably pick 1440p, mainly because it's more ideal for watching fullscreen 16:9 videos, and because I'm more used to scanning left and right than up and down (which is probably an evolutionary result). I've heard that the "aspect ratio" of humans' field of view is approximately 4:3, so if that's the goal, you'd want...2217x1662. 1:1 is actually closer to 4:3 than 16:9. My guess is that the tendency to scan left and right rather than up and down is the stronger argument for wider aspect ratios than the human field of view argument.
  - hackertux 12y ago
    According to wikipedia, A 4:3 ratio mimics human eyesight visual angle of 155°h x 120°v, that is 4:3.075, almost exactly the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_%28image%29#Practical_limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_%28image%29#Pract...
- cpr 12y ago
  Agreed, which is I enjoy my new 3440 x 1440 LG. I don't always use the whole width of the monitor, but I really enjoy spreading windows over more than the usual 2560 width. Any reference materials can be on the very edges with a very slight turn of the head or a big eye swivel.
- adamnemecek 12y ago
  I agree but if you got two 1920x1920 that would be (I'm guessing) a lot better than two 2560x1440.
- saeguaiga 12y ago
  Docker for your eyeballs lets you virtualize most of the marquee or crawl (and a level view from a facing camera) for great ergonomic progress. Marking this as the day 3D sine-scrolling stylesheet aggregation (which you can wipe down or replay every show iteration) took over.
- shurcooL 12y ago
  That makes sense only if you're trying to look at your entire monitor at once, rather than just a portion of it at a time and moving your eyes to context switch.
- nodata 12y ago
  +1 My eyes are also configured in this way.
aranjedeath 12y ago
1920x1920, hands down. (higher numbers also accepted, as long as 1:1)
rodgerd 12y ago
Depends. Gaming, photo editing, anything simulating the eyes' field of view? 2560x1440. Writing, coding, reading, where I want narrow, high columns of information? The square screen.
JoshTriplett 12y ago
1920x1920 for work, 2560x1440 for play.

I'm curious which resolution people would rather have: 1920x1920 or 2560x1440?

by sciurus 12y ago

I'm curious which resolution people would rather have: 1920x1920 or 2560x1440?

For modern wide monitors, I prefer 16:10, or 2560x1600. On my linux system at home I have two 1600x1200 monitors and I like that arrangement for coding. Having lots of vertical space for tall editor windows is a Good Thing. This square monitor would be interesting to try out.

KhalPanda 12y ago

2560x1440. My eyes are positioned horizontally in my head, giving a "wide" field of view. So a widescreen monitor always feels more comfortable. Unless anyone has a single, perfectly round eye in the middle of their face, I don't know why you'd want a square monitor. :) That's my opinion, anyway!

themodelplumber 12y ago
Great, now I'm going to reflect on my physiology every time I see an Instagram photo. (Good point though)
baddox 12y ago
Since we're comparing two monitors with the same number of pixels, I'd probably pick 1440p, mainly because it's more ideal for watching fullscreen 16:9 videos, and because I'm more used to scanning left and right than up and down (which is probably an evolutionary result). I've heard that the "aspect ratio" of humans' field of view is approximately 4:3, so if that's the goal, you'd want...2217x1662. 1:1 is actually closer to 4:3 than 16:9. My guess is that the tendency to scan left and right rather than up and down is the stronger argument for wider aspect ratios than the human field of view argument.
- hackertux 12y ago
  According to wikipedia, A 4:3 ratio mimics human eyesight visual angle of 155°h x 120°v, that is 4:3.075, almost exactly the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_%28image%29#Practical_limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_%28image%29#Pract...
cpr 12y ago
Agreed, which is I enjoy my new 3440 x 1440 LG. I don't always use the whole width of the monitor, but I really enjoy spreading windows over more than the usual 2560 width. Any reference materials can be on the very edges with a very slight turn of the head or a big eye swivel.
adamnemecek 12y ago
I agree but if you got two 1920x1920 that would be (I'm guessing) a lot better than two 2560x1440.
saeguaiga 12y ago
Docker for your eyeballs lets you virtualize most of the marquee or crawl (and a level view from a facing camera) for great ergonomic progress. Marking this as the day 3D sine-scrolling stylesheet aggregation (which you can wipe down or replay every show iteration) took over.
shurcooL 12y ago
That makes sense only if you're trying to look at your entire monitor at once, rather than just a portion of it at a time and moving your eyes to context switch.
nodata 12y ago
+1 My eyes are also configured in this way.

aranjedeath 12y ago

1920x1920, hands down. (higher numbers also accepted, as long as 1:1)

rodgerd 12y ago

Depends. Gaming, photo editing, anything simulating the eyes' field of view? 2560x1440. Writing, coding, reading, where I want narrow, high columns of information? The square screen.

JoshTriplett 12y ago

1920x1920 for work, 2560x1440 for play.