Ask HN: Where is my dream monitor?
2 comments
My current favorite for "productive work machines" vs. games/movies is 3 portrait-mode 1200x1920 monitors. These need to be thin-bezel, and IPS panel, so they have decent vertical (now horizontal) viewing angles -- Dell U2410 work great. I could deal with higher resolution, but that physical angle works great at arms length, keeping everything in the mostly-focus area. I usually keep a laptop off to the side for non-work communications tasks, out of my direct view, and ideally have another screen or two some distance away for alerts/uptime/etc. or external news.
I still use a single 30" Dell when I am using a laptop which can only drive one monitor, and a single 1920x1200 dispay (or even a 1080p display, like a 55" LCD) when the primary output is video/gaming.
I still use a single 30" Dell when I am using a laptop which can only drive one monitor, and a single 1920x1200 dispay (or even a 1080p display, like a 55" LCD) when the primary output is video/gaming.
3 portrait Dell 2410s is my exact setup at work. I love it, but am thinking abou a 4th
It seems like we have hit a ceiling at 2560x1600 and no one is even trying to break it. Is there a technical reason (DVI restrictions?) for this? I know modern graphics cards can push way more pixels. The Eyefinity stuff from ATI is one example.
My dream monitor would be 3840x2400 at 125ppi. This would be roughly 31 inches horizontal and 19 inches vertical, and would have real estate of four 1920x1200 monitors.
I know that Toshiba and Viewsonic/IBM had monitors at this resolution for like $18k in 2002, but they were medical-grade 200+ ppi and thus only 22". Surely we can make a lower density LCD at this resolution for much cheaper now.
So anyway, not sure of the point of this plea, other than hoping that someone at Samsung or LG reads this. Oh, and I'd be interested to know what other people consider part of their 'dream setups'.