If you enjoy a low density of 110 pixels per inch, then this is for you.
I'm much happier with the high-DPI displays in my ThinkPad Yoga 460 WQHD and MacBook Pro Retina 15".
I don't like pixels, and I don't want to see them any more. I want to see the text and graphics I'm working on, not pixels.
So when I wanted a second monitor to go with those machines, I got a 24" 4K display. At 187 pixels per inch, it's a reasonably close match to the 210-220 pixels per inch on the laptops.
I use this monitor in portrait mode next to the laptop display. A portrait mode monitor combined with the laptop monitor is great. I've got a wide screen when I want it, and a tall screen when I want that. It's ideal for reading documentation and especially PDF files, because an entire page fits on the portrait screen. Larger monitors are not very practical in portrait mode.
I'm not concerned with cramming the maximum amount of stuff on my screen. I run the monitors at 225% scaling in Windows, and the default Retina scaling in macOS. So text is about the same size it would be on a lower-DPI monitor, just much sharper and crisper.
After I got my first taste of high DPI with that MacBook, I swore I'd never go back to a low DPI display. It is so nice to not have to look at pixels any more.
I also use a 40" 4K TV. The vast majority of what I do on my computers is text-based, which means that after the text is easily readable, I don't get any real gain from increasing the pixel density of the same shapes, but I get a lot of gain from having more text and types of textual things on the screen at once (as the article author apparently does, as well).
Until recently, I used a 40" 4K monitor. For whatever reason, TVs handle input switching much, much more smoothly than monitors do: If I have two machines hooked up to different inputs of a monitor, and reboot the one I'm working on, the monitor will often spontaneously choose to show me the other input. A TV in the same situation will happily show "no signal" and stay where you told it to stay. I've only tried two brands of monitor (Planar and Philips), admittedly, but they behave identically in ignoring the manually-set input if some other input seems more interesting. :/ I had been using a Philips 40" 4K monitor for a couple years, and the frustration with input switching drove me to the same Spectre TV from the article, which is frankly worse in every picture-quality-related metric than the Philips, but doesn't instantly switch inputs when signal is interrupted, or blank and reblank the screen 2-12 times when it hasn't been on for a while.
If you were good with a 1920x1080 at 24 inches you get then same pixel dentsity with a 4K at 48 inches. I've been looking for a 50" curved TV but might have to settle for a 55" which will be fine for my slightly older eyes. I grew up typing my code on an analog TV so I'm good with any modern monitor. Having said that, 2 24" side by side is nice. Turning one of them into portrait mode is sometimes nice. Having one giant display where I can lay all my stuff out like a real desktop would be awesome.
I tried 24"/1200p, 27"/1440p, 27"/4K/150% scaling, 32"/4K/125% scaling, and now settled on 43"/4K/0 scaling.
The DPI looks like 1080 on a 21" years ago again, but the real estate is enomorous and I certainly don't mind it. Sure pictures/movies on 40" is not as pixel rich as a 32" 4K or 27" 4K, but you'd have to mount multiple to match the real estate of a 43" monitor.
It's true though the scaling makes text larger but not reducing DPI as the picture looks much better on a 27"/32" than the 43". But without scaling, my aging eyes can handle anything greater than 110 PPI. https://www.sven.de/dpi/
Just put the TV further away, it has a similar effect to increasing the DPI, but also it reduces the amount of optical accommodation your eyes need to do (ie eye muscles stretching your lens flatter), which reduces eye strain and must surely reduce progression of myopia. 14 hour days with no eye cramp. I think 4k is starting to approach the upper useful limit of detail you would want on a rectangular monitor that you look at without moving your head, it's a nice bump over 1080p. 1080p upscaled to 4k also looks better than 'raw' 1080p.
I use a 28" 4K and have used a 40" 4K TV for programming in the past.
The 40" had total crap quality but still had some advantages in terms of usable screen real estate.
There are a bunch of 40+ real monitors now though: Dell P4317Q, AOC C4008VU8, LG 43UD79-B, Philips BDM4037UW - they are all using the same panels as TVs I assume, but hopefully the higher quality ones, and their electronics will be designed for computer use.
Enough screen real estate that you don’t feel pressured to add another monitor, high enough DPI to look good, low enough to not need scaling, connects to USB C MBP with one wire for video, charging, and a USB 3.0 hub.
I still haven't found anything that can render code as nicely as a good bitmapped font on a non-HiDPI display can look. I do sometimes code on a retina MacBook Pro, and it's OK, but it's nowhere near as nice to look at as a good non-smoothed coding font on my 110 ppi desktop display.
Obviously, different people will have different tastes here.
The TV mounted on blocks and the Hackintosh suggest the author is willing to compromise and using a TV as a monitor confirms it. Don't get me wrong, I also run a Hackintosh and have had monitors stood on boxes, crates and books over the years, but when it comes to displays I really don't think you should compromise.
I have converted many professionals away from TVs because when you can actually have real quality monitors to compare them too it's usually a no-brainer to abandon the cheap TV. No trick, no incentive for me, just the better choice. It is also why every employee in our company has a pair of IPS displays.
I've looked at 4K TVs as options for a monitor multiple times, from the early Seiki TVs that hit at the start of the pricing change to what's been on offer for Black Friday, don't do it to yourself unless you are spending most of your time gaming/consuming content on the same system or just using it to monitor things.
If you are going to be sat in front of displays for 10,000 hours a year working/focusing (like many of us I am sure) then investing in something like a pair of Dell U3415W, LG UM95 or LG 31MU97Z-B will give you a much nicer experience. Totally appreciate that isn't a $300 solution, but as professionals we should invest in (or demand from your employer) good tools.
To those of you who are using 4K TVs, it is obviously hard to get in front of these monitors and see the difference, but if you can you should - you've already made the choice to go for something better than a cheap 22" 1080P monitor, there are a lot of options to create a great environment to do your best work.
The article is just pure marketing anyway for referrals, so make of that what you will.
You didn't actually say _why_ monitors are better for the author's use case: programming. "A much nicer experience" - how? in what way? is this quantifiable in any way?
I've had a UM95 for several years and just bought a cheap 4K 40" tv (Samsung MU7000) to replace it as my primary. They have equivalent pixel density and the tv has nicer colors and contrast with less backlight bleed (VA panel instead of IPS) and more real estate. The only advantages the UM95 has are the displayport input and the screen being more matte.
I code on a pair of Samsung 4K 55" Curved TVs, and enjoy them immensely. What am I missing out on with your IPS advice? I don't do graphical/visual work, and you didn't mention anything specific about why a high-end monitor is better. I am also not sure what use case you're championing, nor what your employees use their expensive monitors for.
Would be curious what your use cases are, and what the differences are that you've experienced vs 4K TVs as monitors. I moved up from 6 x 27" 1080P monitors and like this arrangement far better. No fussing with multiple video cards, fewer bezels, and gained the equivelant of 2 1080P screens into the bargain. All for $1300, 1/4 of the prior setup cost.
Don't buy a cheap TV for programming if you're not constrained by money. You can get 40" monitors for a bit more, and you won't need to fight the firmware and also you can get a better panel. Also, PWM is worse if you're sitting close. Uniformity of backlight (bleed) also matters.
Currently the display you want to get around 40" is the Philips BDM4037UW, which has no PWM, relatively low input lag and backlight bleed is low.
There are some cheap 43" 4K monitors (Philips and LG), but they're lower quality e.g. LGs have PWM.
Just as an alternative - I have one of these[0] iiyama panels after hearing bad things about the Phillips.
Have to say I'm very happy with it.
No ghosting, really excellent colour (once calibrated), minimal backlight bleed (it's not an IPS panel so has less bleed anyway) and 4k at 60hz.
Been using it for just over a year now. Only thing it does is pure blacks on pure whites can streak a little when scrolling. So very large and thick pure black text on pure white background will leave a very short trail. Normal text doesn't do this, it has to be large areas of black on white. It's actually not annoyed me much as it use this happened only very very rarely on some websites but it's a limitation.
Not sure it's best for gaming (though I've played Mass Effect and Rocket League with no issues) but for productivity work it's been great.
There’s also the latency between the input coming over HDMI and actual rendering on screen. Some of the cheaper TVs are in the 70-150ms range, and you will notice that when your mouse keeps moving after your hand stops.
I second the author's recommendation. I work with iMacs (5k) all day and I can tell you there were a number of times I simply wished I had gotten an iMac Pro with a bigger screen instead. However, one thing to watchout though when getting these cheap TVs is to be mindful of the color reproduction. Most of them will enhance the colors to make it appear vivid and pleasing to the eyes. So, if you're thinking of doing stuff like logo design, Photoshop, you're gonna find it very hard.
it's 4:4:4 chroma at 60hz so it's great for gaming too. and has a lower response rate than you'll get with TVs.
Highly recommended and it's hard to use anything smaller now.
Without using display scaling I wouldn't go lower than 40" and I think maybe even closer to 50" is ideal in terms of keeping the scale comparable between other periphial monitors. a 48" curved display would probably be perfect.
Many, too many BDM4065UC monitors suffer from "flashing" black and then, more than occasionally, starting back at 30Hz instead of 60Hz (dp 1.2 connection). Fixing that requires 1-2-3 monitor power cycles, and when the display is in a "bad mood" it can happen 3/4 times per hour.
Source: I own and use a BDM4065UC which I'm about to return, and I've been able to test another (previously owned) one, where the owner, who had a totally different setup from me (mbpro retina 2015 is my workstation, his own was a custom-built desktop with nvidia card); many other people on various forums complain about that, and Philips support seems to know about the issue perfectly.
I have been interested in BDM4350UC and/or BDM4037UC as well, but both have been reported to suffer from extreme ghosting/persistence; I'm now looking forward to buy an LG 43UD79-B.
What I agree is: a large monitor makes the difference. Not in the workflow per se, but in how much eye strain, headache, back pain (from slouching to get closer to the screen) and so on you get at the end of the day - which is almost inexistent with such large displays. Even if it's $700 for the LG, that's well spent money.
I actually prefer having dual monitors over one big monitor. I dedicate certain tasks to certain monitors, and that divide helps me quickly find what I need.
It's also nice to have the physical separation for some reason I can't really describe. My brother has a similar setup to the one in the article, and I just never really liked using it.
Just personal preference I'm sure.
(I also fear my eyesight might be too bad to have a big monitor in 4k, with things being rather small text)
For my setup, I prefer having (bright) IPS monitors. Not too large, I'm fine with my 24" 1080p monitors.
Economics of scale - many more TVs sold than computer monitors.
Add to that the different features - higher DPI, refresh rate, contrast ratios, etc. Cutting edge features such as NVidia G-Sync and the similar feature from AMD don't come cheap.
I, personally, own one of those TVs (Seiki 39") and both love and hate it. I've always seemed to buy TVs for day to day computing because you generally get more cutting edge features for better prices (My first flat screen was a 27" WestingHouse TV. First 4k, Seiki. ETC).
Economics of scale factor in heavily - more TVs will be sold than computer monitors leading to better prices. Which is why I could get a Seiki 4k for $400 when similarly sized 4k "Desktop" monitors were going for $1000+.
The most annoying thing has been "Turn of monitor, Computer considers it unplugged". So you go from 2 monitors to 1 - and all the icons rearrange. Computer goes to sleep? Monitor turns off... disconnects... Annoying.
The price of saving $600+ for 4k (At the time).
I've recently upgraded to a smaller "computer" monitor that's better suited for gaming and desktop use... and the Seiki is now my computer room Plex Player.
Funny, I was just pondering this yesterday: whether to "upgrade" to the LG, Phillips or Dell 40+" IPS monitors, or whether to stay with my Samsung 40" TVs (UN40JU6400, 2015 models--later models have annoying misfeatures), which I have in all 3 home offices.
These Samsung TVs, once configured properly (Source > HDMI 1 > Tools, select device type as PC, turn off HDMI UHD Color (which blurs), turn on Dynamic Color as well), are excellent, and at the 28" viewing distance I use, are absolutely crisp (no pixels visible) in Retina mode under macOS.
And I'm using it over HDMI 30Hz with absolutely no flicker, and no (discernible) mouse lag.
The 2015 models don't lose their mind when the Mac goes to sleep, unlike the later models, which require re-configuring each time (the TV "forgets" the HDMI port).
Can't recommend them more, especially since you can get these older models refurbished for $400.
"You need to elevate this beast vertically otherwise you’ll be craning your neck down to look at it."
A 40 inch TV is at least 50cm high. You should not be looking up - it's very bad for your neck. Looking down is no problem. The upper edge of the monitor should be at eye level.
I wonder how that TV performs for "monitor" tasks like automatic input switching.
I have a Sony x720e for my macbook for work and my PC for light gaming. It has graphics and gaming modes that have low input lags, but there is a really annoying quirk where when you turn the tv on it has normal (high) input lag until you switch to another mode then back to graphics mode. This means every time you turn on your PC (or plug in your laptop) you have to:
1. Turn on the TV
2. If necessary, switch inputs
3. Options -> Scene Select -> up arrow, down arrow
1 and 2 are annoying since monitors do that automatically but the TV doesn't. 3 is really annoying but hopefully is fixed in a firmware update...
Other than that the screen looks great.
I'm hoping for time to hack on an arduino with an IR LED to automate those steps, haha.
I've been using a 55 inch 4k TV [1] for the past year.
Its a matter of preference, but I prefer more usable space over DPI. I have found at this resolution pixels are small enough that they do not bother me. It takes some tweaking, but if setup right, text quality is indistinguishable from a "real" monitor. Its the rough equivalent of 4 27-inch 1080p monitors arranged in a square.
To get an idea of the size, here is a picture of me sitting next to it. [2]
I'm curious about the mentions of Hackintosh. As I understand it, running macOS on non-Apple hardware (the essence of a Hackintosh) is a violation of the EULA.
I'm not here to argue the pros and cons, and I am not a lawyer, but I'm intrigued about the author saying -- and I paraphrase -- "I'm doing this on a computer that's breaking the licence agreement". That's an admission. I'm not judging, it's an observation. Hackintosh admissions on a personal site where they can be traced back to a person seem a bit risky to me.
I have no knowledge of Apple legal circling. Perhaps I'm just paranoid.
I'm much happier with 4 small screens than a big one. 4 screens means I can do 4 x full screens rather than having to arrange my windows in a big sandbox. I also prefer having them in a long row, rather than 2x2, I put the code on one side and emails on the other, so that I don't see notifications when I code...
With a single 4K you can put 3 1280 images across, which IMHO would be good for web, code, email. You also have the option of stretching vertically - sometimes portrait orientation is better. If you don't like arranging windows in a sandbox, you may want to either have a login script to open your common stuff and place it, or try a tiling window manager.
For me, as long as my code is readable, it doesn't particularly matter. I'm not doing graphics 95% of the time and when I do graphics, it only really becomes necessary to have a high contrast, high pixel density screen. I run dual Samsung 2770HD TVs at home as my monitors, they sit 2ft from my face and they're perfectly adequate for me and the price was right. I guess if you're anal about picture perfection, then you're going to have a very different opinion of what is "best" and mine are certainly a loooong way from the "best."
When I watch a TV show or movie though, I don't get too hung up on the picture quality to just watch the movie and enjoy the story line. Of course, I grew up with a black and white TV in my room until I inherited the colour one that we had to tune with a dial and you got some snow interfering with the picture if the aerial wasn't just right. Oddly, it didn't spoil my enjoyment of the show or movie that I was watching even slightly. The story line is way more important than the picture quality.
For coding, the story line is the same... it lives in my head. The screen is really just a means to share that. I get no less enjoyment coding on a screen with a slightly lower pixel density than I do coding on the latest retina. Even after I've sat in front of one that's truly high quality, it doesn't take long to adjust back to a lower quality screen.
Anyone have any experience with the top TVs on this list? The top entry from TCL seems to be the leader, by far, in terms of average customer review, but the price point seems almost too good to be true: $379 for the 55' version, though that may have been a sale price, and the TV is currently out of stock.
I had a 28/27" 4k monitor, but like the author I found it far too small (the pixel size) to use comfortably. Unfortunately I was working with legacy applications that didn't support scaling and couldn't adjust the DPI. I have no doubt it would be much nicer at 125/150%.
One thing that is certain is that people have different preferences. Certainly some people would enjoy the tiny pixels of the 27" 4k monitor at 100%.
My current setup is 2x24" 1920x1200 monitors. I have considered 3x24, 1x Ultra wide or 2x Ultra wide, but I'm not convinced I'd get the same comfort. I think that 3x 24, or 2x ultra wides would require to much head rotation to be comfortable.
I prefer the vertical break in the screen since it makes snapping windows easier. I'm starting to think that I might prefer a bit more real estate, as I often collapse the vertical file menu in my editor for a little extra room.
Went from 3x 1920x1080 monitors to a 43" 4k IPS display a little over a year ago and has been great once used to it. Tiling 6 apps using divvy works nicely.
Lately I have found myself wishing there was a wider format 5760 x 2160 screen of about 37-43" for 6 full HD screens-worth. But can't have everything I guess.
Agreed -- I find that a single large high-res display works better for my purposes. 32" at 4K is exactly right for three side-by-side 1280xY windows, which means that browsers will display full desktop-sized sites. Text isn't too small with the 32", so no scaling required. Divvy makes window management much faster, with little mouse interaction required.
I have two 27" 2560x1440 displays at work, but I find it counterproductive to look side-to-side constantly to see what's on the other screen.
[+] [-] Stratoscope|8 years ago|reply
I'm much happier with the high-DPI displays in my ThinkPad Yoga 460 WQHD and MacBook Pro Retina 15".
I don't like pixels, and I don't want to see them any more. I want to see the text and graphics I'm working on, not pixels.
So when I wanted a second monitor to go with those machines, I got a 24" 4K display. At 187 pixels per inch, it's a reasonably close match to the 210-220 pixels per inch on the laptops.
I use this monitor in portrait mode next to the laptop display. A portrait mode monitor combined with the laptop monitor is great. I've got a wide screen when I want it, and a tall screen when I want that. It's ideal for reading documentation and especially PDF files, because an entire page fits on the portrait screen. Larger monitors are not very practical in portrait mode.
I'm not concerned with cramming the maximum amount of stuff on my screen. I run the monitors at 225% scaling in Windows, and the default Retina scaling in macOS. So text is about the same size it would be on a lower-DPI monitor, just much sharper and crisper.
After I got my first taste of high DPI with that MacBook, I swore I'd never go back to a low DPI display. It is so nice to not have to look at pixels any more.
[+] [-] randallsquared|8 years ago|reply
Until recently, I used a 40" 4K monitor. For whatever reason, TVs handle input switching much, much more smoothly than monitors do: If I have two machines hooked up to different inputs of a monitor, and reboot the one I'm working on, the monitor will often spontaneously choose to show me the other input. A TV in the same situation will happily show "no signal" and stay where you told it to stay. I've only tried two brands of monitor (Planar and Philips), admittedly, but they behave identically in ignoring the manually-set input if some other input seems more interesting. :/ I had been using a Philips 40" 4K monitor for a couple years, and the frustration with input switching drove me to the same Spectre TV from the article, which is frankly worse in every picture-quality-related metric than the Philips, but doesn't instantly switch inputs when signal is interrupted, or blank and reblank the screen 2-12 times when it hasn't been on for a while.
Well, that went a bit off track.
[+] [-] phkahler|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitcuration|8 years ago|reply
The DPI looks like 1080 on a 21" years ago again, but the real estate is enomorous and I certainly don't mind it. Sure pictures/movies on 40" is not as pixel rich as a 32" 4K or 27" 4K, but you'd have to mount multiple to match the real estate of a 43" monitor.
It's true though the scaling makes text larger but not reducing DPI as the picture looks much better on a 27"/32" than the 43". But without scaling, my aging eyes can handle anything greater than 110 PPI. https://www.sven.de/dpi/
[+] [-] davidzweig|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] saas_co_de|8 years ago|reply
The 40" had total crap quality but still had some advantages in terms of usable screen real estate.
There are a bunch of 40+ real monitors now though: Dell P4317Q, AOC C4008VU8, LG 43UD79-B, Philips BDM4037UW - they are all using the same panels as TVs I assume, but hopefully the higher quality ones, and their electronics will be designed for computer use.
[+] [-] xupybd|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BoorishBears|8 years ago|reply
Enough screen real estate that you don’t feel pressured to add another monitor, high enough DPI to look good, low enough to not need scaling, connects to USB C MBP with one wire for video, charging, and a USB 3.0 hub.
IMO the perfect monitor.
[+] [-] agumonkey|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|8 years ago|reply
Obviously, different people will have different tastes here.
[+] [-] nanomoose|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theWatcher37|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] morelikeborelax|8 years ago|reply
I have converted many professionals away from TVs because when you can actually have real quality monitors to compare them too it's usually a no-brainer to abandon the cheap TV. No trick, no incentive for me, just the better choice. It is also why every employee in our company has a pair of IPS displays.
I've looked at 4K TVs as options for a monitor multiple times, from the early Seiki TVs that hit at the start of the pricing change to what's been on offer for Black Friday, don't do it to yourself unless you are spending most of your time gaming/consuming content on the same system or just using it to monitor things.
If you are going to be sat in front of displays for 10,000 hours a year working/focusing (like many of us I am sure) then investing in something like a pair of Dell U3415W, LG UM95 or LG 31MU97Z-B will give you a much nicer experience. Totally appreciate that isn't a $300 solution, but as professionals we should invest in (or demand from your employer) good tools.
To those of you who are using 4K TVs, it is obviously hard to get in front of these monitors and see the difference, but if you can you should - you've already made the choice to go for something better than a cheap 22" 1080P monitor, there are a lot of options to create a great environment to do your best work.
The article is just pure marketing anyway for referrals, so make of that what you will.
[+] [-] ekelsen|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stephenr|8 years ago|reply
Presumably on a time machine so you can go back and repeat 52 of those days.
Or put another way: there's only ~8760 hours in a year total. Most people (~ 40 hours a week types) work around 2000 hours a year.
[+] [-] masonicb00m|8 years ago|reply
I dislike multi-monitor setups. Dunno if it’s the bezels or what. A single unbroken surface feels better to me.
For a VC company’s web forum, some HNers sure find making money offensive :D
[+] [-] larzang|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] schmookeeg|8 years ago|reply
Would be curious what your use cases are, and what the differences are that you've experienced vs 4K TVs as monitors. I moved up from 6 x 27" 1080P monitors and like this arrangement far better. No fussing with multiple video cards, fewer bezels, and gained the equivelant of 2 1080P screens into the bargain. All for $1300, 1/4 of the prior setup cost.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] PeachPlum|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sz4kerto|8 years ago|reply
Currently the display you want to get around 40" is the Philips BDM4037UW, which has no PWM, relatively low input lag and backlight bleed is low.
There are some cheap 43" 4K monitors (Philips and LG), but they're lower quality e.g. LGs have PWM.
[+] [-] PuffinBlue|8 years ago|reply
Have to say I'm very happy with it.
No ghosting, really excellent colour (once calibrated), minimal backlight bleed (it's not an IPS panel so has less bleed anyway) and 4k at 60hz.
Been using it for just over a year now. Only thing it does is pure blacks on pure whites can streak a little when scrolling. So very large and thick pure black text on pure white background will leave a very short trail. Normal text doesn't do this, it has to be large areas of black on white. It's actually not annoyed me much as it use this happened only very very rarely on some websites but it's a limitation.
Not sure it's best for gaming (though I've played Mass Effect and Rocket League with no issues) but for productivity work it's been great.
Pretty cheap too!
[0] https://www.amazon.co.uk/iiyama-X4071UHSU-B1-ProLite-MVA-Mon...
[+] [-] bartread|8 years ago|reply
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-BDM4037UW-00-40-Inch-Monito...
[+] [-] Haitischmock|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CodeWriter23|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neya|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gnarbarian|8 years ago|reply
https://www.amazon.com/Philips-BDM4350UC-43-Inch-IPS-LED-Mon...
it's 4:4:4 chroma at 60hz so it's great for gaming too. and has a lower response rate than you'll get with TVs.
Highly recommended and it's hard to use anything smaller now.
Without using display scaling I wouldn't go lower than 40" and I think maybe even closer to 50" is ideal in terms of keeping the scale comparable between other periphial monitors. a 48" curved display would probably be perfect.
[+] [-] alanfranzoni|8 years ago|reply
Source: I own and use a BDM4065UC which I'm about to return, and I've been able to test another (previously owned) one, where the owner, who had a totally different setup from me (mbpro retina 2015 is my workstation, his own was a custom-built desktop with nvidia card); many other people on various forums complain about that, and Philips support seems to know about the issue perfectly.
I have been interested in BDM4350UC and/or BDM4037UC as well, but both have been reported to suffer from extreme ghosting/persistence; I'm now looking forward to buy an LG 43UD79-B.
What I agree is: a large monitor makes the difference. Not in the workflow per se, but in how much eye strain, headache, back pain (from slouching to get closer to the screen) and so on you get at the end of the day - which is almost inexistent with such large displays. Even if it's $700 for the LG, that's well spent money.
[+] [-] masonicb00m|8 years ago|reply
Terrible VR accident... punched it while playing Superhot? ;)
[+] [-] Insanity|8 years ago|reply
It's also nice to have the physical separation for some reason I can't really describe. My brother has a similar setup to the one in the article, and I just never really liked using it.
Just personal preference I'm sure.
(I also fear my eyesight might be too bad to have a big monitor in 4k, with things being rather small text)
For my setup, I prefer having (bright) IPS monitors. Not too large, I'm fine with my 24" 1080p monitors.
[+] [-] elnygren|8 years ago|reply
Something to do with marketing and how the two businesses differ (TVs B2C, monitors B2B)?
Or are there actual major differencies in the tech? Like what panel is used or something like that?
[+] [-] wernercd|8 years ago|reply
Add to that the different features - higher DPI, refresh rate, contrast ratios, etc. Cutting edge features such as NVidia G-Sync and the similar feature from AMD don't come cheap.
https://mybroadband.co.za/news/hardware/145753-why-computer-...
[+] [-] thescriptkiddie|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wernercd|8 years ago|reply
http://tiamat.tsotech.com/4k-is-for-programmers
I, personally, own one of those TVs (Seiki 39") and both love and hate it. I've always seemed to buy TVs for day to day computing because you generally get more cutting edge features for better prices (My first flat screen was a 27" WestingHouse TV. First 4k, Seiki. ETC).
Economics of scale factor in heavily - more TVs will be sold than computer monitors leading to better prices. Which is why I could get a Seiki 4k for $400 when similarly sized 4k "Desktop" monitors were going for $1000+.
The most annoying thing has been "Turn of monitor, Computer considers it unplugged". So you go from 2 monitors to 1 - and all the icons rearrange. Computer goes to sleep? Monitor turns off... disconnects... Annoying.
The price of saving $600+ for 4k (At the time).
I've recently upgraded to a smaller "computer" monitor that's better suited for gaming and desktop use... and the Seiki is now my computer room Plex Player.
[+] [-] cpr|8 years ago|reply
These Samsung TVs, once configured properly (Source > HDMI 1 > Tools, select device type as PC, turn off HDMI UHD Color (which blurs), turn on Dynamic Color as well), are excellent, and at the 28" viewing distance I use, are absolutely crisp (no pixels visible) in Retina mode under macOS.
And I'm using it over HDMI 30Hz with absolutely no flicker, and no (discernible) mouse lag.
The 2015 models don't lose their mind when the Mac goes to sleep, unlike the later models, which require re-configuring each time (the TV "forgets" the HDMI port).
Can't recommend them more, especially since you can get these older models refurbished for $400.
[+] [-] rawnlq|8 years ago|reply
40" is roughly 1.5625 times in area of a than 32" though...
[+] [-] Tepix|8 years ago|reply
"You need to elevate this beast vertically otherwise you’ll be craning your neck down to look at it."
A 40 inch TV is at least 50cm high. You should not be looking up - it's very bad for your neck. Looking down is no problem. The upper edge of the monitor should be at eye level.
[+] [-] positr0n|8 years ago|reply
I have a Sony x720e for my macbook for work and my PC for light gaming. It has graphics and gaming modes that have low input lags, but there is a really annoying quirk where when you turn the tv on it has normal (high) input lag until you switch to another mode then back to graphics mode. This means every time you turn on your PC (or plug in your laptop) you have to:
1. Turn on the TV
2. If necessary, switch inputs
3. Options -> Scene Select -> up arrow, down arrow
1 and 2 are annoying since monitors do that automatically but the TV doesn't. 3 is really annoying but hopefully is fixed in a firmware update...
Other than that the screen looks great.
I'm hoping for time to hack on an arduino with an IR LED to automate those steps, haha.
[+] [-] gavanwoolery|8 years ago|reply
To get an idea of the size, here is a picture of me sitting next to it. [2]
[1] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV2094Y
[2] https://imgur.com/a/9uBCG
[+] [-] petecooper|8 years ago|reply
I'm not here to argue the pros and cons, and I am not a lawyer, but I'm intrigued about the author saying -- and I paraphrase -- "I'm doing this on a computer that's breaking the licence agreement". That's an admission. I'm not judging, it's an observation. Hackintosh admissions on a personal site where they can be traced back to a person seem a bit risky to me.
I have no knowledge of Apple legal circling. Perhaps I'm just paranoid.
[+] [-] d--b|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spyder|8 years ago|reply
https://www.online-tech-tips.com/free-software-downloads/spl...
And there are 4k monitors that can work with 4 inputs at the same time:
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/5/2/15513200/lg...
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3074246/displays/dells-4-scr...
[+] [-] phkahler|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] balabaster|8 years ago|reply
For me, as long as my code is readable, it doesn't particularly matter. I'm not doing graphics 95% of the time and when I do graphics, it only really becomes necessary to have a high contrast, high pixel density screen. I run dual Samsung 2770HD TVs at home as my monitors, they sit 2ft from my face and they're perfectly adequate for me and the price was right. I guess if you're anal about picture perfection, then you're going to have a very different opinion of what is "best" and mine are certainly a loooong way from the "best."
When I watch a TV show or movie though, I don't get too hung up on the picture quality to just watch the movie and enjoy the story line. Of course, I grew up with a black and white TV in my room until I inherited the colour one that we had to tune with a dial and you got some snow interfering with the picture if the aerial wasn't just right. Oddly, it didn't spoil my enjoyment of the show or movie that I was watching even slightly. The story line is way more important than the picture quality.
For coding, the story line is the same... it lives in my head. The screen is really just a means to share that. I get no less enjoyment coding on a screen with a slightly lower pixel density than I do coding on the latest retina. Even after I've sat in front of one that's truly high quality, it doesn't take long to adjust back to a lower quality screen.
[+] [-] danso|8 years ago|reply
https://www.amazon.com/s/gp/search/ref=sr_nr_p_n_size_browse...
Anyone have any experience with the top TVs on this list? The top entry from TCL seems to be the leader, by far, in terms of average customer review, but the price point seems almost too good to be true: $379 for the 55' version, though that may have been a sale price, and the TV is currently out of stock.
https://www.amazon.com/TCL-49S405-49-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B01...
[+] [-] keredson|8 years ago|reply
https://medium.com/@keredson/using-the-samsung-mu6300-40-4k-...
stay away from the LG TVs. they don't have true 4k RGB.
[+] [-] ta2384428|8 years ago|reply
One thing that is certain is that people have different preferences. Certainly some people would enjoy the tiny pixels of the 27" 4k monitor at 100%.
My current setup is 2x24" 1920x1200 monitors. I have considered 3x24, 1x Ultra wide or 2x Ultra wide, but I'm not convinced I'd get the same comfort. I think that 3x 24, or 2x ultra wides would require to much head rotation to be comfortable.
I prefer the vertical break in the screen since it makes snapping windows easier. I'm starting to think that I might prefer a bit more real estate, as I often collapse the vertical file menu in my editor for a little extra room.
[+] [-] pixelbash|8 years ago|reply
Lately I have found myself wishing there was a wider format 5760 x 2160 screen of about 37-43" for 6 full HD screens-worth. But can't have everything I guess.
[+] [-] ianhowson|8 years ago|reply
I have two 27" 2560x1440 displays at work, but I find it counterproductive to look side-to-side constantly to see what's on the other screen.
[+] [-] BoorishBears|8 years ago|reply