Re: 4K monitor sizes

Hey Russell,

I've tried dual monitors in the past and it just doesn't work for me as I
end up with a persistent sore neck. My preference is one monitor with as
many pixels as possible.

I was using a 32" 4k screen which died and struggled on whether I should go
with a larger, same, or smaller 4k. In the end I went with a 27" 4k and
it's sitting closer than the 32" - but possibly covering the same fov. A
larger screen just means it'd have to be positioned further back. Also note
that I don't have any eye issues and also do not use scaling. 27" had the
benefit of being cheaper and uses less power so that's a bonus.

Would I consider going larger again? Not really. The only thing I'd
consider is more pixels, I'd really like a 5k2k or more but there's not
many options plus they are crazy expensive.

Jason


On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 7:33 PM Russell Coker via linux-aus <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Has anyone had experience with a monitor larger than 40" on their
> desktop?
> Currently Dell has a 27" USB-C monitor for $422 and a 32" monitor for $594
> while Kogan has a 43" for $799 and I'm thinking of what to buy in July.
>
> My wife's monitor broke and my plan is to buy myself a new monitor and
> give
> her my Samsung 28" 4K monitor (which is higher spec than her previous
> monitor).
>
> USB-C monitors are ones that can supply USB-C power to a laptop while also
> having keyboard and mouse connected to the monitor as a USB hub.  It's
> basically all the functionality of what used to be a laptop
> docking-station in
> a monitor with a single cable.  It would be quite handy to have that
> functionality as a laptop with USB-C is on my shopping list too.
>
> https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship
>
> According to the above article you want a TV to take up 30 degrees of
> vision,
> but for a monitor it's probably a lot more as you focus on the window that
> needs your attention.  Based on resolution and size according to that
> article
> a 43" 4K "TV" would be best at a distance of 80-160cm with the minimum
> being
> based on not seeing individual pixels.  For a monitor you don't need to
> not
> see pixels IMHO, just need to have enough of them to clearly represent
> letters.  So maybe 43" would be a good size.  It seems like a lot, but
> when I
> had a 17" monitor on my desk any larger than that seemed excessive...
>
> Another possibility is getting multiple monitors.  For a long time I have
> been
> unconvinced of the benefits of multiple monitors, but now I'm working at a
> company where there's a USB-C dock at every desk with 2 monitors and I've
> got
> used to working with 2 monitors in addition to a laptop display.  If I
> bought
> 2 of those 27" USB-C monitors I could have them both on my desktop system
> most
> of the time and connect one to a laptop on occasion when I needed to.
> Linux
> has really good support for dynamic plugging of monitors nowadays and
> 2*27"
> gives me twice the pixels and 3/4 the area of a 32" monitor for about the
> same
> price.
>
> --
> My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
> My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
> linux-aus-unsubscribe-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org
>

_______________________________________________
linux-aus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus

To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
linux-aus-unsubscribe-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org