
Best Display for Programming? (2017) - kristianp
https://hackernoon.com/the-best-display-for-programming-8aad0be4227d
======
PascLeRasc
The author lost me at "For programming I didn’t care about having a high pixel
density..I wanted more text characters, not slightly smoother looking ones."

I guess it's just a personal preference, but my retina MBP's screen is so much
easier on my eyes for long sessions than anything else I've ever used, and
staring at a huge backlight like what he recommends seems like it'd be
incredibly painful. I get all the "more text characters" I want out of a
vertical monitor.

~~~
lultimouomo
This. 4k matters much less for games and movies than for programming; it's
hard to tell the difference when looking at moving images but the higher
resolution changes _everything_ when reading text. A high DPI screen puts much
less strain on your eyes!

~~~
polskibus
When you're doing web dev, it's important that devs test on devices similar to
users'. FullHD seems most popular, how do you address that?

~~~
sinstein
You can always downscale resolution to test for Full HD with a 4K panel but
you cannot do the other way round.

~~~
carlmr
If it's UHD (3840x2160) it's going to be exact. If it's actual 4K (4096 ×
2160) then it won't be sharp at Full HD resolution (1920x1080) because the
pixels don't align.

But many monitors have Marketing 4K which is UHD.

~~~
0-_-0
4K most commonly refers to 3840x2160. Which is of course not exactly 4000
pixels, but neither is 4096 :)

~~~
carlmr
The original 4K standard is 4096

------
smsm42
I am surprised how small is a number of people that use vertical (portrait)
display setup (I do). I have always found vertical space much more necessary
than horizontal space. Most workloads will not fill a wide-screen display, and
arranging multiple windows horizontally is usually a pain (the only case where
it works well for me is for comparing two code windows or data sets which are
organized in lines - comparing horizontally works much better in this way), as
is looking at them. Vertical arrangement works much better for me. Downside -
most displays are not able to rotate. It's a simple thing to do, probably
costs nothing, but finding a rotating model is a pain - most manufacturers
won't even tell if it rotates, you have to guess from the look of it. I wish
this scenario was better supported...

~~~
tom_
I've been using 2 x 27" 1440x2560 (Dell U2715H) for 2 years now. (Dell
monitors are typically a pretty safe purchase in this respect as all the mid
range ones seem to come with rotating stand.) I've been very happy with this
setup, and I've no intention of changing. It's a good aspect ratio for editing
text and viewing PDFs and whatnot, and makes very efficient use of desk space.
My 2 portrait monitors are only about 12 cm wider than one landscape one.

I also don't understand why more people don't use it - but perhaps people try
it out with a 1080p monitor, find it a bit cramped, and decide against it. (I
used 1200x1920 monitors for a while, and the screens always felt a bit too
narrow even with that. A lot of programs and sites seem to assume you've got a
monitor that's at least 1280 pixels wide, so you end up with extra scroll
bars, cramped UI, or stuff that's simply inaccessible.)

~~~
gazarullz
How do you deal with the extra vertical effort that your neck needs to do ?

I was thinking about something similar but I am a bit concerned about having
to move my head up and down to be able to focus on the entire screen.

~~~
tom_
I sit about 1m away from the screen, so I don't have to move my neck much
anyway.

I do still find the full height a bit much, so I typically have each screen
split half and half, or one third and two thirds. Depending on what I'm doing
and which program(s) I'm using, this either means two windows, and I use a
window layout program to arrange things, or one window split into panels, and
I just put the split points where I want them.

(3 x 1/3 is also quite usable - 3 x 1440x850. On some laptops, that's about
all you get in total...)

------
komali2
Dude writes a massive article on monitors but Willy nilly strews his windows
across the display, with random sized gaps between them. Gives me a bit of a
chuckle - to each their own but I obsess over getting every pixel of real
estate my display offers me, so I always thought it was odd to peer over a
coworker's shoulder and see something like the first image in this blog.

~~~
kbenson
I used to be like that. Then I switched to a 40" 4k TV as a monitor a year (or
two?) ago. You quickly find that it works best less as a small display into
some large space (as you might view a virtual desktop view) and more like a
chunk of the wall in front of you has become much more dynamic.

It's much harder to see it all at once, so you end up just treating it as a
free floating space to organize things, much like a real desktop (do you layer
all your items our to maximize used space on physical desks as well?).

While not working, I'll spend most the time with a browser window utilizing
slightly more than a quarter of the screen towards the bottom left, and not
much else, maybe some small transient file folder windows.

While working, I keep the browser, but I add a few large terminal windows.
Usually one mostly upper center, bottom right, but the upper center one might
overlap other windows slightly (because why not? I can make it large without
slight overlap and very little loss of passive usefulness of other windows).

It's fairly liberating. I now view tight control and maximizing utilized space
as a response to lack of space, which is no longer my problem. In the
beginning, I wasn't sure if I was going to regret this, and was looking for
utilities to set screen areas that I could maximize to, or save presets for
certain applications. Then I just let go, and it's been wonderful ever since.

If you're interested, I still recommend the TV I got (or something better
maybe now). It's got low input lag (~13ms) and does 60hz at 4k, all for about
$500 at Amazon[1] (I think it was ~$400 when I got it on sale).

1: [https://www.amazon.com/VIZIO-D40-D1-Class-Array-
Smart/dp/B01...](https://www.amazon.com/VIZIO-D40-D1-Class-Array-
Smart/dp/B01A0LGV06/)

~~~
wink
> It's much harder to see it all at once, so you end up just treating it as a
> free floating space to organize things, much like a real desktop (do you
> layer all your items our to maximize used space on physical desks as well?).

If it wouldn't take ages to properly align paper with a 1mm border but they
would magically align themselves - yes of course I would :)

Not that I work a lot with paper anymore, but I see no advantage of not
aligning stuff in the real world just like a tiling wm would...

~~~
flyingpenguin
> Not that I work a lot with paper anymore, but I see no advantage of not
> aligning stuff in the real world just like a tiling wm would...

That depends on how you like to switch windows. Virtual windows can do one
thing that papers can't, they can magically move themselves in the Z space. If
you size/space your windows so that no matter what Z order things are in,
there is always part of every window visible, you can VERY quickly click on
that part to bring that window to the front.

Yes, I know tiling WMs can give you awesome keybindings... but some people
like using the mouse or work for shitty companies that don't allow WM
installs.

------
zapzupnz
I've a 27" iMac with a 5K display. I don't think I'd want anything larger as
you're supposed to sit close to your display rather than have it at a
distance, and if I ever need more screen real estate, I change the scaling
factor in System Preferences.

Anyway, that was just to say that now I've gotten used to a HiDPI display with
fantastic, accurate colour, I can't go back. I'm running a little low on funds
and considered selling the iMac in favour of a 2018 Mac mini with a 24" 1080p
display — can't do it.

I think a lot of people are spoilt by their Retina-display iPhones, iPads, and
MacBooks; or their HiDPI Android phones and tablets. Now that I've been spoilt
by a large Retina display, I'm ruined for anything else, even 4K at 43".

~~~
auggierose
Yeah, can't go change back from my iMac Pro to anything else as well. I was
used to a laptop for years (MacBook Pro Retina) before that, can't go back to
that either.

------
sramsay
> [If you’re the kind of person who loves programming on your smallish laptop,
> you can stop reading now.]

I was all about big monitors until . . . my eyesight started to go south. I'm
not going blind or anything like that, but it slowly dawned on me that I was
having a lot of trouble bringing all of that real estate into focus with
progressive lenses. Switching back to a laptop made it a lot easier just to
see what was going on without constantly moving my head around to bring things
info focus.

Middle age sucks . . .

~~~
hoaw
Dedicated reading glasses is the proper solution.

~~~
stronglikedan
I'd go one step further and say dedicated _computer_ glasses. They're designed
for about twice the distance as book readers, and they have more expensive
coatings (anti-glare and blue light filter) that are unnecessary for book
readers. Since I invested mine (they aren't cheap), I can actually get through
an article without printing it out to read it.

------
nickjj
I would never use a large display like that. Way too much head movement.

Personally I found 25" at 2560x1440 to be the optimal set up (for me at
least). It's a good balance between real estate and being super easy to read
at 1:1 scaling, with no head movement at all really.

If anyone is interested, a few years back I put together a super in depth
article on picking a monitor for development. It's located at:
[https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-
fo...](https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-for-software-
development)

~~~
staffanj
Most developers use multiple displays and two 27" or two 30" display means
just as much (or even more) head movement - right?

At home I went from two 27" (1080p) to one 40" 4k and the workspace is not as
wide (less head movement) and I get the extra vertical workspace (2k vertikal
vs 1k vertical)

~~~
nickjj
Yes, I have 2 displays too, but I don't treat the displays equally.

I spend a lot of time on my main left 25" 2560x1440 monitor and the second 21"
1080p monitor is used for things that I occasionally look at, or look at with
intent to only look at that on its own. It's mainly operating as a separate
workspace that is occasionally beneficial to have up with my primary workspace
(but usually not).

With 1 big monitor, chances are you wouldn't want IRC (or whatever app) right
next to your main workspace (ie. loaded to the right of your main coding
environment) because it's too distracting.

You would typically dedicate 1 workspace for your main coding environment /
etc., but now with a single 40" monitor you would feel compelled to keep
things across the entire monitor because it would be weird to limit it to ~25"
worth of windows while you keep the rest of the monitor empty, so you're stuck
moving your head around like a maniac most of the time, instead of only
occasionally when you want to shift focus to a 2nd monitor.

I suppose it comes down to your work flow.

------
chrismorgan
> I like its menu system better, although its control buttons are
> inconveniently located on the back of the monitor instead of the front.

I have never touched the menus on my external displays since a few days after
I acquired them, and I wouldn’t expect normal people to either except
_possibly_ to adjust brightness.

I adjust the brightness of the displays regularly (typically three or four
times per day) from my laptop. Fun fact: Windows has two APIs for adjusting
screen brightness, one of which only works for the internal display and one of
which only works for the external displays; and sadly the brightness keys on
the laptop are uninterceptable and I have not come up with any way of linking
the brightnesses either. I went hunting and settled on some old freeware
called ScreenBright which I can invoke from the command line, so that now I
just run `b 0` for night time and `b 40` for most of the day (and up to 70% in
certain seasons—but 100% is pretty much always too bright as the situation is
not in direct sunlight); I have since also written a tiny Rust program that
interacts with the APIs directly which could replace it.

I really wish external display brightness was better handled by computers and
laptops.

I also yearn for the days of CRTs with physical brightness knobs that you
could turn. _So_ much simpler and more usable.

~~~
marcosdumay
Laptops usually have it good (after you disable the automatic setting, why do
people insist on automatic brightness at any kind of device?).

I wish desktops had even a passing thought about display brightness, ditto for
TV manufacturers.

------
manmal
I‘m closely watching the E-Ink monitor space. There is already one that looks
promising, but it’s monochrome and small and there’s still a lot of lag:
[https://youtu.be/Laa-cN15uGI](https://youtu.be/Laa-cN15uGI)

I wouldn’t watch movies on that one, but it _could_ be fine for programming
already.

With f.lux and macOS‘ dark mode I‘ve noticed how my eyes like low-light UIs
better (probably because of lower blue light emission?), and I think an e-ink
monitor would be almost zero-strain, just like reading a book.

~~~
pasta
Yeah I'm also watching this for multiple years but there is not much progress
in e-ink.

I would even like it on my mobile. I don't need a brighter screen I need a
readable screen.

But right now I like my ultra-wide monitor for programming. All panels open
but still space to code.

------
Jaruzel
> _The Dell is more expensive, but it feels better built, with a nicer stand
> with more adjustments and some cable routing._

The Dell is ALSO non-glossy, so that might be a big factor for some people.
This article is timely for me, as I'm about to buy the Dell 43" 4K to replace
my ageing Dell 24" (1920x1200).

Like the author, I want more screen space for my windows (I never run apps
maximised) and I do not see the point in buying a smaller 4K monitor, and then
running the OS at HIDPI 200% scaling - if you are going to do that you might
as well save some money and just get a 1080p monitor instead, as other than
smoother fonts, you wouldn't be gaining anything. Additionally, the PPI needs
to match my current PPI as my ageing eyes can't do smaller text/icons without
glasses, and I hate wearing glasses when I compute, as they make the screen
and all it's contents all fishbowly[1] in shape.

\--

[1] Is this a word? What a better word for where the edges of the screen
become bowed-out ?

~~~
falsedan
> _What a better word for where the edges of the screen become bowed-out?_

like looking through a fisheye lens? just distortion, and sounds like your
prescription needs checking as your brain should compensate for distortion
from vision corrections (up to a point).

~~~
Jaruzel
Oh OK thanks. I don't wear the glasses that often. I have astigmatism which is
worst in my left eye. Does it take long for my eyes to compensate? When they
do does that mean I have to wear the glasses for screen work all the time? All
questions, I've struggled to find consistent answers on.

~~~
mkesper
Try wearing them four weeks constantly. Your mind needs time to adapt!

------
mlmartin
I really like the 3:2 ratio display of my Surface Book. I just wish there was
a fairly affordable way of getting 27-30 inch versions of the screen, and then
put two of those side by side. That, would be my idea of perfection.

As it stands I just use a 27" 16:9 1440p display flanked by a 23" 1080p in
portrait mode. (At my desktop workstation)

~~~
alexval
This. I have the dell P4317Q and I think it’s the best thing out there right
now. But I would ditch it right away if a larger 3:2 screen existed maybe, 40”
4K at 3:2 something like that

~~~
mlmartin
The Surface Studio is perfect looking, 28" 3:2, 4500×3000 (192 PPI). The
frustrating thing is that it's not a standalone monitor/touchscreen - the
computer is built in, doesn't look all that powerful considering what you pay,
and doesn't look upgradable.

There's gotta be a market for these types of monitor...

------
atoav
I am a colorist for movies and I prefer my Eizo CGxxxx over a cheap 4k display
any time for programming.

Not only are the syntax highlighting colors less exhausting to look at, but
despite less pixels you gain more clarity, which often has to do with the
quality of the blacks.

On top of that I had only the best experience with Eizo Customer Support.
Better than with any hardware manufacturer ever. On of the Eizos is running
for over 15 years now without any issue and it still looks better than most
modern displays.

~~~
busterarm
I'm with you, here. That said, those are still a little bit above my budget. I
generally buy the most color-accurate monitor that I can at a price point I
can justify. Usually that's $600-700. This time around it was a LG 27UK850-W.

xmonad does a pretty good job splitting my screen into usable
browser/application and terminal areas.

All that said, I'm using ZBrush a lot more lately and a Cintiq Pro 32 seems
like it'd be pretty sweet.

------
tluyben2
Much a matter of taste I guess; I like 11-12 inch displays with crazy high
resolution. Unfortunately there are no ideal laptops that fit that criteria as
far as I can see so I must be lonely in that demand. I really liked my 11 inch
macbook air although the resolution was crap; that one with a very hd display
and 15 hours battery life would definitely be my perfect machine. But I know
i'm lonely in that; I never sit in a chair while programming; I program on the
couch and have been for the past 30 years (I used to have a keyboard with a
long cable and a couch in front of a low table when laptops were too expensive
in the 80s/begin 90s); I shift position often and find screens that don't move
with my line of sight incredibly annoying just as I find heavy things annoying
and cables annoying. I use i3wm/ubuntu on my x220 which is currently my setup,
but it's not ideal; too big and low res; great battery life though (19 hours).
The resolution of the GPD Pocket is perfect but the screen too small and it's
too slow; I used it when I do something urgent while travelling. If that would
be 10 inch it would be perfect (I got used to the keyboard which was annoying
at first; that would also benefit from a few sizes bigger).

~~~
bradfa
Not quite as small as you'd like but my work issued Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 is
quite small and light with high res. I haven't tried running any Linux on it
yet but it should have decent software support with a recent kernel and modern
distro.

~~~
tluyben2
How is the battery life for a programmer? All machines I tried, esp Windows or
Mac, have not given me more than 3 hours for my normal workload (while Ubuntu
with i3wm on Pocket or x220 give me 19 hours with the same workload so I do
not quite get it but whatever) while reviews give 15 hours on normal use.

I hear good stories about the xps 13 but the reviews and reddit stories about
battery life vary very wildly; from excellent to absolutely miserable. I got a
HP x360 something recently from work and reviews say excellent battery life
under Windows: I get 2-3 hours for my workload, my wife max 4 and she does
browsing and wordprocessing. Went to HP: called us heavy users, nothing wrong
with the hardware. Same with the macbook pro I have.

~~~
bradfa
I've not used my XPS 13 long enough to really have a great feel for it but I'd
estimate somewhere in the 5 to 9 hour range for light CPU/disk load (ie:
mostly typing in a text editor, sometimes compiling and executing, maybe some
web activity). Definitely not 19 hours. Your x220 battery life is impressive.

Sadly, due to the form factor being super slim, there's no way to add-on or
swap-in a bigger battery so it's not like you can improve upon the XPS with
post-purchase mods/changes.

It sounds like you aren't so concerned about performance as much as form
factor and battery life. I'm not sure I have a great solution for you, the XPS
might not be a good fit, but you might have a look at some of the Intel-based
Chromebooks where you can load your own UEFI firmware and then boot directly
to Linux. Some chromebooks have enough storage to be useful, sometimes have
high resolution screens, and use rather low power consumption CPUs so they
might fit your bill. It's a bit DIY but if you're into that kind of thing it
might be worth your effort.

[https://mrchromebox.tech/#devices](https://mrchromebox.tech/#devices)

------
bradfa
The best part of that 43" Dell monitor is that it has a serial RS-232 input
which you can control it through. Dell even has a programming guide showing
all of the commands.

[https://downloads.dell.com/manuals/all-
products/esuprt_displ...](https://downloads.dell.com/manuals/all-
products/esuprt_display_projector/esuprt_display/dell-p4317q-monitor_reference%20guide2_en-
us.pdf)

~~~
handzbagz
I have a Samsung digital signage screen that I use for a TV that has the same
thing, quite useful as I can control the TV through my media PC.

------
sbr464
My personal setup, 3x monitors:

iMac Pro 5k, LG 5K, Dell Ultrasharp 4K 27” in vertical layout/stand.

It’s very difficult to go back once you use a retina/5k screen. No ultra-wide,
4K etc can compare in font rendering. I’d replace the Dell if the LG or iMac
weren’t so expensive.

~~~
sbr464
Here’s a random pic I took a while back, I used to use two Dell 27” in
vertical layout, but it was a bit overkill, I found I never used the 4th.

[https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ixw62l5pg3c34xx/AAAi_yWrGIF3Solee...](https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ixw62l5pg3c34xx/AAAi_yWrGIF3SoleeWjDrNkca?dl=0)

------
Insanity
I actually prefer using two monitors, as I have a division of which programs I
run where. It takes no mental overhead to find program X when I'm programming,
because I know on which monitor it will be.

For example, when writing web assembly:

\- Primary monitor: vim (in tmux, multiplexed for build and other commands) \-
Secondary monitor: Web browser to test the code.

Similarly depending on what I'm doing I have such a 'division'. I'd hate to
miss that when using just one big monitor.

If I would use a 4k monitor, I'd hate to be using windows or mac because of
the window management options. I'd definitely want to be on a decent tiling
WM.

~~~
bradfa
The Dell P4317Q mentioned in the article can take 4 video inputs (2 DP, 2
HDMI) and you can split the screen into up to 4 virtual screens where each
virtual screen displays a given input. So you can do fun splits for side-by-
side or 4 corners or even 1 tall on the left/right and 2 of 1080p on the other
side stacked.

Some of the other monitors which use the same panel cannot do this splitting,
as far as I can tell.

~~~
Insanity
Oh, I hadn't actually heard of doing this before, but that's something I'll
look into :)

~~~
flyingpenguin
you could get yourself a 32:9 monitor as well. literally 2 16:9 monitors but
no bezel. Sure bezels are small but even 5mm in the middle of your setup makes
the far edges 2.5mm further to the side.

If you like vertical I would recommend a large format 4:3 which would
basically be 2 2:1 vertical monitors... but the world seems to hate good old
4:3

------
taneq
I'm a big fan of multiple portrait-mode monitors. It makes organising multiple
windows easy and the taller aspect ratio per screen is a natural fit for
editing code and documents. It's not so great for CAD or graphics editing but
still usable once you learn to tune out the bezels.

------
Theodores
If you are going to get a monitor then you might as well get one that will
last a few years, we are at that sweet spot now where the inputs do the
refresh rates and the price isn't so expensive. Having two 'Full HD' monitors
side by side doesn't cut it any more.

The big benefit of 4K is the vertical resolution, you really can work on a
good chunk of code with the whole block you are working on fitting in the
screen with your browser (full of Stack Overflow tabs) open adjacent to it.

Nobody likes land-filling monitors or having a cupboard full of dead ones. So
my advice is to go for a 4K monitor that does justice to colours. A TV won't
do.

I went 4K before the inputs did decent refresh so I have 'cinematic' 24 fps.
This is fine for programming and I am not a gamer plus I have a laptop for
watching video.

There is also a difference between 'cinema' 4K and regular 4K. Regular 4K is
3840 x 2160, 'cinema' gives 4096 x 2160, giving a whole column of extra 256
pixel goodness. I went for 'cinema' and 'real 4K' but the market has settled
into not selling these beasts.

Size is also a thing, do you really want to crick your neck looking skywards
to the top of your screen? Therefore 31" may be the sweet spot for you, your
desk and your code. This has worked for me and I don't feel that a larger
screen would help.

There are these ultra-ultra-wide monitors on the market with 1440 vertical
pixels but after enjoying 2160 vertical pixels I am not going to want less.

Those that work on websites for a living should demand a 4K monitor instead of
the side by side Full HD monitors everyone else in the office has. The website
of today does have to look good on an iPhone as well as a 4K monitor so the
budget reason for the upgrade is requirements.

------
omegabravo
I recognise that I'm in the minority here, but when I program on something
high density but small (physically), I long for more screen real estate. I
find this far more important to me than the DPI. I use 2x24" 1920x1200 (I do
prefer that than 1920x1080)

I didn't like the 30" 4K screen that I had to use for work. When I used a 24"
4K the extra DPI didn't seem to impact me at all.

My big dilemma is do I go for a 3rd 24"

~~~
chadcmulligan
I use 2 x 24" monitors to. I've tried various other combinations, but this
seems to be the sweet spot. The real advantage I find is you can maximise your
apps to each monitor and just flick between them if needed. They're also
cheap.

I have tried the 3rd 24" and I found I just leave mail and stuff open on it,
mainly because it was there. Two seems to work for me.

I have one for my IDE to edit code, and the other one for other stuff. I keep
thinking I should do something more sophisticated, but I always come back to
this.

I find larger monitors I have to move my head a lot more as well, with the 24"
eye movement is enough.

------
skunkworker
Currently I am running 3xDell U2412M in portrait for an effective resolution
of 3600x1920. My next move will most likely be a 43" 4k+ monitor to replace
them. A 30" is in a weird spot resolution wise but 4k over 43 is perfect for
splitting the screen into 3 columns and 2 rows, or pulling up a code editor
and seeing 108 lines of code without scrolling.

------
ryanmarsh
LG 5K UltraFine from the Apple Store is where it’s at. The thing is like
reading printed text on backlit glass. It’s so nice to program on I can’t
stand anything else.

I didn’t understand the eye strain I was putting up with till I bought this
thing.

~~~
rerx
I love this screen, too. Sometimes a bit more real estate than its 27 inches
could be useful. But my biggest gripe is really that my late 2016 Macbook Pro
with a 2GB Radeon Pro 450 often seems to have too little horse power to drive
all these pixels smoothly....

------
PaulBGD_
I don't see too much discussion about this fact, but I run a 1440p 144hz
monitor and it's fantastic for programming. Testing myself in Vim, I actually
move around and edit code faster with 144fps than 60fps. I'm not sure how big
the benefits are overall, but I've recommended 144hz monitors to many people
because of that.

------
neverminder
I have dual 4K 27 inch IPS monitors (DELL U2718Q) and of all the setups I've
tried this is the best one. Sufficient pixel density (163 PPI) for code to
look crisp at any font size. Narrow bezels, so ultimately not much head
turning is needed while at the same time having maximum screen real estate.

~~~
slantyyz
Do you feel like you have enough real estate?

I have a pair of the Dell P series 27/4k screens, and the moment I installed
the second one, I wanted more real estate (I run them without scaling).

I have since added a pair of 23" ultrawides below them, but I just can't wait
until 55" 8K curved monitors become affordable so I can have the equivalent of
a 2x2 grid of 27" 4k monitors and fewer cables to deal with (but I also know
I'll want more real estate the moment that gets installed).

------
pttrn
"For programming I didn’t care about having a high pixel density" → close tab.

------
daxfohl
I use two cheap 4k offbrand tvs that were on clearance at Walmart for $300
each five years ago. Contrast is not great but otherwise I love them. I have
two WUXGA side monitors in portrait mode too, mostly for nerd points but
really it's nice to have one as a permanent outlook monitor and one as a
permanent console. Usually I use the main monitors for two apps each side by
side, but sometimes it's nice to use all 4k for visual studio or dashboard
viewing. Occasionally will still need to float a few windows randomly, but
hardly ever tile them vertically as shown in the op picture.

------
alkonaut
Whatever I'm looking at when writing I want it centered on the screen. More
screens don't help since I don't want to twist my head for extended periods of
time. A bigger screen would probablåy have the same effect. When I have 2
screens all I do with my second one is place things I don't care about on it,
such as a mail client. It could just as well sit behind my active window.

My ideal solution is to just get nice quality screen that's _big enough_ and
has a decent DPI for its size. E.g. 27" 1440 or 32" 4k is nice for unscaled
(100%) content.

------
sunstone
I would like to try a 75" 4k screen across the room so that my eyes can relax
by focusing closer to infinity.

~~~
abledon
now thats a blog post i would read

------
ld00d
I recently got a 28" 4K monitor on sale for $250US, and it's almost too big to
me, but I love the way fonts look under macOS's scaling. I'm farsighted, so
when I wear glasses with a lower resolution, I really don't like seeing the
lines between pixels. While not technically "retina", my new monitor is close
enough.

Also, I do like working on a 13" laptop -- especially with workspaces.
Switching the workspace is almost a complete replacement for the screen real
estate of a larger monitor.

------
readingnews
From the article

> I had been worried that a 43-inch monitor might feel too huge.

Have a friend at work with a 55inch TV/monitor. On his desk. At first, we were
like "be serious, get rid of that thing". After a few weeks, we were all like
"hrmmmm, I think I might need one of those things".

Having a single ancient monitor at home, and two 27" monitors at work, I
always have the burning question: two wide screens, or one huge one (like the
author of the article)?

I think also the author is showing off his nice keyboard :)

~~~
interlocutor
> _I think also the author is showing off his nice keyboard_

I think I have a better keyboard. This is what it looks like:
[https://www.svethardware.cz/klavesnice-acer-future-
keyboard/...](https://www.svethardware.cz/klavesnice-acer-future-
keyboard/1866/img/acer.jpg) What is great about this keyboard is the touchpad
in the center. This is great because you don't have to stretch you arm to
reach the mouse. This reduces RSI for me. Unfortunately my keyboard is getting
old and they don't make this (or anything like this) anymore. Keyboard-
touchpad combinations are still being made but the touchpad is to the side
which doesn't solve the problem of have to stretch your arm.

There are some laptop keyboards like this one: [https://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-
ThinkPad-Compact-Keyboard-Trac...](https://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-ThinkPad-
Compact-Keyboard-TrackPoint/dp/B00F3U4TQS/ref=sr_1_6) but I want a desktoppy
split keyboard with a touchpad in the middle.

~~~
readingnews
That is certainly not common. I am a mechanical kb enthusiast, and most splits
I see rearrange the function/control keys... but the pad in the middle is
quite different. That is an interesting take on it for sure. And the sidecar
numpad is even more interesting.

------
vagab0nd
Over the years I've found that I really dislike multiple screens, or huge
displays. I've actually tried the 43 display the author had and it sucked for
me. It required so much head movement that it's even worse than 2 monitors.

What really works for me is a single 27 - 32 inch, hidpi display. It gives
enough screen real estate while keeping the content (mainly text) sharp and
pretty. A tiling window manager helps too.

~~~
sridca
Yup, I've been quite content with my 27 inch 5K monitor. I use i3 on Linux.

------
harrygeez
I recommend one of the ultrawide monitors. It's so much nicer to have many
windows open side by side, especially when you're editing multiple files

~~~
arvinsim
I had 2 monitors before and a 32" 4K monitor now. Despite the large real
estate, I don't feel that the increased vertical space is as good as the
increased horizontal space.

I will be buying an ultrawide next time to see if those are indeed better than
a 4K monitor.

------
airbreather
I have got a 55inch 4k Kogan curved screen TV which I drive via HDMI, so only
30Hz but it doesn't matter for any of my use cases.

It is totally awesome, really crisp and the curve makes a noticeable
difference on the desk to bring the edges in.

Cost AUD$500 plus delivery, extremely hard to beat at that price.

Plus I have a 32 inch 3K landscape and a 24 inch HD portrait, set up emails
and whatsapp web on the 24 inch and do work on the other two.

------
randallsquared
When I was a remote worker I had in my office two 27 inch QHD screens and a 39
inch 4K screen in between them. This had the nice property that the pixel
density was very close to the same, and so windows moving from one monitor to
the other (on Windows or Mac) didn't change much. I didn't have a lot of
success setting this up nicely on Linux. For me, it turned out that three
monitors in landscape orientation was too far to turn my head -- I ended up
either leaving the right or the left monitor essentially unused.

Where I work now, I have my laptop and a 34 inch 21:9 (1440p) curved screen. I
was surprised to find the curved screen so agreeable, and only wish that it
was somewhat larger and higher resolution. Might look at 21:9 (1600p) curved
screens.

------
telesilla
I solved a problem with resolution just recently, on older macbooks. I refuse
to give up my 2012 Retina macbook until it's dead in the water. Connecting a
4K monitor through HDMI didn't work: it either didn't wake up from sleep,
randomly switched itself off or sometimes flat refused to connect. Displayport
didn't give me 4K resolution. Fortunately I found SwitchResX[1]. $10 saved me
from lugging my giant new 4k monitor back to the store - it lets me use the
DisplayPort at high resolutions. I now have up to 3840x2160 though unless I'm
working on media, I'm happier at 2560x1440.

[1] SwitchResX: [http://www.madrau.com/](http://www.madrau.com/)

------
miguelmota
Best displays for programming I find useful are ultra-wide matte displays such
as the LG 29UM68-P with a 21:9 ratio. I love having tmux panes side by side.
Having a second one placed vertically allows you to easily read entire pages
of source code all at once.

~~~
nvarsj
I know a lot of engineers who like the ultrawides. What I don't like is that
they sacrifice vertical height. So it's not the best, in my opinion, for
coding. An ultrawide that had the same height as a 30" would be really nice!

~~~
Wintereise
Some (expensive) ultrawides do address this (somewhat) -
[https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-
monitor](https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-monitor)

3840x1600 instead of 3840x1440. If you long for more than that, you'd probably
like standard 4k a lot more.

------
mattnewport
I have a 43" 4K Viewsonic as my primary display and it does work pretty well.
I actually wanted something between 32" and 43" but there are basically no
options for 4K displays in that range. I'd like to try something around 36-37"
if it existed and I wish I'd been able to find a matte panel at this size but
overall I'm pretty happy with it. Previously I was using a 32" and it was
usable at 100% in Windows but some text was a little small.

On its own it fits comfortably on my desk but my second display is a 27" and I
have to put it in portrait to fit both with my current desk setup.

------
nateroling
LG 38" does it for me at the office.
[https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-
monitor](https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-monitor)

I have a flat 34" ultrawide at home, and very much miss the curved screen from
the 38". The 1600 vertical pixels is a nice step up from 1440 as well.

At this point I think I'm waiting for a VR/AR solution before I upgrade my
display again...

------
bengale
I like ultra wides, I've got two 34" (3440 x 1440) stacked one on top of the
other. I tend to put monitoring stuff, ancillary stuff up on the top one that
I just need to be able to glance at and code on the bottom one.

I don't really have super long files normally, but will be jumping between
files so its helpful to be able to have three or four side by side on a wide
monitor. Then I just have my laptop open to the side (driving all of it) with
fullscreen terminals.

------
egypturnash
Huh, now I’m kinda tempted to leave my 24” display behind when I do my
upcoming move and get one of these. Maybe not the LG, what with the top
comment on its page saying that it provides nowhere near enough power to keep
a usb-c Mac powered, and a super slow usb bus...

([https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-43UD79-B-4k-uhd-led-
monito...](https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-43UD79-B-4k-uhd-led-monitor))

------
Boxbot
i don’t think a 43” display would even fit on my desk, and i think i would
personally prefer two smaller displays, but i would whole heartedly recommend
dell’s ultrasharp or similar displays to anyone who wasn’t lookin for super
high fps gaming. their stands are some of the best (most adjustable and
stable) i’ve seen and the panels themselves have great colour reproduction and
a good resolution/ppi.

------
umlautae
“I liked the resolution of the 30-inch monitors, which is 2560 by 1600 pixels.
That is 100.63 pixels per inch (PPI).” AND it was very easy on the eyes. My
ten years old 30” seems to have blown a cap so I’m on the market for a new
one. The 43” seems like a great alternative. Especially because 30” became
only 50% cheaper over the 10 years, that means they are still (over)
expensive.

~~~
64738
No, take the opportunity to replace the cap! If you really just don't have the
interest or the time, please give it someone that is willing to make the
attempt. It's a great learning experience and maybe someone that couldn't
afford a new one just got a good enough one on the cheap :)

------
kowdermeister
I have a 34 inch LG 4k monitor cost about 400$, connected to my laptop. My
only wish was if it was curved.

I eyeballed with the UHD ultrawide curved one but it was too pricy :)

Edit: funny, that when the heating automation for my home turns on with some
electromagnetic switch, my screen goes black for a second or glitches the
image. I suspect the USB-C > display port converter.

------
nyghtly
I don't understand the programmer's obsession with having as much screen as
possible. Is dividing up your attention span with 8+ windows open at one time
really helping you to work better? I prefer to have at most 3 windows visible
at one time. Workspaces, alt-tab, etc. were invented for a reason.

------
walkingolof
I have two monitors now, I'm going to move away from that and go for a 21:9
display, the reason is that most IDE's (and OS:s for that matter) handles two
screens very poorly.

For example in VS Code I can easily open editors in columns beside each
others, but I cant distribute them over two screens.

That sealed the deal for me.

~~~
jenscow
Most IDEs handle dual screens handle multiple screens very well, usually by
supporting multiple windows and allowing tabs/panels to be detached and moved
between them.

If not, it's a flaw of the IDE not the monitor setup.

------
rcarmo
I’ve got a 5K 27” iMac with a 4K 24” external monitor and find I prefer two
distinct (high resolution) panels rather than a vast one.

Being able to have individual workspaces on each (and switch between then with
a two-finger swipe on the mouse) is a great way to switch between individual
contexts.

------
DomreiRoam
the Eizo ev2730 is a 1920 by 1920 square screen. A little pricey ...

[https://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/index.h...](https://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/index.html)

------
pizza
Other factors that are likely as important as real estate are impact on vision
and sleep.

------
chowyuncat
I think this falls apart on Mojave. I use 27" Cinema Displays that are
noticeably less readable even with the various font smoothing settings.
Perhaps I haven't found the right combination.

------
simplyinfinity
From my personal experience, a single 32" 4k monitor is far better for my
productivity than 2 x 1080p monitors.

And even better one is 2 x 1080p in vertical position and one 32" in the
middle is quite pleasant!

------
segmondy
Best programming I've ever done is on a 320x240 display. Display doesn't
matter. Font doesn't make. It really doesn't. People love to convince
themselves that these things matter, as someone that has programmed for over
20+ years. Let me say, your monitor, your keyboard, your font doesn't matter.
What matters more is your computing hardware, OS, your tool chain and your
brain. Not a popular opinion, but I firmly believe that from personal
experience and from having watched and observed experienced programmers.

------
jchw
I feel like I've gotten pretty picky with monitors. Right now, I'm running two
old 1080p IPS displays from years ago, and the reason why is because I have
trouble choosing an upgrade:

\- IPS or OLED would be preferable for the wider viewing angles, better color
reproduction and significantly richer blacks vs TFT panels, but they cost
more.

\- High refresh rate panels offer a notable improvement in user experience.
Even if '60hz is enough' that does not mean you cannot benefit from more,
especially when it comes to lower latency and techniques like black frame
insertion (which reduces ghosting.)

\- Variable refresh rate is nice, too: in some circumstances (mostly gaming
today I presume) it could basically eliminate stuttering and dropped frames.
NVidia now supporting FreeSync to a degree makes this even more enticing.

\- Higher pixel densities greatly improve text legibility and picture quality,
which can be especially great when viewing denser glyphs such as Japanese
kanji. Bonus points: at decent densities, subpixel rendering can be switched
off.

\- Curved/ultra-wide panels are fairly enticing because they might offer a
solution to the problem of wanting a single optimal display for your line of
sight, versus two smaller displays.

...but in reality:

\- Panels satisfying even just a few of these constraints can be very
expensive and few, if any, satisfy literally all of them.

\- Operating system support for high pixel density varies. Linux can vary from
surprisingly good to absolutely terrible depending largely on your setup, and
Windows varies strongly, though it is a lot better in 10 than it ever has
been. MacOS has relatively good DPI support.

\- The combination of high refresh rate and high pixel density makes for heavy
bandwidth usage requiring cutting edge display connector standards to be
supported on your GPU. Some displays require multiple ports to be plugged in
and this can be flaky and glitchy.

\- High refresh rate support in OSes is also a bit messy. I've not tried but
I've heard Windows DWM can be buggy especially in mixed refresh rate setups. I
also believe variable refresh rate is mostly only useful in situations where
you have a fullscreen application running, since not everything will push
frames out at the same time.

\- If you switch to a single display, versus multiple homogeneous or
hetrogenous displays, you lose some utility. My dual display setup has a
unique feature, in that it works together with my IOMMU passthrough. The right
monitor is designated to whatever virtual machine has the secondary GPU
attached. Display forwarding is handled with Looking Glass, so I don't need a
physical output. However, I have it plugged into the physical output, which
allows me to switch to it for lower latency/reduced screen tear/debugging/etc.

\- Panels are still evolving at a decent pace. In a few years, OLED monitors
may be superior to IPS monitors. Also, prices of cutting edge technology is
definitely trending down in the monitor space. It just feels like it hasn't
been a good time to buy.

So I sit here with my 1080p monitors. They may not be great, but they have
good viewing angles, decent colors, and they were pretty cheap when I got them
(it was around the time cheaper IPSes started to hit.) The market has plenty
worth switching for, but there's so much more potential, and the user
experience hasn't always kept up with the innovation here.

~~~
RachelF
I agree with your comment. The OP is using a 43" TFT. I've had a TFT side by
side with an IPS monitor, and I much prefer an IPS panel. I find it easier on
the eyes.

~~~
DougBTX
The Dell website says the P4317Q is IPS so the author might be wrong here.

------
keymone
to each their own. laptop display only, fullscreen all the time, took some
time to get used to, but now my desk has nothing but a charging cable and i'm
comfortable in any environment. i found having multiple windows in eyesight
too distractive.

