I'm happy that Apple is aiming at the pro market again. I wish their next step was to release more products for programmers, not just designers.
For example, big 2k 16:10 monitors have been wiped out from the market as manufacturers can't be bothered to produce panels in that aspect ratio, instead of 16:9. More vertical space makes such a difference.
I only know of two old 30 inch models from Dell and NEC that will be soon not possible to purchase. Apple, with their scale, could get custom orders.
I am not sure that 2K 16:10 30" is the sweet spot for users. Five years ago before 4K worked properly then yes, but not now.
4K on 31" works great, plenty of vertical resolution for code plus the pixels are not too small. Anything larger and you will be getting neck ache peering up/down the screen. Or you would have to push the monitor further away than what a regular desk affords, adjusting font sizes accordingly, going into painful letter box territory.
I promise you won't look back if you go 4K on 31", there is no need for a dual monitor setup unless you are editing movies!
But with scaling, are you not simply getting effectively a 16:9 2k but a bit crisper with 4k?
I have tried one of those old 30 inch Dells with 16:10 2560x1600, and it's amazing how much nicer it feels than having just 1440 vertical pixels. The aspect ratio is closer to sqrt(2). I guess that's the difference.
I don't have scaling and all application font sizes are stock. 31" is goldilocks for me, it is about having 2160 pixels good for programming, not smoothed out 'retina', but native pixels!
I have a failed product according to the marketplace - cinema 4096 x 2160 resolution @ 24Hz with extraordinary colour accuracy. Perfect for code, useless for gaming and 60+ Hz video.
I am not sure I would want a 27" 5K monitor, even if it did work properly (mine has an early DisplayPort interface, pre-dating useful standards). If you get a chance to look at a 34" 5K monitor then I reckon that could be what you are looking for. Any bigger and you have to crane your neck or push the monitor further away.
How would you feel about having 1692 vertical pixels instead?
Aspect ratio isn't what matters, it's vertical pixels and vertical inches. A 32 inch 16:9 screen is almost exactly the same height as a 30 inch 16:10 screen.
I don't think either one is a sweet spot, once software is taken into account. Most programs can only competently scale to 1x or 2x, and nothing in between. And for a 4K 31" screen, 2x is too big.
In my opinion, 31 inches, if you were at 1x DPI, is a perfect fit for 1440p. So double the pixels to make a 31" 5K screen and you're in a great spot. Text is a good readable size. Everything is extremely crisp. Compared to a 1920x1200 screen you have 20% more vertical space, and 33% more horizontal.
I’ve been running 4K at 31” for quite a while with Windows.
It’s a sweet spot in the sense that I don’t need scaling. On the other hand this means there’s not so many pixels per inch.
I’m still dreaming of a ”PC” screen which would give me the ”wow” feeling I get using Macbooks with retina displays.
Right now there’s very little choice on market if you want high DPI for desktop. Could not find modern options, only Dell 8K/32” and 4K/24”, both of which are bit old (24” has very wide bezels unlike newer screens).
For example, big 2k 16:10 monitors have been wiped out from the market as manufacturers can't be bothered to produce panels in that aspect ratio, instead of 16:9. More vertical space makes such a difference.
I only know of two old 30 inch models from Dell and NEC that will be soon not possible to purchase. Apple, with their scale, could get custom orders.