|
I have assumed that the only reason one would want a curved monitor was for watching movies/video, or gaming, from much farther away from the screen than the typical distances your eyes are at when you are keyboarding away doing whatever.
Is this assumption incorrect ?
I welcome enlightenment.
cheers, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
I'd imagine that it depends: if the curve makes the whole area of the screen seem equidistant from your eyes, then it should reduce the refocusing you have to do to view the whole monitor. Pretty sure that wouldn't be good for your eyes in the long term though...
And even at my age I have no problem moving the focus from any part of my two 22" monitors to any other, so I think "gimmick" myself.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I bet there are some studies somewhere of the effects of using a curved screen relatively close-up on eye-movements, and focusing.
And, how much do I really use my "peripheral vision" when I am coding ... perhaps attending intensely to a relatively small area of the screen at any one moment in time is more typical of how I work in VS. But, I had no teevee in my larval stages, and using computers came around age 40; my first tv-tube monitors were convex (yuck) ... so ... whadda I know about the current generation ... for all I know they are evolving multi-tasking eyeballs can move independently like lizards.
... mmmm ... time to Google.
oh: how unsurprising this should appear on a Samsung news site: [^].
well, here's a PDF that sounds like it might have some kind of scientific content: [^].
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
modified 26-May-16 10:14am.
|
|
|
|
|
My usual want for a larger monitor (TV) would be to sit further back so my eyes can be more relaxed. When you sit further back, so far as I can do in a gedanken experiment, would mitigate any advantage perceived advantage it might supply. Perceived to be taken literally and figuratively.
I would hypothesize that if one were attempting to fill their entire field of vision it might have some benefit. I leave that aspect to the theaters.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Upvote for using gedanken without, evidently, schadenfreude 
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
I surprised no one seems to be speaking from experience of actually using a curved extra wide monitor. I have an LG 34" IPS Curved UltraWide monitor that I've been using for a couple of months now and I have to say I am very happy with it.
When sitting at the monitor, you can't see the curve, but it does seem to be slightly easier to see the corners. Of course, it could be in my head too.
The ultrawide 21:9 aspect ratio is also very nice. I like the factor that although it's wide, it's not tall, so I don't find myself getting a crook in my neck looking up to the top of the screen.
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
|
You like the extra wide format? I'm the opposite.
I first experienced it on a laptop. Great for movies, but I needed it for work. I had the choice of only seeing a relatively few lines of code/text with a readable font or looking at a whole page that was too small to read. I've gotten used to what are now the regular aspect ratio monitors, 16:9, but for working I found the old-format (4:3) even better.
Also - to make up for the deficit, above, one needs to get a very large monitor, indeed, and thus pay a premium and lose a lot of physical real-world territory to accommodate its excess bulk.
But, I can certainly accept that different work habit will optimize at different points.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I do the majority of coding in VS and I've found a couple of good uses for the wide format.
It lets me not worry about the sizing of the left and right panes in Visual Studio. Mainly, the Solution Explorer panel and the Tools panel. Those panels can creep into the central panel and leave you feeling like you are coding on a post it note.
Another use is when pinning each app to one half of the screen, it's like having 2 4:3 screens side by side (I didn't figure out if it actually works out to 4:3 on each half). So, browser in one side, Visual Studio in the other. It works pretty well for me.
You are correct in that the monitor probably cost way more than 2 4:3 monitors, but overall there is less clutter (one set of cables).
|
|
|
|
|
I use a pair of 24" widescreen monitors and have them angled where the monitors meet. Otherwise the far corners are further away than the centre of the "screen". I guess a curved 48" or 54" monitor would achieve the same result.
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, 34" is the only size in computer monitors and it's about 32" wide.
I would love it if they made on 48" wide (Ultra Ultra Wide). I've considered getting a second monitor, but it would take up 64" and that is a lot of desktop space.
It also be nice if they increased the rate of the curve on a monitor that large, going for the wrap around effect.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes; I'm sure eventually we'll get to the size we want. Until then, 34" is indeed about as good as it gets.
|
|
|
|
|
I have the Dell version of that one at home and I'm very happy with it. The work on is the flat 34" LG.
Originally at work I had two pretty crappy monitors and a huge bezel between them. The UW gave up maybe a few pixels on the sides (as I said crappy), but the lack of bezel just makes it so easy to use. Of course, the prior ones weren't IPS and the color accuracy was absolutely terrible so when writing proposals and putting in graphs or pictures I had no clue how they would look in print until I got someone to print it on a nice printer.
I think you're right about the aspect ratio. I think that the human eye is more suited to looking at things left and right instead of up and down so it makes sense. It does mean that I put my start bar on the left though.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a 34" flat one at work and a 34" curved one at home. I don't know how to describe it very well, but the curved one seems easier to see. On the flat one I have to let my eyes refocus more when I'm going to the far edges and I don't notice it nearly as much on my one at home. It isn't saving me seconds, but I think it might save me some eye fatigue. I'm not sure though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does the word "caterwauling" translate into Dutch? 
|
|
|
|
|
Aw come on! She has an amazing voice! 
|
|
|
|
|
I agree completely, like a cat yowling at the moon.
|
|
|
|
|
I await your list of the 5 to 10 best female vocalists of the past 20 years so that we have an idea of what your baseline for comparison is.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
I wasn't using a baseline, merely listening to the Youtube video. I must admit I did not listen to the whole thing, half a minute was more than enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah. The Grumpy Old Man setting!
It would still be interesting to know to whom you would listen for more than 30 seconds. Actually, hold that thought, let's ask everybody. There's not been nearly enough dissent and flamethrowing this week!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Here are a few in no particular order:
Debbie Harry (Blondie)
Enya
Emma Kirkby
Jacqui Abbott (The Beautiful South)
Joan Baez
Maria Callas
Norma Waterson
|
|
|
|
|
9082365 wrote: Ah. The Grumpy Old Man setting!
Not at all. I merely found the sound of that girl's singing raucous and not to my liking. There is nothing grumpy in not liking the same things as other prople. I doubt you would enjoy much of the stuff I listen to.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe he just needs to buy a new speaker set 
|
|
|
|
|
Much as I hate to agree with you on anything, I'm gonna have to concede that yours is the more accurate assessment here!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Did you... Did you just give me a COMPLIMENT!? 
Please don't do this too often, I might feel guilty about not liking you!
Thanks man! 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
