I found this article utterly baffling. The author clearly knows their stuff, having created Fira Code, but my experiences couldn't be more different.
I spend most of my days in a text browser, text
editor and text terminal, looking at barely moving
letters.
So I optimize my setup to showing really, really
good letters.
I certainly appreciate how nice text looks on a high DPI display.
But for coding purposes!? I don't find high DPI text more legible... unless we're talking really tiny font sizes, smaller than just about anybody would ever use for coding.
And there's a big "screen real estate" penalty with high DPI displays and 2X scaling. As the author notes, this leaves you with something like 1440×900 or 1920x1080 of logical real estate. Neither of which is remotely suitable for development work IMO.
But at least you can enjoy that gorgeous screen and
pixel-crisp fonts. Otherwise, why would you buy a retina
screen at all?
It's not like you really have the option on Macs and many other higher-end laptops these days. And I am buying a computer to do some work, not admire the beautiful curves of a nice crisp font.
So anyway, for me, I chose the Dell 3818. 38", 3840 x 1600 of glorious, low-resolution text. A coder's paradise.
For purposes of software development, I won't really be interested until 8K displays become affordable and feasible. As the author notes, they integer scale perfectly to 2560×1440. Now that would rock.
Legibility is a funny thing. When you're paying attention, your standards for legibility will be very low. I was totally happy to read text on a 1024x768 17" MAG monitor for years. When you're paying attention to something else, like designing the code you are about to type, I think crispness and clarity of text absolutely matters. Microsoft Research did a lot of work on this when they released ClearType. They seemed to believe strongly that clearer text measurably improved speed to recognize characters.
I'm in my 40s and my eyes aren't great. But I have zero issues with legibility on the non-high-DPI Dell 38".
Depending on font choice (typically I use Input Mono Compressed) I can fit six or seven 80x100 text windows side-by-side on the Dell with excellent legibility.
That is up to 800 total lines of code and/or terminal output on my screen at once.
That really is my idea of coder's paradise. You, of course, are entitled to your own idea. No two coders like the same thing. Ever.
Well, it's really about personal preference and while I know a couple of collegues with your preference, I feel it's the minority.
I take two 16:9 screens over one 3840x1600 screen anytime. No need to setup some additional inner-mintor split-window management. Split-monitor management and workspaces works very well and I can even turn the 2nd monitor off, when I don't need it and want full focus mode (i.e. reading). Also I prefer my main monitor exactly in the middle in front of me and an actual 2nd monitor to the right. If I have the luxury of a 3rd monitor, it's to the left (usually the laptop that powers the 2 big screens). Setting one half of an ultra-wide in the middle just feels wrong. And splitting in 3 is too small for me and again the inner-monitor window management issue.
While I also strongly believed my old 1920x1080 24" (~92ppi) screens were good, I had the opportunity to use qhd 27" (~110ppi) screens for 3 months abroad and I was baffled when going home how incredibly bad text looked on my old 24" monitors.
The benefit of a 3840x1600 screen over two monitors with lower resolution is that 3840/2 = 1920 and 3840/3 = 1280. Those are horizontal resolutions for 1080p and 720p respectively. The fact that these are standard resolutions means basically every app works as designed regardless of whether you have 2 or 3 windows side by side. This isn't true for ultrawides with resolutions like 3440x1440 that don't divide cleanly into other standard resolutions.
The default software that comes with the Dell mentioned above handles everything. If I want to simulate two 1080p monitors, I just do the standards Windows drag to the side of the screen. If I want to simulate three 720p monitors I can press shift while dragging and that tells the Dell software to take over. It is more versatile than having individual monitors.
> The default software that comes with the Dell mentioned above handles everything.
Does it really handle everything? Does it handle all (or even just a single one?) of the use cases I mentioned in my comment and that I care about. Can I turn of part of the screen, if I actually only need smaller space? Can I position a 1920 default width space right in the middle in front of me without it looking weird (i.e. symmetry of screen hardware borders)? Are workspaces working correctly (in unix, windows, macos, all of them?). Just splitting monitors isn't everything, I heavily use workspaces to switch between context.
If all of this works (except the obvious middle problem that's phyiscally impossible to solve) I might actually consider it.
It does for my use case, but obvious your mileage may vary.
>Can I turn of part of the screen, if I actually only need smaller space?
Sort of. The monitor can split into dual source mode that has two 1920 sources side by side. You could potentially turn that on and set one side to an empty source. You can also always use a black desktop if you need the rest of the monitor to be dark to allow you to focus on whatever window you have open.
>Can I position a 1920 default width space right in the middle in front of me without it looking weird (i.e. symmetry of screen hardware borders)?
How do you accomplish this with two monitors currently? You would have to choose between symmetry or having one monitor front and center. The Dell software allows you to customize the drag and drop regions. I use three columns that are the full height of the screen. You could set it up to have a 1920 section in the middle with two 960 columns on each side. You could also setup your physical workspace so one side of the monitor is centered in your vision instead of the center of the monitor. Also I have mine mounted on a monitor arm that allows me to reposition it as needed.
> Are workspaces working correctly (in unix, windows, macos, all of them?)
It works in Windows and that is the only native GUI I use. Everything obviously works fine when in the terminal and I rarely increase the resolution of a VM past 1920. I would frankly be shocked if there wasn't similar software available for Linux and OSX that allowed you to setup customized zones like Dell's software if you need to run one of those natively.
That Dell tool sounds a lot like Microsoft's PowerTool FancyZones. Have you tried FancyZones? It can optionally take over the Win+Left/Right shortcuts from Aero snap (the drag to side/quadrants tool built into Windows).
I've been drooling over the Samsung curved ultra-wides since like January as a possibility for my gaming desktop. In March one of my gaming desktop's monitors blew so I've been done to just one monitor and started to use FancyZones and regular usage of FancyZones has got me much more convinced I'd be happy with the ultra-wide, now I'm just hesitant for merely financial reasons.
I haven't used FancyZones. I will check that out, thanks for the tip.
The financial aspect of this is definitely the toughest part to justify. A single monitor with this resolution is always going to be more expensive than multiple smaller monitors. The cost was justified in my experience, but that will vary depending on your use cases and budget.
Yes the financial aspect isn't easy to get past right now, and the curved ones especially right now are a premium cost just because the option is still so new, but the curved ones do about what I tried to do in manually angling my previous dual monitor setup with added advantages in gaming (because I could actually use the center point and periphery in game rather than the center being bevels and in the way if I tried to span games across both monitors). Plus, all the usual financial concerns from the current state of the world and everything that has been going on.
This is, of course, an issue of personal preference and I do not work for a monitor manufacturer so I'm not trying to talk anybody into buying anything hahaha.
Also I prefer my main monitor exactly in the middle
in front of me and an actual 2nd monitor
I don't understand how dual 16:9 screens help with this! But I agree with you that I hate having a "split" in the middle. I need my main monitor centered.
My monitor arrangement is:
- Dell 38" ultrawide (centered in front of me). Work happens here, obviously. MacOS virtual desktops, while not the most feature-heavy, cover my needs well enough here. Of course I respect that some people lean into virtual desktops/workspaces harder and need more.
- Compact ("portable") 15" 1080p monitor, centered in front of me under the ultrawide. This is essentially dedicated to Slack and my notetaking app. This leaves the Dell at a decent ergonomic height at my eye level.
- Laptop off to the side, for nonessential stuff - typically music app, sometimes Twitter or news feeds
I have a Dell 38" 3840 x 1600 Ultrawide and it is bliss. I don't think of it as two screens, I think of it as three. I can comfortably have three applications displayed side by side with no seam down the middle. For me, it isn't about the crispest font I can get. It is good resolution and tons of real estate.
Do you use it with Windows or MacOS? If it's Mac, do you experience any compatibility issues? I was researching quite a bit into this Dell 38" in the last few days and discovered that it does not have official Mac support, and it seems to have some issues with the USB-C connection.
That Dell would be the screen I would buy right now for coding. I am currently using a 5k iMac at home and a 30" Dell (2560x1600) at work. I really loved the resolution of the iMac, but for my work, I need screen estate. The font rendering on the 30" at 1x scaling is good enough, and having a lot of screen estate is essential for me. Having 50% more horizontal space would of course be great :).
The new 32" Apple display would be great of course, but the price is just off. For coding, I don't care how much reference quality the color setup is. My only hope is, that Dell soon offers an affordable display based on that panel.
I definitely have zero regrets about the Dell. Some of the best money I've ever spent. Depending on font choice (typically I use Input Mono Compressed) I can fit six or seven 80x100 text windows side-by-side on the Dell with excellent legibility.
I can't imagine anybody justifying the cost of that 32" Apple display for coding either. I can't even imagine many high-end creative professionals justifying that.
I mean, on one hand... if a person figures they'll get 5+ years out of that Apple monitor and they work 5 days per week... that's less than $4/workday for a $5,000 monitor. From that perspective it's somewhat reasonable. But most people would probably get more benefit from picking a $1000 monitor and spending that $4000 elsewhere.
The funny thing is, I would even think about the 32" Apple display, if Apple made a computer to go with it. But the new Mac Pro at the entry price is 2x of its predecessor and really not a great computer at the entry level specs. It is amazing fully loaded, but I would rather get a Tesla :p. Not sure how well the 32" Apple is supported by Linux :).
Do you use it with Windows or MacOS? If it's Mac, do you experience any compatibility issues? I was researching quite a bit into this Dell 38" in the last few days and discovered that it does not have official Mac support, and it seems to have some issues with the USB-C connection.
What's with the downvotes? HN is turning into Slashdot or Reddit, and that's not a good thing.
I clearly stated my point. Maybe you disagree. However, the downvote button is not a "disagree" button. It's for posts that actively detract from the discussion.
We need some kind of meta-moderation to ensure frivolous downvoters lose their downvote privileges.
I personally agree that the downvote button should be reserved for low quality comments rather than disagreement and that the diverse and high-quality comments are what makes this site and community awesome. Unfortunately neither the FAQ nor the Guidelines state anything about how to use the vote buttons. So how should HN users know when to use them? Is there even consent anymore (or ever has been?) that downvotes should not be used for disagreement? How did I form the opinion that downvotes should be reserved for low quality rather than disagreement? Somehow along the lines of contributing enough to this site to reach enough karma to downvote.
Maybe the guidelines should add a section on how to vote. On the other hand, how can this really be enforced?
It's a sad thing. I also stopped posting opinions that might trigger disagreement from a large majority.
However, the guidlines clearly state:
> Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills. [1]
It's not authoritative, and I don't know dang's feelings on the matter, but it's probably worth noting that long ago the founder of the site clearly stated that it was acceptable to use downvoting to express disagreement:
pg: I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness.
For completeness, here's the primary moderator 'dang' very explicitly confirming that downvoting for disagreement is still allowed at least as of 2 years ago:
dang: Downvoting for disagreement has always been ok on HN.
I don't care about the imaginary internet points, but it doesn't take many downvotes to bury/kill/whatever a post. If a few early responders "downvote disagree" then nobody will ever see it.
It's almost as if they thought, "How can we best encourage groupthink?" and this was the answer.
And yet, years after Dan took over as moderator, and over a decade after Paul posted his comment, the site is still going strong, and arguably is one of the best places for discussion on the internet. There is clearly a tension between allowing people to "bury" unfavorable opinions and denying them the ability to express themselves at all, but somehow it mostly works.
One thing I'd recommend, if you haven't done so already, is to at least occasionally browse with "Showdead" turned on (accessible through your profile link in the upper right). The majority of the things that are dead deserve to be, but the others can often be rescued by vouching for them.
It also may help if you think of voting as "rearranging the page" rather than killing an opinion. The opinions are still there for those who wish to upvote them, they are just at the bottom. Like the dead comments, most of the things greyed out at the bottom deserve to be there---but the rest one can try to rescue with an upvote.
And yet, years after Dan took over as moderator,
and over a decade after Paul posted his comment,
the site is still going strong, and arguably is
one of the best places for discussion on the internet.
HN is a success and does the vast majority of things well. But it makes no sense to sweep aside criticism with "well, it's working." It succeeds because of the things it does well and in spite of the things it does suboptimally.
HN moderation generally works well in spite of the actual technical implementation; it succeeds because HN has a high-quality readership who generally follows the internet etiquette of "downvote posts that harm the discussion, not simply because you disagree."
One thing I'd recommend, if you haven't done so already,
is to at least occasionally browse with "Showdead" turned on
(accessible through your profile link in the upper right).
The majority of the things that are dead deserve to be,
but the others can often be rescued by vouching for them.
Amen! I wholeheartedly agree and I do that for this very reason.
But for coding purposes!? I don't find high DPI text more legible... unless we're talking really tiny font sizes, smaller than just about anybody would ever use for coding.
And there's a big "screen real estate" penalty with high DPI displays and 2X scaling. As the author notes, this leaves you with something like 1440×900 or 1920x1080 of logical real estate. Neither of which is remotely suitable for development work IMO.
It's not like you really have the option on Macs and many other higher-end laptops these days. And I am buying a computer to do some work, not admire the beautiful curves of a nice crisp font.So anyway, for me, I chose the Dell 3818. 38", 3840 x 1600 of glorious, low-resolution text. A coder's paradise.
For purposes of software development, I won't really be interested until 8K displays become affordable and feasible. As the author notes, they integer scale perfectly to 2560×1440. Now that would rock.