from Hacker News

I went back working on 24-inch 1080p screen from a 32-inch 4k screen

by iwangulenko on 1/26/20, 2:43 PM with 65 comments

• by rspoerri on 1/26/20, 3:10 PM

  I dont know what OSX this guy is using, but osx has the longest history of any OS i know that is able able to scale the actual ui on monitors with a fixed resolution.

• by krilly on 1/26/20, 3:33 PM

  It seems like most of his grievances are with macOS and not his monitor.

  For a long time I've been using tiling WMs (currently awesomeWM) and I could never go back. Yes there is a bit of a learning curve while you settle on a good configuration for you, but the productivity gains are worth it since you spend so much time interacting with your WM.

  Obviously your options are more limited outside of Linux, but there is a WM tool in Microsoft's Powertoys repo which looks intriguing.

  https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/blob/master/README.md

• by mciancia on 1/26/20, 4:06 PM

  Someone forgot to tell him that he can turn on scaling and set different virtual resolution.

  macOS handles this very good, at work I'm using two 27" 4k displays side by side with virtual resolution set to 2560x1440 which gives me no problem with size of icons/apps and very good image quality at the same time.

• by _bxg1 on 1/26/20, 3:35 PM

  > At least on macOS, the size of apps & notifications is not adjustable. Toolbar symbols, Tab-bar in Chrome, native apps on MacOS are not scalable.

  Um... yes... yes they are. https://www.eizoglobal.com/support/compatibility/dpi_scaling...

  > Moving your head and eyes IS unpleasant.

  I mean yeah. Having a display that large on your desk is absurd. That has nothing to do with either the OS or the resolution.

• by srik on 1/26/20, 3:40 PM

  This reminds of a time I had to let go of a 27 inch iMac that complimented my laptop. The lack of all that ample screen estate made me feel like I lost a bit of power-usage. Around the same time Rob Pike's(Unix, Plan9, UTF8, Go) post on usesthis.com came out mentioning him feeling happy with his 11" MacBook. I distinctly remember that feeling of shame that made me see how a smaller screen might be a blessing rather than a handicap. https://usesthis.com/interviews/rob.pike/

  This author's notes on distraction reminds me how moving onto a "tinier" screen forces me to stay inside the portal into whatever you have on screen. That single change contributed more to me writing much smaller encapsulated functions than anything else, for better or worse. I'd say it necessitated me carrying a larger/clearer mental model of my projects too. Also, to do anything else you'd have to switch the entire screen away from your current layout and after a while indulging in distractions becomes more tedious thus not worth the cost of switching and much less tempting.

• by pw6hv on 1/26/20, 3:48 PM

  I have a 24inches Dell with 16:10 screen ratio. With Sway on Linux it fits very well, especially for the vertical space.

  It's so bad that they do not produce anymore affordable 16:10 screens...

• by nutjob2 on 1/26/20, 3:56 PM

  I find that a 39-40" 4K screen is optimal and has about the right size pixels such that you don't need to scale the UI. I use it in portrait mode which I think is the most effective use of screen real estate for code editing.

  With this setup you have less useful parts of the screen, like the very top, but you also have windows that you don't need to look at so much. I run a text editor with two windows side by side and three windows high. The smallest windows are at the top and basically double in size as you go down. The bottom ones are used to edit and the top ones are mostly used for reference.

  I find this arrangement incredibly productive. I have actually migrated from 3x 4K screens, which was overkill.

• by throwaway1735 on 1/26/20, 4:44 PM

  The title is a little misleading. Most of the poster's problems come from the small dot size.

  If he had a 48'' 4k display, each pixel would be the same size as on a 24'' 1080p display. Zero font size problems, no need to scale anything.

  I use a curved tv of this size (at a low brightness setting ;)) and notice only one problem from the ones the poster mentioned: sometimes the amount of windows on the screen can be a little distracting. However it is easily offset by the productivity gain from having all necessary windows constantly visible. Also, if you need to concentrate on just one window temporarily, just move it to another virtual desktop. Takes no effort.

• by jotosmurf on 1/26/20, 6:01 PM

  I reckon what the author is saying however one can solve the problem of MacOS not picking up the proper scaling. I had to use a tool called SwitchResX.

  My Dell 25" monitor has a native resolution of 2560x1440. You don't want to use this native resolutions as everything gets too small to comfortably read/work.

  Had to input 3840 x 2160 as a 'scaled resolution' to get 1920 x 1080 HiDPI which gets you a sharp retina like experience. To be honest everything is a tad too big now but SwitchResX does somehow not save any other scaled resolution for my monitor (UP2516D / U2515H).

• by tompark on 1/26/20, 8:02 PM

  Article says: "At least on macOS, the size of apps & notifications is not adjustable. Toolbar symbols, Tab-bar in Chrome, native apps on MacOS are not scalable."

  This is factually incorrect.

  By not explaining that what scaling options were tried in the article, it strongly appears that the author did not try them.

  By not explaining here on HN what was tried in more detail, it appears to be handwaving away the issue.

  It's totally possible that a smaller screen is better for his productivity, but that's a minor argument compared to the incorrect assertion made in the article and here.

• by mikhailt on 1/26/20, 4:45 PM

  The author didn't specify which Mac and external monitor he used but it sounds like he had specific issues that most people probably don't.

  1. macOS has bugs related to font aliasing from misconfigured setups that makes using external screens harder to use, such as font-aliasing settings that were removed in the latest macOS updates. Some folks had to do a clean macOS install that fixed the problem with Catalina.

  2. I wouldn't recommend using HDMI > TB port, DisplayPort is recommended for any 4K setups IMO. He may be using a 30hz screen via HDMI where most older Macs can't do 4k@60hz at all, in this case, even 4k @ 30hz is very uncomfortable to use.

  3. If he never had retina screen before, it is possible by moving to a larger screen, he is focusing his eyes more often and causing blurriness. This could be a sign of an eye condition; such as not taking enough breaks and/or vision has degraded. I had this issue and my astigmatism actually got worse, once I got better glasses, no issues.

  4. He may need to readjust his desk setup or get a monitor arm that places the monitor correctly to his eye vision. A lot of people used monitor with its stand and they are looking at them facing down, causing more pain than need be.

• by mnm1 on 1/26/20, 7:27 PM

  I just got a 32" 4k curved monitor. Without the curve, I think the head movement would be too much. I had a 40" 4k flat. The head movement was extreme and contributed to my RSI. I downgraded to a 27" Apple thunderbolt first. I'd say 28" or so is probably max for a flat panel with 32" or so being max for a curved panel for comfortable use without painful head turning. His complaints about scaling are unfounded and simply false. Too bad because this is a real issue with monitor sizes, focus, and back/neck issues. I too found my focus increasing when I dropped down from the 40", but the 27" and 32" are roughly the same for focus. For me, that's much better than any smaller monitor.

• by davidy123 on 1/26/20, 3:35 PM

  I have a workstation with a 32" display in landscape and a 22" display in portrait, and a notebook computer with a 13" display, where the keyboard and mouse (trackpoint, actually, I found a wireless Thinkpad keyboard which is a game changer) are shared using Synergy. I sit about 30" away from them. It's really helpful for software development sessions to have the editor, debugger, tests, and built product available at the same time. I use Ubuntu and don't have any problems with scaling. I use workspace switching so my distractions are in another space altogether, so I can focus when I'm in the zone, and my distraction-time is more, well, efficient.

• by smnrchrds on 1/26/20, 4:34 PM

  I have never had a Mac. Can someone please let me know how is it possible for Mac and its app ecosystem not to support higher resolutions well, when iMac has 5k resolution?

• by metalrain on 1/26/20, 3:47 PM

  I've been using 27" 4K screen with 15" 1440p laptop screen underneath. Maybe 1/4 width of bigger screen is for console and 3/4 for code editor. Laptop screen is mostly splitted 50:50 for browsing and chatting.

  Many people comment how small text is on my screen, but I think it's nice to view a lot of code at once.

  I think going back to FullHD would take some time to adjust.

• by sailfast on 1/26/20, 3:55 PM

  Why 1080 on the 24”?

  I get not moving your head, but lower resolution seems odd. I found going from Retina to 1080p was a bit jarring / pixelated.

• by milosz191 on 1/26/20, 3:51 PM

  Probably it depends on your work type. I switched from only notebook screen to 3x24 to 1x24 to 32 4k. So far 4k 32 is the best experience for me. Its exacly like 4 laptop(15) screens next to each other. I prefer using a ide verticaly on one side and second side divided into two different windows. Personal preferences I guess.

• by LargoLasskhyfv on 1/26/20, 7:11 PM

  Should have gone 1920x1200. Many excellent refurbished (professional) ones on the market for cheap.

• by adrianscott on 1/26/20, 3:29 PM

  You definitely want to scale UI to readable. Also need to consider how to take advantage of the extra screen real estate, e.g. code editor in right half of screen, browser for research on the left, console in bottom left for random command line stuff, etc...

• by ww520 on 1/26/20, 5:45 PM

  I had the same experience. Tried a 4K monitor for a week. Didn’t like it. Returned it and got back to the old 1080 monitor.

  Main problem was everything was scaled so small. Also scrolling left some white ghost shadow for a brief moment like half of a second.

• by michalpt on 1/26/20, 4:20 PM

  macOS scaling is the way to go here. I have been using LG 27UD88-W 4K monitor which is set to 2560x1440 and it works perfectly without any noticeable distortions.

• by tpmx on 1/26/20, 3:28 PM

  I find 40-43” @ 4k optimal. With a deep desk of course.

• by Jaruzel on 1/26/20, 4:07 PM

  My personal story: Last year I went from a Dell 24" (1920x1200) to a Benq 32" (2560x1440). I deliberate didn't choose a 4k because I knew that without at least 150% scaling, my poor 48 year old eyes wouldn't be able to read anything, so 4k seemed pointless. Additionally, I use a wide gamut of software, half of which is not hiDPI aware.

  Overall, I'm really happy with my Benq 32" it strikes a nice balance between being a larger screen, but still readable at 100% scaling.

• by fit2rule on 1/26/20, 3:50 PM

  I have also done this. I found it immensely fatiguing to have a massive screen on my desk, it was almost like information overload. But instead of a single 32" screen, I got two 24" monitors side by side .. for some reason I can't explain, this was a lot more comfortable. Perhaps the physical divide promoted a better organisation of windows - docs on left, code on the right - whereas with a 32" monitor it was a free-for-all craziness.