Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

zirky t1_iuy7fcu wrote

i can’t wait to see how much better this makes me at updating jira

28

AlSwankin t1_iuy4d1x wrote

For who and why?

12

To-To_Man t1_iuzakde wrote

Artists working on high resolution images who are tired of constantly zooming in and out.

7

RafMazurek t1_iuy6epy wrote

For me <3 its probably 8k2k - so twice current resolution

5

Samwarez t1_iuy5trw wrote

more data that can be clearly displayed at once is usually better. I used the G9 to replace 4 monitors and I was still cramped for space sometimes.

2

5kyl3r t1_iuzdbb0 wrote

i have the neo g9 and while it looks amazing, the text clarity could be a lot better and pixel density isn't the best for non-media use. 8k would help both of those things. but...... then again, 8k would be hard to drive, so i think a solid 4k NORMAL SHAPE/SIZE/FLAT monitor is what a lot of people want, but they all keep making massive curved turds that nobody is asking for. i decided to wall mount this time instead of clamp arm, so i can move desk back a hair and get even more distance and completely free my desk top, but being ultraside and curved, i might as well have 3 monitors on my desk, because the curve is so aggressive that it hangs over the desk and is no different than running triple monitor sitting on the desk. it's really annoying. also, being so wide, if i put side monitors to each side, they'll be like nearly 90 degrees to the right/left, which is not ergo at all. if i buy a second g9 (non-neo) to match this one to put above it, i can't angle it down because it would make a gap between the monitors, a big one, thanks to the curve lol. if it were flat, you could angle the top one down without a gap. i just hate everything about it, but it's still the best looking monitor i've seen in game so far. (i also own the 48" LG ultragear gaming OLED)

gimme 4k, 19:10, full array backlight with similar backlight density as the neo g9, 240hz, flat, glossy, and we're in business

1

fml87 t1_iuzgyzn wrote

I buy these for my business and they are stunning IMO.

https://us.msi.com/Content-Creation-Monitor/Prestige-PS341WU

1

5kyl3r t1_iuziach wrote

they look nice for productivity. i do have two LG dual-up vertical monitors which look great and work well for productivity. i'm just trying to find the ideal does-it-all monitor that i can game on, but also do productivity. this wasn't a problem in the past, but right now, to get one, you often sacrifice in the other. (due to sub-optimal sub-pixel layout, lower DPI for high refresh gaming monitors, ultrawide trend, curved trend, anti-glare trend, etc)

1

DanielLizs t1_iuza15k wrote

8k only exist so movie theater can separate themselves from the rest Soo... It's made for stupid rich people who really like buying expensive shit to make the fell better about themselves

−5

ken579 t1_iuzkoj4 wrote

I don't think you realize how obvious that projection is.

3

Squiggledog t1_iuy9v4d wrote

How come the figurative emphasis on "8K" ?

5

Massive_Parsley_5000 t1_iuybdxz wrote

Because depending on how you're looking at it, it's technically a 4k ultra wide monitor. It's, by the numbers, 8k across but it's effectively just 2 4k monitors in one. It's not "real" 8k like most people mean when they say it, as in pixel density equal of 4x 3840x2160. A "true" 8k ultra wide would thus be like 15,360 x 4,320, or more depending on how "wide" you go.

Ultimately just understand terms like "8k" and "4k" and whatever are just marketing terms. Just focus on what the pixel count and density is, that's what's ultimately important.

22

vanalla t1_iv0x54v wrote

This happens with every new resolution technology.

Remember the days of 720p/1080i/1080p being advertised as HD, despite only one of those actually being HD.

3

SergeiPutin t1_iv779ae wrote

>but it's effectively just 2 4k monitors in one

Then maybe call it "6k"?

3

kensaundm31 t1_ix8mul8 wrote

Yeah I think the highest other widescreen odyssey type is only 1440. So this will be 2160p version.

1

Murderyoga t1_iuyby2x wrote

Meanwhile 90% of what I watch is on my phone.

4

Raziel66 t1_iuyi7f9 wrote

Cut that down to 20% by watching your porn on a VR headset like god intended

6

Majinvegito123 t1_ivawird wrote

Too bad the g9 has bad pixel density.. I’d really like a 5k2k monitor. I love my g9 Neo, but you put it next to a 5k2k and you realize what you’re missing.

3

I_LOVE_PURPLE_PUPPY t1_iuzfqi5 wrote

If you need tons of pixels for technical work like looking at 8 terminals full of text side by side, or doing some scientific visualization, you can get an 8K TV (7680 x 4320) and then arrange all your windows on the bottom half for the same effect as this ultrawide monitor. As a bonus, you can occasionally run the screen at 4k 120 Hz for full screen gaming or watching movies. The 65" Samsung QN800A is only $2000. I have one on my desk, AMA.

1

SergeiPutin t1_iv78037 wrote

Our eyes get more tired with a setup like that. The problem is that you have to place the TV farther away than a monitor.

For long work periods it's better to focus on no more than an arm's length. That's what our eyes got used to doing for thousands of years.

1

I_LOVE_PURPLE_PUPPY t1_iv7t0rd wrote

The pixel density on a 65" 8K screen is the same as a 32" 4K screen. Just treat it like a dual (or quad) monitor setup without any bezels in between.

1

SergeiPutin t1_iv7uux4 wrote

Consider this:

To use a 32" 4k monitor, you need to place it at the same distance as a notebook, so you can see it just like you see a 16" 1080p screen (you wouldn't push that screen farther away).

Now if you replace that screen with a 65" 8k, you'd need to keep that distance, and you'd end up with a ginourmous screen very close to your face. I just went close to my 65" TV and it doesn't make sense.

Either you place the screen close and your eyes get tired from movement, or you place a larger screen farther away and get tired from focusing on distance.

1

Dickmusha t1_iuzkrcv wrote

Are these also going to randomly get too hot and crack down the middle with no hope for a refund?

1