4k tv / monitors

[Michael Butash]

Likewise, much the same, I was going to go with 40", but a buddy got one 
of the seiki cheap 4k tv's, and it was just too small, odd to say.  
Standing in front of a 55" seemed too big, I ended up with the 48's that 
I think are just about right with 4k, and curved was nice for the 
desktop.  I could have lived with the 55's I think.

https://plus.google.com/+MikeButash/posts/GxC8jCzJRBA

I spread things out as well, and I can still full-screen chrome or 
whatever, zoom in, and read with my aging eyes.  Even with 11520x2160 
pixels, I still end up with clutter piling up at times.  KDE's idle 
windows as transparent is great for this.

Ubuntu/Unity just sorta barfs and never finishes launching on mine to 
test with compiz the pretty features.

-mb


On 06/22/2016 12:10 PM, David Schwartz wrote:
>
> I’ve been using a 39” 4K TV as a monitor with my MacBook Pro for about 
> 8 months now. (I keep the MBP closed.)
>
> My only complaint is not the monitor, but the fact that my eyesight is 
> degrading (I’ll be 60 next month) and I can’t read most stuff 
> displayed at “native” resolution. This is true of the Retina display 
> on my MBP as well. Younger eyes would probably really love it at 
> native resolution (ie., much smaller renderings).
>
> My opinion at this point is that 39” is too small for a 4K monitor.
>
> But parallax plus “angle of incidence” that some monitors have (ie, 
> the effective viewing angle) becomes a problem with larger screens 
> when you’re sitting a little more than an arm’s-length away.
>
> To be viewed most effectively, the screen really needs to be curved 
> spherically or parabolically, where the eyeballs are positioned at the 
> centroid of the curve.
>
> But I have to say, it’s AWESOME to be able to have two or three apps 
> open in different windows and have them spread out on a large viewing 
> area without overlapping. It’s basically like having four HD monitors 
> right there.
>
> -David Schwartz
>