A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)

  • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    What is your point? Why would someone pay for a 4k monitor? Its a waste of money, that is the point I made. How does showing me that even after 10+ years of 4k or higher monitors being for sale that 30% of users have them (well Linux users at least)? That is not showing what you think it is.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      The study says that users can appreciate resolutions up to 94 pixels per degree. A FHD 27" monitor at 18" distance is 29 PPD. At 4K its 58. Users can appreciate the fact that a 4K display is much better.

      https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/

      And no, 4k desktops do not “look nicer”, it is stupid and tiny for no reason. Unless you have like 250 shortcuts on your desktop what is the point?

      And no, 4k desktops do not “look nicer”, it is stupid and tiny for no reason. Unless you have like 250 shortcuts on your desktop what is the point?

      Couldn’t find the setting called scale on your windows desktop? Ok mr manager. Do you also call IT when your monitor is turned off to tell them your CPU is broken?

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Ok mr manager. Do you also call IT when your monitor is turned off to tell them your CPU is broken?

        What are you on about, just tell me why anyone who likes money should buy a 4k or more monitor? So I can fiddle with my desktop settings? Is this a arch thing?

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Because if you draw things with very few pixels it tends to look blocky and unrealistic because the universe like your mom has curves. The more pixels you use the more realistically we can represent both real and virtual pictures. Cambridge says people can see up to 94 PPD. This means that 4K monitors on your desk are trivially within the range that people can distinguish but its dubious that 8K TVs are useful. The more you know!

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Yes, we are clearly using so much fidelity that 4k is needed… and 3d TVs are going to come on back. I am not saying you can not tell the difference, I am saying people want smooth frame rates over pixels and that 4k monitors are not worth it. That all the bullshit sold to users is just that. But hey thanks for bringing up my mother, who does not have curves (unless ash is curvy?).