Comment on Study Claims 4K/8K TVs Aren't Much Better Than HD To Your Eyes
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days agoThere’s this thing called scaling that allows you to see things in an appropriate size but higher definition.
Anyone who uses spreadsheets regularly wants the extra real estate. Anyone who works with complex documents wants the extra real estate.
It’s not about more dots on your 24 inch, it’s about larger monitors that can display more stuff simultaneously. Instead of 4x 1080p monitors you can have 2x larger 4k monitors. Offer this to anyone who makes money by staring at a screen all day and they’ll tell you it’s worth it.
M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 days ago
And yet as I have stated this is not the case for most users. I remember when a national here bank decided to do an “upgrade” to 4k monitors there was so much push back from users (in this case mortgage lending) that after installing the monitors I was back two weeks later to change them back.
People who use spreadsheets regularly (myself included) would rather have a second monitor or a bigger one then one 4k one. I have a 32 inch 1080p monitor as my secondary and it works great at a cheap price. I went with one that is brighter and a slower refresh rate since I don’t need or want that on a secondary. And if you are going big why spend the money on a 4k one if you are just going to use scaling anyway?
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
I honestly find this hard to believe. I have 2x 32 inch monitors on my desk and in 1920x1080 they’re ugly to the point of distraction.
4k isn’t that expensive. you can get 32 inch 4k monitors for a few hundred dollars.
Scaling is not the same as reducing the resolution.