This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Anyone else like square monitors more than widescreen?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Anyone else like square monitors more than widescreen?

User Info: Chass1990

Chass1990
4 months ago#11
depends, for some web browsing activities, yea...the lost vertical space sometimes isn't made up by the extra width.
MSI Z97 Gaming 5 * Xeon E3-1246 v3 * Noctua NH-U12S * MSI GTX 970 * Sound Blaster Z * HyperX Savage 32GB * 850 Evo * Supernova G2 750W * Phanteks Enthoo Pro

User Info: CursedPanther

CursedPanther
4 months ago#12
Cobra1010 posted...
I want a 180 degree monitor that cups over my face from one ear to the other but with like 3 feet of space. Like them formula 1 simulators but just the screen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE-Fge3gN9w

We're slowly getting there, starting with the recent 21:9 monitors.

User Info: bikeblaster

bikeblaster
4 months ago#13
Kokuei05 posted...
DXMG posted...
no, but I do like 16:10 more than 16:9


I would like 16:10 more if games wouldn't f***ing letterbox at 16:10 resolution.


Nothing an exe hex edit can fix.

User Info: ganondorf77

ganondorf77
4 months ago#14
For documents and coding, Vertical monitors are great, but still they are technically Wide, but rotated 90º. For anything else, no excuse today, can't stand less than 16:9... even better 2:1 and so.
Bu!

User Info: Lienhart

Lienhart
3 months ago#15
No, square monitors are objectively garbage for the vast majority of users.

Best right now is 21:9, 16:9/16:10 are too small.

I use a 21:9 as the main screen and flipped a 16:10 vertically to read or program. This also allows me to have 3-4 documents open which is extremely useful for programming.

You can't do any of this with a 4:3 screen.

Now if we start talking about peripheral vision, fov, and competitive gaming, that's when 4:3 actually have a role.

User Info: vlado_e

vlado_e
3 months ago#16
ganondorf77 posted...
For documents and coding, Vertical monitors are great, but still they are technically Wide, but rotated 90º.

I love vertical monitors - I've got two and one of them is rotated. With that said, I wouldn't say that's great for coding - I find that having more horizontal space is more useful than more vertical space. It's rare that you need to see over a hundred lines of code at a time - you usually focus on less than that and most modern IDEs will have various widgets you can make a lot more use of, like file explorers, showing the structure of the current file for quick jumps, test results, linting/compilation results and so on. If needed you can even split the file viewing area into two and either have two files at one time or two sections of the same file if really required.

At any rate, as I said rotating the display is great. I'm currently browsing on my vertical monitor and it's just amazing - it's 1080x1920 px resolution and the majority of websites are designed to fit on 1024px width (so the maximum width is 900-ish px), which means that you cut out the useless screen space left and right and you get to see more content up and down. Also, you can easily open two or three windows and stack them vertically and still be able to read them fine, while if you have a horizontal widescreen monitor and split horizontally you need 4k monitor at least to get the 1000-ish px per window and splitting vertically means you get very little content and a lot of the left/right filler space.
We do what we must / because we can. / For the good of all of us. / Except the ones who are dead.

User Info: DXMG

DXMG
3 months ago#17
Lienhart posted...
No, square monitors are objectively garbage for the vast majority of users.

Best right now is 21:9, 16:9/16:10 are too small.

I use a 21:9 as the main screen and flipped a 16:10 vertically to read or program. This also allows me to have 3-4 documents open which is extremely useful for programming.

You can't do any of this with a 4:3 screen.

Now if we start talking about peripheral vision, fov, and competitive gaming, that's when 4:3 actually have a role.


something cant be "objectively bad for the majority", its either objectively bad, which means it is bad, period, for every one, or it is subjective. In this case, it is subjective.

User Info: Lienhart

Lienhart
3 months ago#18
DXMG posted...
Lienhart posted...
No, square monitors are objectively garbage for the vast majority of users.

Best right now is 21:9, 16:9/16:10 are too small.

I use a 21:9 as the main screen and flipped a 16:10 vertically to read or program. This also allows me to have 3-4 documents open which is extremely useful for programming.

You can't do any of this with a 4:3 screen.

Now if we start talking about peripheral vision, fov, and competitive gaming, that's when 4:3 actually have a role.


something cant be "objectively bad for the majority", its either objectively bad, which means it is bad, period, for every one, or it is subjective. In this case, it is subjective.


........................Google the definition of objective versus subjective.

User Info: DXMG

DXMG
3 months ago#19
adverb
in a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions.


How you (or anyone) feel about monitor aspect ratios is entirely influenced by personal opinion.

User Info: Lienhart

Lienhart
3 months ago#20
DXMG posted...
adverb
in a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions.


How you feel about monitor aspect ratios is entirely influenced by personal opinion.


No, it isn't.

Whether or not a monitor's aspect ratio is good or s***ty is subjective to what the monitor is being used for.

For example, any software developer will benefit greatly from using a 21:9 monitor due to the increased screen real estate. Flipping 16:9, 21:9, or 16:10 monitor is also great because it improves the readability of large classes. This is objective. You can say you prefer 4:3 monitors but it is objectively worse than using anything with more screen real estate.

Another example: RTS or MOBA type games played on a 21:9 monitor are objectively better than 16:9, 16:10, or 4:3 monitors if more of the map is rendered (LoL, and HoTS come in mind). There is a competitive advantage here because more information is on the screen. It doesn't matter what your feeling or anyone else's feelings are because information is key in MOBA/RTS games.

Learn2Engrish, Learn2Think
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Anyone else like square monitors more than widescreen?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived