The fact that so many people are posting updates an hour after starting their vacation really speaks volumes. It just goes to show, people are making decisions about vacations, events, etc. based on how well it will post on Facebook.
I think that's part of the reason ticket prices have gone through the roof for sporting events. Before, you were only motivated to go to a game based on 1) your desire to see the event live, and 2) your immediate circle of friends and family who you could tell.
Now, all of your outer circle of friends, including the people you went to school with, ex's, etc get to see how well you're living life, how successful you are, etc.
It's really quite annoying and obnoxious.
Having taken a break from social media for about 3 months now, I'm realizing just how evil it is.
52% voted for it, and not a single positive reaction from a scientist? "OMG, all the smart scientists are against Brexit so if I'm smart, I must be against it too!" Propaganda at its finest...
This is an area where "Eastern Europeans stealing my job, but former colonies are OK" or "Who is the president of the EC or EU Parliament" kind of problems does not matter.
Honest question, do you feel a little ridiculous with that setup? I'm a coder and have 2x24" monitors, and found that to be borderline ridiculous with neck strain, thus the reason I'm going 27". But unless you're running security at a place of business or something with 50 security cams, I can't imagine what you're doing that requires a wall of monitors?
Our philosophy in the office is that alt-tab is for suckers. While my setup is the most over the top we have three other people with five monitors or more. We are all security researchers and find the configuration saves a bunch of time in reviews. As an example, I can associate a MitM proxy like the Burpsuite or Fiddler 2 with the server side application which might communicate to web clients as well as to additional web services behind the scenes. That takes up one monitor, typically the one at the far top left. Under that monitor I can then associate another MitM proxy with the client. I can then run the client from my laptop display. If I'm working on a fat client, on the 30" I'll then run Wireshark which will effectively be watching the client. On another monitor I can run sysinternal tools. What remains I use for writing code necessary for the review, running additional tools like Metasploit, e-mail, chat, and research. I arrange my workspace for the task at hand. On a daily basis do I use all nine? No.
Interestingly enough, with this sort of setup it's pretty easy to visually see what's happening when going after an application. Before going to the monitor extreme I'd constantly alt-tab between my monitoring & exploit tools with every action. Now I can run an action and see the results within one workspace. Of course there is a massive downside. It makes competing in CTFs a pain in the butt as I can't drag that setup with me to physical events.
The moment I use more than 1 screen, I find alt-tab to be cumbersome. I find that in a GUI environment, having your mouse autofocus on the window it's hovering over is far easier than using alt-tab. Especially when you have multiple windows open, cylcing to the correct window using alt-tab is usually slower than moving the mouse over the window.
> Our philosophy in the office is that alt-tab is for suckers.
Which is why I've partly switched from Unity to xmonad (a tiling window manager). Dual monitors is nice to have for me, but the real boon was to have 9 (or 10?) easily accessible workspaces, which allows me to only have to worry about a handful or less windows in each workspace. Unity also have workspaces, but they suck (at least out of the box).
I can't go back from three monitors (currently running 24" displays):
Left Portrait, Terminator with two horizontal splits
Centre Landscape, Vim with a vertical split, usually have NERDTree open
Right Portrait or landscape, browser and/or documentation
I find if I don't have all of those constantly open I can miss stuff, and having them all squished onto a single monitor means I'm not able to display enough information to cover my needs.
I just got my fourth monitor. Two of them are old shitty 900p screens though. My main displays are my new 144hz 24" 1080p panel ($160 black friday sale) a 21.5" 1080p panel over hdmi, and the two shitty old panels I got from clients throwing out their old screens.
Usually the layout is IDE on the main window, docs on the second screen, IRC, git, and github on the third / fourth.
Back in the day, I was much happier with two 4:3/5:4 monitors than I am with two 16:9 monitors, as you say the neck strain... or wasted space is a bit ridiculous. I prefer two squarish monitors to 2x widescreens _or_ giant screens.
If you're getting neck strain from using 2 monitors try moving them further away. Ideally you want both screens in your front facing FOV, with only your eyes doing the moving.
"The myth I keep hearing is that you must go to larger fonts when scaling up to a 4K monitor. This is not exactly true. Do the math. If you double the screen resolution and at the same time you double the screen width, you have done absolutely nothing to the size of a pixel or the physical size of your fonts."
Yeah but it's a 39" monitor... On your desk! Seriously, I'm all for the largest monitor and resolution and everything else, but there's a point where I'd argue it's just too much. I think a 39" monitor on your desk is crossing that line. I can't imagine the neck strain that's going to occur.
Instead of selling extended warranties, they need to start selling these with chiropractic insurance.
Full disclosure: I just went through several days of research on 1440p vs 4k. I went into it assuming I'd get a 4k monitor, but in the end, opted for the 1440p monitor because I refused to stick a 39" monitor on my desk, and the 28" 4k would require DPI scaling and all that mess.
I'd get a 4k for gaming, assuming I had a rig that could power games at that resolution. Otherwise, I'm happy with my decision to get the Asus PB278Q 1440p monitor.
Maybe a large monitor should be like a large desk. You only work on what's in front of you but with a glance around you quickly see everything that needs your attention. With a small monitor or small desk, things get stacked and buried, hidden in drawers/folders etc.
> I can't imagine the neck strain that's going to occur.
I was wondering about this too and the impact on your eyes. For a 39" monitor it's recommended you sit over 5ft away, so the optimal desk environment for such a large monitor will be interesting.
Too close and the pixels are going to be "big" and too far away and the pixels are going to be invisible.
For example, at 15 feet away the high res would be a waste of money for that screen size, you can't see better than 480 lines at that range.
Extending my arm, I seem to be around 2.5 feet from this screen. Doing the math, higher that 4K at 40 inch screen would be visibly noticeable although its kind of borderline, so 4K should be good enough.
DPI would be more of an issue than screen size, I think. I've got 2 portrait (1200x1920) 24" monitors side by side, one in front of me and one to the right: 28" wide, 22" high, for a 35" diagonal. It looks like this: http://quadruple-a.com/2_portrait_monitors.jpg
I find this works well, and isn't too overpowering. A 35"x23" arrangement would surely be no problem in terms of overall size - but you would be squeezing 1.8x as many pixels into rather less than 1.8x the space. Not sure my favourite 6x13 xterm font would look so good any more...
(I also tried adding a 3rd identical monitor on the left (total 42" wide, 22" high, 47" diagonal), and this looked perfectly manageable. So I'd probably be able to handle a 50" monitor... maybe. 3 monitors all lined up was starting to look a bit intimidating. And in the end Linux wouldn't display anything on the 3rd monitor anyway, so what it would actually be like in practice, I couldn't say.)
A 39 inch monitor is not nearly as bad as it sounds.
I am currently using 3 1080p monitors in portrait[0], a setup that I like quite a lot. Here are some measurements:
Width : 39 inches
Height: 22 inches
Avg. distance from eyes to monitor:
22 inches
Maximum head movement to look left/right edge of monitors:
40 degrees
Estimated maximum head movement during use:
20 degrees
It's a very comfortable setup, and allows for a huge amount of screen real-estate[1]. However, I will say that I use it in a somewhat "different" way compared to other setups. The middle monitor is the main workspace, and is where windows with active work on them go. The left and right monitors hold the 4+ windows with non-active or asynchronous information, like chat windows, documentation, comparison code windows, etc.
I've been using a SE39UY04 under Linux for the past year at about a two foot viewing distance, and it's no strain to use. I'm slightly elevated to its center because I use a stationary bike as my chair, which also allows me to lean in or out as I need. It is pretty big, so I'd probably hate using it if I had to sit in a regular chair all day, too though.
Also, since most major Linux distros handle HiDPI scaling for you out of the box, I only did minor tweaking for text in dconf. Pretty painless overall, physically and literally.
When I game at 1080_120 or 1440_60, I do scoot back a little more out of habit, but it looks amazing close up. I have another 1080_60 TV the same size, and I have to sit across the room if I don't want to see the pixels. If I did get another monitor, it'd be a 22ish inch 1440_144 overclock. They seem pretty much ideal size, refresh, and DPI wise.
In principle at least, there's no reason why having a larger proportion of your field of view covered by the screen ought to make things worse. If fullscreening a document is going to make it uncomfortable to read, well, don't do that then. Now in practise not being able to just fullscreen things can be awkward, but that's a software problem with current OS GUIs, not a hardware issue. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8634121
I think 40" is exactly right. I've been using a 30" monitor for 8 years now. At first it seemed overly large. Now I want one more column, and find 27" cramped when I have to use one of those.
I am concerned about throwing too much light at my eyes. That's why my next monitor will be one that has solid blacks and good contrast.
I'm not concerned about neck strain. I bet you're more likely to get neck strain holding your neck in the same place for 8 hours than you would
From the article: "Republicans who decided to shut down the government this week rather than relentlessly message against the Affordable Care Act's glitches did the law a great favor."
I thought it was the Senate Democrats voting against the house spending bill that shut the government down?
SEEKING WORK - Let us create your next SaaS app! Small startup software consulting company based in Austin, TX, USA that builds cool SaaS apps in Django or Yii. We can drive any part of your process, from requirements and wire framing to development to support to infrastructure/IT to technology-based marketing.
I've never been too successful with polyphasic sleep, at least not the hardcore type (6x20m naps). That said, a lot of very successful people have adopted biphasic sleeping, taking a shorter core nap (4 to 6 hours) with a nap during the day. I think this is a better approach, especially if you're in a field where you use your brain a lot. Taking a 30m nap can do wonders after lunch.
I think that's part of the reason ticket prices have gone through the roof for sporting events. Before, you were only motivated to go to a game based on 1) your desire to see the event live, and 2) your immediate circle of friends and family who you could tell.
Now, all of your outer circle of friends, including the people you went to school with, ex's, etc get to see how well you're living life, how successful you are, etc.
It's really quite annoying and obnoxious.
Having taken a break from social media for about 3 months now, I'm realizing just how evil it is.