Author Topic: New square monitor (27" 1920x1920) (Read 27293 times)

mouser · « **on:** November 22, 2014, 09:43 PM »

Slashdot reports that monitor maker Eizo will be releases a 1:1 aspect ratio monitor (square) next year. It's 1920x1920 resolution:

Screenshot - 11_22_2014 , 9_42_54 PM.png

http://hexus.net/tec...-inch-square-monitor

I think this is a wonderful idea! I'm getting really tired of the super-wide monitors.

bit · « **Reply #1 on:** November 22, 2014, 11:40 PM »

Cool.

Mine is sort of square; it's a super-old Compaq P900 CRT.

Renegade · « **Reply #2 on:** November 23, 2014, 12:38 AM »

WANT!

Deozaan · « **Reply #3 on:** November 23, 2014, 12:49 AM »

Why?

rgdot · « **Reply #4 on:** November 23, 2014, 01:16 AM »

Surely not for web browsing

Renegade · « **Reply #5 on:** November 23, 2014, 03:49 AM »

Why?
-Deozaan (November 23, 2014, 12:49 AM)

The aspect ratio has a huge impact on your ability to work in different environments, e.g. an IDE, Photoshop, Excel, etc.

16:9 simply doesn't make sense for much except movies. It's not good for reading web pages unless you read in portrait mode, and even then, most web pages are made for larger (wider) resolutions, so they're not very good at that unless you're well into the 2400+ pixel range (height), which also puts you in the stupidly expensive category.

In the end, 16:9 wastes screen real estate as much is put into peripheral vision.

4:3 is a very good aspect ratio as it is closer to the actual human field of vision/attention.

This monitor will probably find its greatest use with Excel jockeys, though I expect that it will also be popular with anyone working in multi-windowed environments, e.g. stock trading.

Here's one way to think about it...

This monitor takes advantage of wasted vertical space. How much space do you have between the top of your monitor and your ceiling, and just how much wider could your monitor be on your desk before it crowded out other things?

With 4 monitors on my desk, I have exactly zero room horizontally, but lots of room vertically, so using that vertical space would be a serious boon.

Renegade · « **Reply #6 on:** November 23, 2014, 03:57 AM »

On comment in the article:

I quite like the look of the Full HD video editing layout but some tasks could arguably fit/work just as well on ultra-wide or multi-monitor side-by-side setups.

But, you still need to deal with the bezel, so, it's a bit of a poor solution in comparison.

tomos · « **Reply #7 on:** November 23, 2014, 05:42 AM »

I've avoided the 16:9 format so far (well, apart from laptops where it's often a real pain).
Even 16:10 is a big improvement over 16:9 -- if you can find it these days.

I dont think that 1:1 would suit me personally, but it's great to see

-
would be nice to see more variety in the market in the future.

Ath · « **Reply #8 on:** November 23, 2014, 06:57 AM »

I saw the announcement earlier this week on Dutch site tweakers.net (chrome can do a translation for you), so I thought: lets wait and see how well that's going to get adopted.
Next would be a 'real' developers' monitor 1:1 with 2560x2560 resolution and a 27 to 30" diagonal size

When that arrives, I'll try to order 2 of those at work

Renegade · « **Reply #9 on:** November 23, 2014, 08:43 AM »

I saw the announcement earlier this week on Dutch site tweakers.net (chrome can do a translation for you), so I thought: lets wait and see how well that's going to get adopted.
Next would be a 'real' developers' monitor 1:1 with 2560x2560 resolution and a 27 to 30" diagonal size When that arrives, I'll try to order 2 of those at work
-Ath (November 23, 2014, 06:57 AM)

I think a 51" diagonal would be nice. That's 36" x 36", so 3' of screen real estate. You'd really only need 1 at that rate, and not 2 monitors.

You'd need one mean MF video card for that though... Or multiple cards & inputs on the monitor. (Speaking of... I have 1 badass card doing nothing that I need to flog off on eBay or something.)

But still, a bit of a ratio there might be nice. You can only really know these things by seeing & using them.

My current setup looks like this:

Screenshot - 2014_11_24 , 1_35_14 AM.png

Screenshot - 2014_11_24 , 1_35_14 AM.png

I do different things on each monitor, but a square #3 there would really be nice. (#3 is in front of me, while the other 2 are to my left. All are 1920x1080 resolution. (1080 wide isn't enough for the web at large for a perfect viewing experience, but good enough for most.)

I really do like the idea of using the additional vertical space though. It would help a lot.

wraith808 · « **Reply #10 on:** November 23, 2014, 08:47 AM »

I don't like the additional vertical space because it forces me to scan upwards also. I have 4 monitors side by side, and the motion to scan across them is more natural to me than scanning upward. I know, because originally I was going to do 4 in a grid- but there were quite a few problems with that setup, both in use and physically.

Deozaan · « **Reply #11 on:** November 24, 2014, 12:54 PM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.

mouser · « **Reply #12 on:** November 24, 2014, 01:11 PM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.

it's really true -- moving the head/eyes vertically is *MUCH* more uncomfortable than horizontal movement.

app103 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 24, 2014, 01:53 PM »

Side to side eye motion is something we have been trained since childhood to do, when we first started reading.

I suppose in those countries where text is written vertically, they are used to a different eye movement and would find it easier than side to side.

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.
-Deozaan (November 24, 2014, 12:54 PM)

So, you are not a "yes man"?

Bending_Unit · « **Reply #14 on:** November 24, 2014, 02:07 PM »

Had they released this monitor 2 years ago i would have been interested.

These days with 2560x.... and 3840x2160 i have to say i have moved on.

If they were going to release 3840x3840 however ... hmmmm - maybe in two years.

Of course the format is not for gaming or videos but for websites its just great. Seriously all those websites wasting space to the left and to the right but making you scroll down.
Just because it looks sleek? Thanks for having DonationCoder still using fullscreen by the way.

Deozaan · « **Reply #15 on:** November 24, 2014, 02:26 PM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.
-Deozaan (November 24, 2014, 12:54 PM)

So, you are not a "yes man"?
-app103 (November 24, 2014, 01:53 PM)

Yes, ma'am!

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #16 on:** November 24, 2014, 04:48 PM »

So now that the layout for most applications is designed for a wide screen interface they're going to recoil back into a completely square screen???

dr_andus · « **Reply #17 on:** November 24, 2014, 05:24 PM »

a square #3 there would really be nice.
-Renegade (November 23, 2014, 08:43 AM)

I have a similar setup to yours but I'd probably want it for #1, to expand the portrait mode space, so e.g. two browser windows or two Word/PDF etc. documents could be viewed side-by-side.

I don't like the additional vertical space because it forces me to scan upwards also.
-wraith808 (November 23, 2014, 08:47 AM)

Yes, that's the downside, but there is an upside too. More visibility and less scrolling of web pages, documents, lists etc.

So now that the layout for most applications is designed for a wide screen interface they're going to recoil back into a completely square screen???
-Stoic Joker (November 24, 2014, 04:48 PM)

Several of my favourite software are modular, where you can either rearrange panes manually (e.g. PDF-Xchange Editor or ConnectedText) or portrait/landscape mode can be toggled (e.g. Dopus). Maybe the square layout would encourage developers more to make their software to suit both portrait, landscape, and square views.

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** November 24, 2014, 05:50 PM »

I want four of them.

4wd · « **Reply #19 on:** November 24, 2014, 06:36 PM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.
-Deozaan (November 24, 2014, 12:54 PM)

it's really true -- moving the head/eyes vertically is *MUCH* more uncomfortable than horizontal movement.
-mouser (November 24, 2014, 01:11 PM)

You two ain't gonna last long in the Zombie Apocalypse.

Spock: He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking.

bit · « **Reply #20 on:** November 24, 2014, 08:39 PM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.
-Deozaan (November 24, 2014, 12:54 PM)

it's really true -- moving the head/eyes vertically is *MUCH* more uncomfortable than horizontal movement.
-mouser (November 24, 2014, 01:11 PM)

You two ain't gonna last long in the Zombie Apocalypse.

Spock: He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking.
-4wd (November 24, 2014, 06:36 PM)

^

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #21 on:** November 24, 2014, 08:40 PM »

Until it died, I had a "slightly more vertical" widescreen monitor, and I get the extra vertical room. But I'm far from sure a pure square layout is the answer either!!

I now have a "more wide" widescreen ... when you get birthday presents you just have to adapt ...

I vaguely think I miss the vertical room, but only about three apps I use really aggressively used the ratio. I wouldn't want a pure square.

If nothing else, on a horo monitor, you can "hide" windows in the last couple of inches. a square isn't so easy to do that with.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #22 on:** November 24, 2014, 10:45 PM »

So now that the layout for most applications is designed for a wide screen interface they're going to recoil back into a completely square screen???
-Stoic Joker (November 24, 2014, 04:48 PM)

Several of my favourite software are modular, where you can either rearrange panes manually (e.g. PDF-Xchange Editor or ConnectedText) or portrait/landscape mode can be toggled (e.g. Dopus). Maybe the square layout would encourage developers more to make their software to suit both portrait, landscape, and square views.
-dr_andus (November 24, 2014, 05:24 PM)

Yeah, sure (me too), that's what you can do. But it's not what you should have to do every time you open something.

Renegade · « **Reply #23 on:** November 25, 2014, 09:27 AM »

I'd rather swivel my head side-to-side than nod my head up and down all day long.

it's really true -- moving the head/eyes vertically is *MUCH* more uncomfortable than horizontal movement.
-mouser (November 24, 2014, 01:11 PM)

I don't have that problem. Actually, I find it harder on my neck to work on screen where I need to look left/right.

But I sit back a fair ways, and I don't use my neck to scan up/down - just my eyes.

Reclining also helps if you have a chair that does that. You can then use that to adjust where you look without moving your eyes/neck. But the main advantage of reclining is the distance you get that eliminates the need to move your neck at all. (Similar for swiveling.)

But, just my own experience.

phitsc · « **Reply #24 on:** November 28, 2014, 05:21 AM »

I think these would be great for programming and I'd very much like to have a pair. I'm very curious to learn what they'll cost.