Why the fuck do we keep moving toward fucktarded resolutions?
It's hard enough to run a game at 1080p, let alone 1440p or even 4k. Why the fuck does 5k exist?
>>54455621
hi resolution pornography of course
Games are for kids
4K+ is great for productivity
MUH GAYMEZZZ
WHY CAN'T THE NEW GPU MY MOMMY BOUGHT FOR ME PLAY MAH GAEMZ IN FOUR KAYYY
Nintendo NX console altready has 5K output confirmed.
>>54455621
maybe for purposes different than games. pleasant serif font rendering, huge displays with a lot of detail. But most important reason is mainstream love towards large numbers. Same shit as with retarded 20mpx smartphone cameras noisy even at iso 200.
>>54455621
because apple decided they wanted to fuck everyone in the ass yet again
>>54455621
No AA needed :^)
>>54455648
>>54455645
>2016
>still thinking games are for children
are you my grandpa or something?
>>54455645
when you double the scale of all ui elements, the productivity was not increased
>>54455686
Go to bed, you have school tomorrow.
>>54455686
>this year's date
>the opposite of your worthless opinion
This format of faggotry needs to die in a fire.
And resolutions are increasing NOT because of the gaming world but because of the home theater world. People want bigger TV's that need higher resolutions. In 10 years we'll probably see entire walls of houses made into superhypermega HD screens for $1000, and movie theatres will be (nearly) out of business.
Also, companies like making people refresh their technology because money. Hence, higher resolutions. DESU, only OLED makes me excited. If you haven't seen it then you're missing out.
5K is the best
>>54455645
this
>>54455697
not an argument
>>54455621
Yes, because if you can't gayme at such a resolution it's completely useless
>>54455788
>In 10 years we'll probably see entire walls of houses made into superhypermega HD screens for $1000
doubt it unless $1000 means more than what it currently is
>>54455645
I wish i could read your post but i fell for the meme.
>>54455690
why would you want to double the scale? 1:1 on a 4k monitor is god-tier
>>54455621
Because its well documented that at normal viewing conditions we need at least 8k to fully eliminate pixelization and visible moire.
>>54455645
you might as well filter "productivity" because it could easily mean being paid to shitpost on multiple imageboards at once.
are you editing photo and video? are you programming? are you being paid to play a vidya gayme? if something is great for something say what it actually fucking is, and preferably why.
You can play the games at lower resolution and use the hi-res for work and things that it's useful for
>>54455807
>wallpaper of a cartoon
>Tiny ui.
I cant think of workable screen size that wouldn't look shit on. how big is your screen?
>>54455807
Can't read shit.
I hope IRL that's at least a 42 inch
>>54456167
>Tiny UI
That's wrong though. Don't you know what scaling is? Pic related.
My monitor is 27 inches as well.
>>54456209
pls share your folders baby?
>>54456143
>Don't you know what scaling is?
i dont think you do. thats one open window without context. the original screenshot on a 27 screen would look small. dont sit so close.
> tfw 1280x1024 master race
Feels good man
>>54455621
Innovation? Idk why make a better version of anything you fucking retard?
>>54455621
Red cameras/sony/etc. make hardware for film/tv at high resolutions for viewing in theaters and then tv manufacturers and computer manufacturers want to advertise their "full theater experience" even though it's usually less than what it really is. 4k is starting to become a thing while films right now are being shot in 6K/7K/8K. When 1080p was the cool thing, films were being shot in 4K and 5K.
>>54456364
>Innovation
apple needs more money.
1440p 27" here
got this monitor 4 days ago
loving every inch of it
using a 1:1 scaling and I can perfectly read everything
>>54456258
It's not that hard of a concept. 5120x2880 is exactly 4 times greater than 2560x1440 (2 times in each dimension).
That means when the GUI is scaled to be 4 times as large as normal it would look exactly the same size as a normal GUI on a 1440p monitor, just far sharper.
Pic related, this is what 5k looks like with the scaling off.
>>54455807
>capsule
You're alright.
>>54456364
You make a better version of something the average tech illiterate actually cares about so you can get away with selling a worse version of everything else. Duh.
See: Apple.
>>54455690
>logic of laptop users
not everyone is using 4k on 13in retard
>>54456505
>Cantering to your customers wants and needs
>Bad
People who buy Macs want a 'luxury' computer and they don't need or care about it having the fastest hardware. It's not 2002 anymore, even a 10 year old laptop would be enough for most people, even on /g/. Hell, look at all the people using 10 year old ThinkPads.
>>54456491
>Apples UI is shit and small
thanks for the info
Daily reminder that the 5k dell monitor is a better monitor than the 5K iMac.
Ironically it also have way better sound, even though it's just a monitor while the iMac is a PC in a screen thus kinda needs to have good audio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEjeVjq5irk&feature=youtu.be&t=349
>>54456578
And now here's the same windows, same resolution, different scaling.
If you still don't get it then I don't know what to tell you.
>>54455697
It's May 9th school is over
>>54456616
Depends on where you are. Schools around here don't get out till June
>tfw 2560x1600 30in master race
>>54456596
Don't reply, he's either jealous or mentally handicapped.
Win10 even have scaling so if he's not using OSX or Windows he's probably one of those that use an Autismnux distro.
High pixel density monitors will allow you to run games at arbitrary resolutions without looking like dogshit, just like it was with CRTs.
That's really the main thing I care about, an effective end to native resolution.
>>54456657
>an effective end to native resolution.
Vector monitor when?
>>54456530
Yes, that is bad if the majority of customers for all companies don't give a shit about good hardware. They're more interested in looks. As it turns out, more than one USB port was only ever used by the niche market. "Ultrabook" is slowly becoming the new standard.
Free market FTW. Vote ron paul, power to the people. The masses are always right.
>>54456675
Never. We'll hopefully get gorillion PPI monitors that brute force the problem eventually.
High resolutions are just MEMES to get you to pay more for a single screen.
>>54456690
And yet Apple is the only company making an OS and computer that supports high PPI properly
IF YOU NEED ANYMORE THAN 800X600 RESOLUTION THAN YOU'RE EXTREMELY INEFFICIENT AND WASTEFUL OF YOUR WORKSPACE.
CZECH YOUR PRIVILEGES
>>54456596
C-can you upload the Yuru-Yuri, Lucky Star and Non Non Biyori folders?
>Radeon HD 7990 card from 2013
>still plays my games perfectly fine at 4k
Why cry?
>>54456649
>jealous
4k faggots are getting as bad as audiophiles. UI issues with 4k screens is a known problem.
Im sorry if my comments upset you.
>>54456818
Considering I'm using a 1080p why should I be upset or part of the 4K screeniephiles?
>>54455644
you make jokes about it but pornography drives the tech industry
>>54456826
You sounded upset.
>>54455788
You know projectors exist, right? Not saying you can get a 4k projector for ~$1k. But if you settled for something lower-end, $1k could probably just about cover a decent system (screen, speakers+amp)
>>54456856
Thought you meant I was upset, but now I know you don't know the meaning of it.
>>54455621
With the 1080 we will finally be able to get a single card 4k 60fps solution
Hopefully the same with the 490
>>54456904
Are you ok?
>>54456758
>Literally two 380's
>Duhh i can play 4k
No shit cunt
>>54456948
Are you one of those pretending to be retarded?
>>54455807
>Capsule
Let's be friends, anon!
>>54456983
no.
manufacturers are desperate for turn-over and churn. "if you don't have the latest highest resolution you are a filthy casual/norm"
It's all bullshit.
>>54456997
he's a pedofile
>>54456453
Using 1440p at 2:2 scaling. Might upgrade to a 4k monitor this summer.
>>54456818
If you use winblows maybe. 4k works fine on OSX and linux desktop enviroments with hidpi support like unity, gnome 3, plasma 5, etc.
>>54456818
>UI issues with 4k screens is a known problem.
Only on Windows and Linux
>>54455621
Because you need 5K for the best possible experience.
And next year you need 6K.
Next year OH SHIT 7K
And then you need the GPUs that can handle the higher resolutions, etc. etc.
Basically yet another number-based pissing contest for lazy marketers.
5K is optimal to edit 4K
4K is optimal to edit 1080p
4K content is only one of several factors contributing to our perception of detail.
>>54455621
To is the retina version of 1440p. It'll b my upgrade in 5 years or so
>>54456847
It's impressive how true this really is
>>54455621
You aren't supposed to be gaming at 4k or 5k, they're for large screen productivity
>>54456847
then why are porn websites all using shit resolutions and bitrates + decades old codecs?
video technology is being driven by blu-ray and anime fansubbers
>>54457073
>5K to edit 4K
>4K to edit 2K
why not 3K to edit 2K
>>54457073
>4K content is only one of several factors contributing to our perception of detail.
If you normalize for quality (e.g. set up all your displays to be on the same slope in your diagram) then the resolution only determines the apparent size (x axis), not the quality (slope).
in simpler words: resolution only makes things bigger or smaller, it doesn't change the quality. (Unless you're sitting too close or too far from your display)
>>54456818
>>54457053
>>54457058
Yes, this issue is solved entirely on OS X. Been using an rMBP for over a year now and haven't run across a single app that has weird scaling issues.
I bought a 4k TV simply because it's been so heavily meme'd that it'll eventually become mainstream, but realistically anything above this resolution is fucking retarded. I don't even have full HD on my laptop because I don't fucking need full HD to process geodatabases. Fuck memes, really.
Forcing hardware upgrades.
Progressive resolutions are the best, until we get to 8k. At that point we will need a new way of displaying stuff outside of pixels.
>>54455650
>confirmed
>>54457387
>At that point we will need a new way of displaying stuff outside of pixels.
Why?
More like,
>at that point we will have covered the human field of view
If you need more than 150% scaling you're doing something fucking wrong. Your eyes can't resolve details much finer than that.
>retards will defend their 500+dpi meme shits
>>54457411
200% scaling is the only way to go. It's not that you need such a resolution, but that it scales perfectly.
>>54457446
crash course: there are two types of scaling
vector scaling, and raster scaling
vector scaling scales perfectly regardless of the ratio
raster scaling never scales perfectly
the end
>>54457401
we will have, but also pixel size limitations. Remember 8k isnt a dpi, its just a specification.
Different ways of displaying stuff will eventually become the future.
>>54457489
>Remember 8k isnt a dpi
You're right, it's equivalent to a specification of the viewing angle
>>54457411
Every time I scale by percentages like 150%, 175%, etc I get weird problems like controls being too big or small. Also there's a little interpolation from only 1 and 3/4 or 1 and 1/2 pixels being rendered instead of 1 whole pixel or 2 whole pixels.
>tfw 4k 27"
>>54457245
>he streams his porn from websites
>>54457489
I once thought of something like instead of pixels you just save a superposition of a bunch of waves. So the resulting image is never really blocky when looking closer, but rather blurry. On a screen like that you could enhance the resolution simply by using more high-frequency waves. Pic related, they contain roughly the same amount of information (a little less on the right one). Left one is pixels, right one a superposition of "waves".
It's pretty much how JPEG is compressed as well.
>>54455621
There was never such a huge jump in resolution
the jump from 1280x1024 to 1080 wasnt that big
1080p to 1440p isn't that great either
+1440p isn't that common.
The jump from 1080p/1440p to 4k on the other hand is a ridiculous.
And people thinking the new GPUs will run games at 4k with acceptable frames are retarded, maybe in a year or 2 on shitty games.
>>54455681
downsampling masterrace
>>54458112
its about the same actually, its just not linear growth
>>54457334
scaling isn't the problem here, it's just that once you start scaling, you sacrifice productivity.
Like those 20k macbooks with a functional resolution of like 1600x900
>>54456588
Pity the monitor is the same price as the whole imac
>>54456588
Also >Glossy screen
Dell instantly wins for that fact alone
>>54457729
Where else do you get porn? in b4 you watch professional mainstream garbage
>>54458227
obviously torrents, private trackers mainly
>>54457387
Like long, solid strips of succulent pork, speed in rich flavored dyes for a pristine, tender picture.
>>54458242
so you watch professional mainstream garbage, got it
>>54458274
At least i watch it in 4k 60fps
>>54458285
All the 4K 60 Hz porn I've seen has been ridiculously low-bitrate and also of exceptionally low quality.
What's the point of filming it in 4K if you can't do it properly and are also going to film the most boring shit imaginable
>>54455686
Playing video games achieves you as much as staring at a wall. Literally the lowest form of entertainment and a sign of degeneracy like tattoos. I hope you enjoy it when the realization kicks in once you've maybe grown up. Faggot.
>>54455621
TO
SHOW
OFF
YOUR
SUPERIOR
NUMBERS
TO
OTHERS
It has always been that way.
>>54455621
Resolution is all well and good, but I give more of a shit about refresh rate and the type of screen. I'll take a 1080p OLED 120hz TV over even an 8K LCD 60hz screen.
>>54458472
TV is a lower form of entertainment, depending on what you watch.
>>54455621
You're the kind of person who holds technology back.
>why do we even have 1080p? 720p was good enough!
The real answer is because we can
>>54455645
This. 1080p is good for consumers, 4k for producers.
>>54455650
No it does not
Even the latest HDMI 2.0b spec only supports up to 4K
4k doesnt really interest me.
Res the colors and stuff look better but i want 120hz+ 4k it would really feel like a upgrade but the only dell panel in the world costs like what $5000+
>>54458353
>What's the point of filming it in 4K if you can't do it properly and are also going to film the most boring shit imaginable
There are some gems in there worth it. Also some qt pornstars. Though I'd prefer 60fps over resolution beyond 1080p
5k?
Give me 10k resolution, I'll take it.
Actually 8k is quickly coming in glorious Nippon.
http://www.cnet.com/news/8k-tv-broadcasting-coming-to-japan-during-2016-olympics/
Fuck gaming, fuck DPI, there are more uses for higher resolutions that that.
Here's a comparison between 1080p and 720p.
Look at the real estate the higher resolution provides.
Easily seen with the tools that are visible.
Higher resolutions can't come fast enough.
>>54460247
Useless if it's still 24 inches
>>54455621
so the jews can sell you more meme technology that has no real purpose.
>>54455621
>It's hard enough to run a game at 1080p
>>54455621
5k exists for professional shoopers.
4k on <=27" exists for suckers.
4k on 40"+ exists for god-tier general productivity.
40"-50" 4k is and will continue to be the prestige tier of displays until 8k starts trickling out in maybe a few years*.
At that point, hopefully GUI scaling will actually be universal and fully functional.
* subject to home theater retards being suckered into buying 40"-60" 8k displays despite utter lack of content.
>>54458472
Depends on how much time you waste playing them.
If you spend all day playing them then yea you are wasting your life, But killing an hour or two isn't gonna hurt you.
>>54455621
We need to go wider.
>>54457073
I edit 1080 just fine on 1440p quit spreading shit opinions
>>54455621
Waaaaaaw I cant run my gaymez on that resolution, therefore its ussless.
>>54455621
Because Americans and dumb consumers buy them.
I'll stick with 1080p until it literally becomes obsolete.
>>54456258
This, sorta. You know certain programs can't "stretch" or fill the screen correctly regardless of scaling
1080p OUGHT TO BE ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE
>>54455645
4k is still shit if the screen size is small(fuck your PPI dick measurement). a large monitor with 4k would be great.
>>54455681
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>>54455621
>game
Here's where you fucked up.
>>>>>>>>>>>/v/
>>54460898
Cats don't like pancakes
>>54460979
>>54461028
>>54455645
Holy shit THIS
4K if for the creators
>>54455621
Nothing "fucktarded" about higher resolution as long as we can perceive the differences. It's just a question of screen size and viewing distance. Whether other hardware or applications can keep up is another question entirely but in no way a reason to limit the progress of manufacturing a higher resolution displays.
Because the industry doesn't revolve around video games, kid. Now fuck off back to /v/.
>>54455621
>Implying there are only games
>Implying running games in 1080p is hard
>>54457216
I game at 4k. Kill yourself.
>>54456143
Let me pull some made up bullshit “facts” out of my ass and allude to nonexistant documentation
>>54460344
I seriously doubt that you're speaking from experience here, but how on earth is it useless to see more of the tool palettes and layers, in smaller screen than 24"?
Increasing the resolution of my tiny 13 inch Cintiq would provide me with plenty of more room to work with and it would still be usable.
You can practically cram any resolution in an 22" inch variant of this thing and still be able to use it without any problems.
It provides more room to work with, simple as that.
It has jack shit to do with the physical size of the tablet or monitor.
>>54463190
>You can practically cram any resolution in an 22" inch variant of this thing and still be able to use it without any problems.
As you keep moving closer to compensate for everything being smaller you will reach the near focal plane and eventually the pain threshold.
>>54463407
>pain
>from looking at things
ok
There are people out there who have the cash to spend on a 980Ti SLI setup, so companies like Nvidia and AMD are more than willing to oblige.
It's definitely a high end luxury though, certainly at the point of diminishing returns. Most people with 4K monitors are using screens under 30". People here may disagree, but I think it's a waste of money to spend $1400 on video cards to play 4K on a 27" monitor. It will look better than 1080p with AA cranked up, but that's a serious amount of cash to spend.
If you have a 40" 4K monitor on your desk, then alright it's well worth it.
>>54463468
>>54463562
I don't think the word "pain" comes up in my mind here and this is completely unrelated to yet another fucking retarded /g/ bait thread about something so simple as display resolution.
>>54463190
I have a 4K monitor and do a lot of work in photoshop.
The extra screen real estate is lovely but don't get carried away. I have a 27 inch monitor and I need scaling.
The size of the monitor is directly related, at 13 inches you'd barely need 1080p. Unless you have microscopes for eyes.
>>54463468
You've obviously never looked at your own mother then.
>>54463468
not from looking, from FOCUSING. Do you even fucking read? Try taking your finger and focusing on the tip while moving it towards your nose.
If you're still focusing on the tip while it's touching your nose then you should be experiencing physical pain in your eye muscles.
If not, then you're too braindead to understand how to focus on something.
>>54463658
Also, the closest comfortable viewing distance depends on the age but is generally around 25 cm for typical adults.
Meaning: If your device is 25 cm or closer, you will suffer from excessive eye fatigue, exhaustion or pain (yes, pain) - especially as you move even closer.
>>54463562
>>54463600
I guess maybe your body is crippled and can't feel pain properly or something? Have you ever suffered from a stroke? (genuinely curious)
Normal people feel physical pain in their eyes when looking at high-frequency images of these wavelengths
>>54463732
Also it depends on the apparent image size (duh) so if your viewing environment is highly atypical, move closer and further away until it physically hurts. You'll know when it does.
>>54463732
Either you're lying, or normies are really weak
>>54463764
>pain is weakness
lmao, there's a reason people who don't feel pain tend to die pretty quickly
good luck with your life pal
>>54456657
It's up to the scaling hardware and resolution has nothing to do with a low res image looking like "dogshit".
>>54463846
Why would looking at an image cause pain? I'm in a dark room with a 1440p display
>>54463954
>with a 1440p display
apparent image size is determined by the combination of (resolution, dpi, viewing distance).
>>54456675
We already had them, but they were bad for porn.
>>54455621
get it with the times
look at this post from from 1990
>Why the fuck do we keep moving toward fucktarded resolutions?
It's hard enough to run a game at 640x480, let alone 800x600 or even 1024x768. Why the fuck does 1280x1024 exist?
>>54463658
I would describe that more as simply uncomfortable than actually painful, then again I have a really high pain tolerance so maybe I'm not the person to ask here.
The size of it all carries us along
More equals better, it's what we want!
>>54457278
Cuz meme k
>>54464167
CRTs had actually a lot higher resolution than flat panels for many, many years..
>>54456125
Because they fell for the small 4k monitor meme
I thought they would only gonna stop when there is no difference between looking at a paisage through your window or your monitor.
>>54457034
>not being a pedo
why are you even here
normies get out
>>54460760
Enjoy your obsolete technology, europoor.
consumerism
aka your old display is shit this 5k is so much better than 4k!
>>54456596
I'm not the OP, but what is the point of 4K/5K if you need to scale about 2x to see the text? Is the alternative to scaling just to purchase a larger screen? Would it be better to purchase a 1440p screen instead, without having to scale the text?
I'm saying this because I'm in the market for a >1080p screen but don't know what combination of screen size and pixel count will work best. Any sources on that?
>>54466210
High PPI screens offer sharper looking images and text, and less/no need for anti-aliasing. It depends on your use case which would be better for you. Personally I'm looking to buy a 34" 3440x1440 ultrawide which is similar in PPI to current displays, but I would rather buy a 5k one of the same size instead of getting it even bigger.
Yes, if you buy a higher resolution yet equally bigger screen things will look the same, except you'll have more space to work with. At 27" a 1440p screen has roughly the same PPI of a 20" 1080p screen, likewise a 40" 4k screen would be needed for the same PPI.
>>54456596
found you on steam
you aren't anonymous anymore, I got my eye on you
>>54455644
High resolution is bad for porn imo
You can see every ass pimple as clear as day
>>54466210
>I'm not the OP, but what is the point of 4K/5K if you need to scale about 2x to see the text?
With 5K you can have either:
• Same size text and interface elements, at 4 times the sharpness
• Same sharpness of text and interface elements, and 4 times the desktop real estate.
• Any in-between combination
You choose.
>>54466557
That just means we need higher resolution porn actors, or more plastic surgery.
>>54466724
>4 times the sharpness
Pixel size and (real) sharpness aren't related.
Actual sharpness is the result of local contrast. - something nobody focuses on becasue it's all about higher pixel counts.
The reason is that games are tied to consoles.
Unfortunately, the current generation of consoles are relatively weak. This puts an effective limit on how much graphical fidelity developers can actually put into PC games, there is only so far beyond consoles that they can go in that regard.
But because there is a pretty big industry based around regular advances in GPUs they have to put those advances to some use, otherwise theres no reason for people to buy new cards and the industry as it is grinds to a halt. The answers to that are resolution and framerate.
Higher resolutions are much more demanding, which gives GPU developers more headroom while they wait for the current console generation to die. And for people who can run games well at those resolutions, post-60hz displays open up even more headroom. Even though the consoles are gimped as fuck GPUs can keep being pumped out and slowly work towards making 4k @ 144hz a reality. Those things are easy for developers to implement and give Nvidia and AMD something to keep selling.
>>54466210
Ignore all the fools talking about sharpness.
The real reason text looks better at higher DPI is because with most fonts there is a mismatch between letter spacing and the pixel raster.
And the smaller the pixels, the less of a problem this is.
Does this line:
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Look uniform to you?
Are some i's spaced closer than others?
Are some i's more blurry than others?
If so, you would benefit from a higher dpi screen.
If not, don't bother.
>>54457245
where have you been watching your porn from ?
>naughty America is leading in vr porn
>>54456596
>tfw scaled resolutions lag on my mbp
>>54456596
bastion isnt OP, git gud
>>54466557
>3DPD
>>54466980
You're an idiot.
The issues you mentioned are real, but a acting like that's the entire reason high PPI looks better is wrong.
>>54456209
Upload madoka, shinobu and splatoon folder plox
>>54463614
Famillia, dont waste your breath eventhough ur post is the logical end reply to resolution/screensize ratio debate.
You can't fight cancer, you let it take over you and die.
Which reminds me, 1080 is okay on a 13 inch due to mobility purpose, anything beyond 1080 is brainless.
>>54471285
2880x1800 is perfect for 13 inches since it would give you a workarea similar to 1440x900.
15 inch and larger laptops should be 4k.
You're one being "brainless" here for writing off the biggest quality jump in display tech we've had in a very long time.
>>54455621
>hard to game at 1080p
>midrange cards can do it just fine
yeah no, high end cards are great for 1440p and pretty good 4k, with the new cards coming out it's just going to be more and more accessible.
>>54471347
>biggest jump
So i can do more work with my 6inch 1440x2560 phone compared to my laptop ? Neat !
>>54471405
I hope English isn't your first language.
>>54455621
>4k is already obsolete
gotta keep milking the feeling of inadequacy nerds entertain and impose on each other when they don't have the latest tech meme
Don't forget to make fun of OP for not having a setup that fully and smoothly supports 4k. He hasn't donated enough to the almighty planned obsoletion machine.
>>54455621
>let alone 1440p
I run my games @1440p for a while now, and I only have a GTX 670
>>54471414
¿¡ What Is You Problem My Dear Friend !? We Are Every One Good Pal In Board . . . Let Us Be Good On Each Otter . . . ¿ Yes ? You thank lots. (-:
>>54466557
>3d porn
why would you do that to yourself?
>>54471414
Does it matter ? Define biggest "quality" jump.
I hope English is your first language, American.
>>54471819
I wonder what having 4 pixels in the same area as one pixel does for clarity.
>>54471660
You construed having a high resolution as being directly related to doing more work, when no one else had made a claim even remotely similar to that.
>>54471883
>You construed having a high resolution as being directly related to doing more work, when no one else had made a claim even remotely similar to that.
You have to be a special kind of dense to not pick up that I was just pretending to be a stranger with poor english skills. Jesus fuck.
>>54471910
And you're once again showing you can't even comprehend a single sentence. What made you think that reply was directed at your sarcasm?
Just scale shit up.
The point of these display isn't to run it without any scaling.
>>54455621
I've only owned a 1080p monitor for about a year now, and I still don't think it's enough. It's just not as dizzyingly high resolution as I thought it would be.
>>54472065
>le Apple iz gay meme
>>>/middleschool/
>>54472077
>apple users are OK
>>>/y/
>>>/y/
>>>/y/
>>>/y/
>>54472065
Windows has broken scaling (it's also a shitty OS in general) Linux has spotty scaling and simply doesn't work as well as OS X.
What do you expect me to do?
>>54472098
kill yourself.
>>54471883
Autism: The Post
>>54455621
Kill yourself poorfag
>>54472098
Kill yourself.
>>54472206
>>54472107
I can't imagine how awful using your computers must be.
>>54472037
welcome to over 10 years ago, i guess
>>54455621
>2016
>not being 30" 2560x1600 master race for like a decade now
I'm holding out for 8K
>>54472283
>Not just getting 5k now
>>54472213
Cool story bro.
my 2560x1440 27 inch monitor just works and i don't need to do any silly scaling to make it useable
could hardly play games on it anyway at 60 fps, why would i want even more resolution
>>54472305
>i don't need to do any silly scaling to make it useable
You're right, but no matter what you do it'll never be as sharp as a high PPI monitor.
>>54472471
I'm not looking to slice bread with it, anon.
>>54458285
why, pornstars are not HD Ready™
>>54456125
>install GNU/Linux
>boot into the tty
>font so small its basically invisiblesetfont latarcyrheb-sun32
>feel like its 1972 again
>>54457892
>Talking out of my butt: The Post
>>54472098
>windows has shitty UI scaling
i agree
>>54472098
>Linux in it's entirety has bad scaling!!
>Too tech-illiterate to find software that supports scaling, or fix his software to support it
see:
>>54472107
>>54472206
>hard to run a 1080p game
lol gtfo scrublord
>>54455621
>its hard to game at 1080p
my gtx 980 handles everything i throw at at 1080p and several at 1440p
>tfw 1080p monitor amd radeon super virtual resolutioned to 2560x1440
>>54455681
thi si flase
5K
Are you people fucking serious?
I'm out.
>>54458472
>gauging the pleasure of an art form by its utility
For what purpose you moron
>>54472957
>Linux in it's entirety has bad scaling!!
Absolutely. It's been 5 years and many developers are still not switching to GTK3 or other modern UI frameworks. Not to mention the fact all these different frameworks exist in the first place. Hell, wayland still isn't ready yet. High PPI on Linux is somehow more pathetic than Windows, which is really really sad.
>Too tech-illiterate to find software that supports scaling
Are you really suggesting I change the applications I use just to use Linux on a high PPI monitor?
You're a certified spastic if you don't own a 4k monitor
You havent lived until you lose your mouse mid-way through a teamfight on dota in 4k
>>54473603
Why does the res matter?
>>54473638
the mouse is so fucking tiny comparative to the screen and you get lost in the fray
> game
Baka desu senpai.
>>54473395
>GTK3
>modern UI framework
>>54466210
“Scaling” is mostly needed for historical backwards compatibility, really.
Had we always been using monitors and display devices at an ‘intended’ display patch, we would never have needed scaling to begin with. But it also would have meant less working space and viewing area.
Since people mainly used computer monitors to work and therefore cared more about efficiency and screen real estate than about quality, we've transitioned to an environment where we move up closer to increase our viewing area and make everything smaller than designed for to compensate.
The emergence of 4K is now putting a stop to this trend of “doing things wrong”, and taking us back to the intended visual acuity (where one display pixel roughly corresponds to the smallest feature we can see with our eyes).
But since all legacy software and images have been produced within a “large pixels” environment, they end up way too small on our new, modern, high DPI displays.
This is why scaling is needed - to bridge the gap. In some distant future, scaling will be abolished again as everything is now rendered twice as big out of the box.
As for your question, yes, if you need more than 2x scaling then you are over-increasing your resolution without increasing the display size to compensate, and it would be better to do that instead.
However, in the real world, people like big numbers - and it's significantly cheaper to increase the resolution than the display size, so I expect this trend to continue for quite some time as with other consumer marketing bs.
>>54473897
As for why I keep talking about this visual accuracy being “intended”, it's backed up by historical documents from standards organizations like the ITU-R.
The TV world, for example, has never deviated significantly from this trend (which is part of the reason why you need huge text on a TV to be able to read it), only the PC world has (and often quite significantly).
>>54456818
i use a dell ultrasharp 4k and i have no issues whatsoever
except sometimes it turns off randomly
>>54473897
>This is why scaling is needed - to bridge the gap. In some distant future, scaling will be abolished again as everything is now rendered twice as big out of the box.
It's also not quite that simple because different people will always prefer to do things slightly differently.
For example, some people use 6" phones, some people use 4" phones. Some hold them at 20cm from their face, some hold them at 50cm from their face. Some people have better vision than others.
At any combination of a viewing environment, you need a different resolution to achieve the “optimum” quality, therefore it might not ever be possible to eliminate scaling completely.
(Although by eliminating scaling, you can at least coerce users into adjusting their viewing distance based on how well they can actually see things - so it might be a self-supporting decision)
>>54457245
they're not though, at least not anymore
if you actually look you can find tons of free HD scenes as streaming video nowadays
>>54474407
>if you actually look you can find tons of free HD scenes as streaming video nowadays
What do you mean by HD?
1080p60 H.264 at ~10 Mbps or higher?
720p is enough desu.
>>54457053
>at 2:2 scaling
OK, I'm dumb, what do you mean by that and how do you set it?
>>54475024
I'm pretty damn sure that's a typo for 2:1
Déjà vu all over again.
>>54457245
>anime fansubbers
Why though?
>>54456596
aye compadre can you pass me that css?
>>54475160
Enjoy you're ban.
>>54456491
>friends with rincewind
w3w laaaaad
>>54466980
>iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
I'm on 19 and 1280x1024 and the line looks good. And I just wanted to buy a new monitor!
>>54456112
I read post your post and enjoyed it
>>54460247
I think I read somewhere that there's no reason to go beyond 8k because they human eye can't tell the difference between a higher resolution.
I'll get 4k tv/monitor when all my pirate movies are in that resolution. Until then, 1080p will do me just fine.
>>54473755
Not him but it does support proper UI scaling. Also Qt5 is too broken at the moment.
>>54476433
>Also Qt5 is too broken at the moment.
What are you talking about? Works fine here
>>54476566
At least it works better if I move it over to my other monitor
>>54473395
Most QT and GTK 2/3 programs look fine scaled up when I use a DE with hidpi support like Unity or Cinnamon. GTK2 programs look a little small compared to GTK3 programs but since they all use vector scaling I get non of the blurry fonts/icons problem that in windows with hidpi scaling.
