Samsung releases 49-inch desktop monitor with 32:9 aspect ratio

Re: Only 1080 high?

Hear, hear.

+1000

Why is there a fixation on 1080 height, 1200 should be the minimum. Height wise more is better.

Re: Only 1080 high?

> Only 1080 high?

Buy three, mount vertically.

Re: Only 1080 high?

My ultra-wide Dell is "only" 32", but is 3880x1440, a much better combination.

I still have an LG 24" monitor with 1920x1200 at home, but at work we just have 24" movie viewers (1920x1080), the lower pixel density makes them much harder to look at than a "proper" monitor.

Re: Huh?

> As for work, I'd rather have multiple monitors as it's far easier to snap multiple apps in place that way

You're thinking too small. My first thought was that if I went for these, I'd get two (for precisely the reasons you mentioned)

Re: weighs 45 pounds

Stuff the practicality...this thing will surely be a big babe magnet! 49" will really impress. Anyone with one of these on their desk must be really serious about their work as well - although what's the betting it's only the boss gets one, who uses it to play solitaire and surf dodgy websites.

Re: weighs 45 pounds

Well, the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Screen-LED-Lit-Monitor-LC49HG90DMNXZA/dp/B072C7TNC5/ref=sr_1_1”>Amazon link I found says the “item weight” is 33 pounds (still not light), so the larger figure includes packaging, the odd cable, inadequate printed docs and maybe a power brick.

Re: #Fail

It'll be focused on Gamers. 4k is wonderful for raw pixels but you need very high end hardware to run games at a decent framerate while pushing that many pixels. This monitor is about equal to two standard 1080p monitors so you'd get all the benefit with none of the bezelly downside.

Re: Any good for ....

>Is it any good for watching porn??

As long as they are lying horizontally.

Re: 125% of the sRGB colour spectrum

And still, it doesn't say nothing useful. 125% *how* - unless you see its colour space plotted, it's of no use. But I guess game players are little interested in gamut. For true photo editing, you need something close at least to the AdobeRGB space, and for video editing something with the right color space (not 95% of it).

Re: Who would want of of those?

Had a house survey done in the 1980s by a local firm. In talking it turned out that he used an ICL Perq system - which was then considered by many as the bees-knees for a video monitor.

Re: code word

No different to audiophiles, motor enthusiasts, or any other sector where people consider themselves to have an expertise that few others have.

They all buy expensive toys that they think professionals use to make themselves seem "more" professional, whether or not they can even use them effectively.

I look at my Facebook and I see people with fishing gear costing thousands, which they then use in reservoirs where there are no fish. I see car nuts buying bits for their cars that are totally worthless and unnecessary and the cost of which would cover buying a better car. It's the same for all sorts.

My technician was telling me only yesterday that he was in a store and a guy was buying a "gold-plated optical audio cable". I can't even fathom how that works. But the guy paid a fortune for it because "it'll make it sound better".

Everything from the guy with the large 4K TV, to the bloke with go-faster stripes and under-car lighting, to the gamer with the 48-button, 10Mdpi mouse, they're all the same.

And they all whine like hell with excuses when your run-of-the-mill, bog-standard, but you spent a tiny bit more than the minimum and actually researched, purchase beats their super-duper kit into a cocked hat. They all then pull out the "Yeah, but that's just electronic timing / digital audio / carbon fibre / whatever, it's not as good as my ancient mechanics / dust-strewn LP's / stick of wood even if you think it is".