4K Resolution Here Like Mainstream

Myself?, none since I sold my last mac a couple of years ago but the problems it has I think are due to it having this menu bar at the top of the screen and apple not admitting this was a stopid idea and trying to work around this bad design choice, from what my mac buddies have told me, the 'fullscreen' mode is apple trying to fix it, which doesnt play nice with some apps esp with multiple monitors

Personally I haven't had any issues since Mac OS X 10.4 with multi-monitor setups.

What issues does having the menu at the top cause for them?
 
Then, why is the second image more crisp, more clear and overall looks better?

There is something that you do not tell us.
Hmm mate, I've explained it a few times, its because windows at high DPI simply scales the 'window' instead of the correct way (what html engines do)
eg see my reply to mrcorbo at the top of this page https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/4k-resolution-here-like-mainstream.57133/page-3#post-1862068
& reread all my replys over the last page, twice if necessary, you will understand after a while. yes I know I'm terrible at explaining, if you still dont understand perhaps someone else would like a try?

@Pressure I'll look into it
 
Your first window looks as if ClearType is turned off !

That said and if it's not this, I don't know why and how Windows would do what you are saying.
 
I did't do Windows development for quite some time so I'm not completely sure about that, but AFAIK at least in Windows 10 Windows tries to do something similar to OS X: try to scale "legacy" applications in high DPI mode to make them at least the correct size (though look worse). A "good" application should always show the correct size with correct resolution even in high DPI mode.

The problem for Windows right now is simply that there're too few applications supporting high DPI correctly (compared to OS X), and there are still some applications that aren't even correct sized (they'll show half sized with everything very tiny).

I think it's a matter of time that most applications under active development to support high DPI properly, just like under OS X. It's just that OS X has a head start of a few years.
 
yes the top image is high DPI the bottom image is normal DPI,
I dont think so
They are exactly the same size and dpi for that to happen you must of scaled one of them up hence the bluriness
top image
luOFUro.png


bottom image
vgeddwh.png
 
They are exactly the same size and dpi for that to happen you must of scaled one of them up hence the bluriness
read pcchen's reply, he understands. No I havent scaled it up, the windows OS scales it up 'hence the bluriness' I did rescale it down afterward to reflect what I see (as both appear to be the same size to me) and for it also to make it easier to do a A -> B
here is chrome, same page viewed like above at high dpi and normal dpi
highDPI.png
normalDPI.png

what chrome does is go OK you want 'open sans 15pt' well I'll give you open sans 23pt for high DPI and open sans 15pt for normal DPI
Ideally this is what the windows OS should do eg when it gets a win32 message drawText replace the font with a larger size. Yes I realize this is a reasonably difficult programming problem and requires more work on the path of the programmers but hey I think MS employ intelligent people
 
On second thoughts, Looking at those screenshots theres bugger all difference between the high DPI and normal DPI (trust me in the flesh there is), I assume its due to downscaling, Like I've been saying throughout this thread, an image should always be 100% and not scaled, as it blurs. Thats the problem you can only understand when you see the high dpi and normal dpi side by side, but the thing is you need to see it on the capable screens, to see it fully, its like looking at a 3d image on your non 3d monitor, you can see it but you don't truly 'see' it. I suppose I could take a photo and post it, but that seems a bit lame and you prolly cant see bugger all anyways
 
Don't know what some of you are using, or how, but OS X has been handling multiple monitors just perfectly for years. And of course higher DPI.
 
It certainly does not handle it perfectly. It just fakes the resolution to apps that don't opt-in. I suppose Windows could do something similar, but there are trade-offs.
 
I believe Windows 10 is already doing the same thing for most applications (most applications I run under Windows 10 are upscaled). However, there are still some applications are not upscaled correctly or not upscaled at all, thus making them look very small (Of course, these are mostly the application developers' fault)
 
Ultrawide 21:9 Aspect Ratio PC Gaming: Better Than 4K?

I believe it is. I'm gettning the upcoming Acer predator 34inch. 100hz with GSync and 3440x1440. Can't wait! my trusty dell 3008wfp has been with me for ages but change is good.
 
Are monitors/TVs super expensive in the UK?, thats nz$1300 you can buy a 4k monitor for nz$504 @ 28". 40" phillips for nz$1137
In fact of the 16 of the 27 4k monitors at this nz website sell for cheaper than £550
 
Some countries have different tax rules for monitors with and without a TV tuner.
 
Easy. Normal viewing will show you quite quickly that black levels and therefore contrast leave much to be desired. I'll keep my Panny plasma for now.

Get the best of both worlds, an LG 4k OLED TV. :) Assuming you can afford one.

Myself, I'll stick with LCD tech for a bit longer due to price. Hence getting a 49" 4K PC monitor with adaptive sync (Freesync). I thought of going with a 40" but wanted something with larger pixels than my 30" monitor (aging eyes) and a 40" would have had smaller pixels.

Also considering getting a 65" 4K PC monitor with adaptive sync and passive 3D to replace my 55" TV. Don't need a TV tuner or all the TV post processing crap. Should make it quite good for gaming.

Regards,
SB
 
Get the best of both worlds, an LG 4k OLED TV. :) Assuming you can afford one.

Myself, I'll stick with LCD tech for a bit longer due to price. Hence getting a 49" 4K PC monitor with adaptive sync (Freesync). I thought of going with a 40" but wanted something with larger pixels than my 30" monitor (aging eyes) and a 40" would have had smaller pixels.

Also considering getting a 65" 4K PC monitor with adaptive sync and passive 3D to replace my 55" TV. Don't need a TV tuner or all the TV post processing crap. Should make it quite good for gaming.

Regards,
SB

Wow, I didn't even know these existed until you mentioned them and I started googling. Almost all of the features I am looking for, but missing HDR support, which is a big one for me.
 
Yeah, it's pretty amazing what the Koreans are putting out right now. Especially the 2nd tier manufacturers that don't officially sell their monitors outside the country. Of course, the problem with them is that they use B-rated panels (higher chances for stuck or dead pixels). So chance of dead/stuck pixels. You can guard against that somewhat by getting a "Pixel Perfect" edition, but read the fine print. Certain ebay sellers consider 0-3 stuck pixels as "perfect." And then, of course, there's always the hassle of getting a replacement if you got the perfect pixel option but it has some dead or stuck pixels.

Actually 1 manufacturer sells monitors in the US officially. Philips. Not sure if they are Korean owned now, but they use the same panels as the Korean 2nd tier manufacturers. Unfortunately the Philips monitors suffer from PWM flicker which can cause certain people headaches and eyestrain.

Wasabi Mango and Crossover are either PWM free or PWM flicker free, but don't officially sell in the US. The one I ordered is from Wasabi Mango. Only reason I ordered that is because of the Mstar chip it uses (HDCP 2.2). The Crossover 49" is going through a transition from Realtek to Mstar and I didn't want to take a chance I'd get one with a Realtek (no HDCP 2.2 yet) chip.

Regards,
SB
 
Back
Top