Hacker News Reader

Comment by mil22 | Hacker News Reader

Totally agree. I have tried multiple monitors so many times over the years but always come back to a single display, usually 24-27”.

Turning your head is a hassle. I also find turning my eyes fatiguing if the angle of movement is too great. So I tend to prefer smaller, higher PPD displays over larger displays with the same resolution. I want a lot of pixels in a compact FOV.

For me, 4K 24” has been the sweet spot for desktop monitors. I currently have a 27” due to so few good 24” 4K monitors being made these days, and at the viewing distance allowed by my setup, even that is just slightly too big, such that looking to the corners can get annoying.

The PPD on these headsets still just isn’t anywhere close to the point where it can match a single high density desktop monitor, and making the virtual screen bigger or adding side screens just doesn’t work for me ergonomically.

View on HN

I don't understand. I don't even have to technically turn head with 3 screens. It's just eyes I have to move, and even if I turned head, it's barely 20 degrees?

I have 3 screens, but honestly would prefer more.

I find it more uncomfortable to eyes to switch screens on the same window, especially if one is light and the other is dark. The blinking is disorientating and can be eye hurting, because eye is not prepared for the color switch/ doesn't know what to expect.

I have 22 inchers around 32 inches away from my eyes.

When looking at the video in the OP, the issue is more like the screen seems so close and plastered to the FOV. When you could have more screens further away.

In real life all 3 screens are in my FOV, I would feel massively overwhelmed if it appeared as it did in his video, not sure if it is giving a correct perception.

I think it very much depends on the viewing distance. Using https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/:

* Your 22" screen at a distance of 32" has a horizontal FOV of 33°. Moving your eyes from the middle of one screen to the adjacent screen is a 33° movement. Assuming 1080p it would have a PPD of 58, which is roughly retina PPD.

* My 27" screen at a distance of 20" (I measured it [update: originally measured at 14", remeasured in a more relaxed posture]) has a horizontal FOV of 60°, almost twice as wide. Moving my eyes to an adjacent screen would be physically impossible and I'd have to turn my head since the maximum adduction angle for human eyes is ~45° (each side). At 4K it has a PPD of 32, not even retina.

Although you can move your eyes from the center of the left screen to the center of the right (33 * 2 = 66°), you can't see the edges of your outer screens without turning your head slightly (33 * 3 = 99°, greater than human adduction of 45 * 2 = 90°).

Your three screens have a combined FOV of 99°, which is 50% bigger than my single 27" at 60°. That's definitely more, but it's 1.5x, not 3x, more. So our setups are not that different, it's just that you are using three monitors to cover a little more horizontal FOV than I get sitting closer to just one.

> I find it more uncomfortable to eyes to switch screens on the same window, especially if one is light and the other is dark. The blinking is disorientating and can be eye hurting, because eye is not prepared for the color switch/ doesn't know what to expect.

I use dark theme for everything so don't have this issue and am constantly switching between tabs and windows.

I also use dark theme for everything, and I also have a browser extension for that, but I keep disabling/enabling it because sometimes things bug on dark mode.

How is to be 14 inches from the screen? I wouldn't feel good being this near to the screen.

I am very near-sighted... it feels good. :)

[update: I remeasured in a more relaxed posture sitting back and it's closer to 20" in that scenario]

I was going to comment that all the ergonomics things I've read suggest arm-length (touch with tip of finger) as the optimal monitor distance, but if you're nearsighted enough that doing so would require glasses, I can completely understand wanting to have the screen much closer. That makes a lot more sense.

Even that feels way too close to me. Maybe it's because I've adapted to 3 screens?

Note there was an error in my math here which I can no longer correct. My 27" 4K at a distance of 20" has a PPD of 63, which is also considered retina. Compare this to the Vision Pro PPD of ~34.

To get true 4K res (3840x2160) at a PPD of 34 would require a screen that is 3840 / 34 = 113 degrees wide, way in excess of what is accessible by adduction of the human eye. A 60° wide screen would have a resolution of 60*34 = 2,040 pixels wide, or roughly 1080p.

Use tiling window manager + one large or ultrawidescreen monitor. If you have Mac, rectangle is good free software (https://rectangleapp.com/)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com