this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
484 points (92.6% liked)

Technology

75756 readers
2293 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
484
Study Boldly Claims 4K And 8K TVs Aren't Much Better Than HD To Your Eyes, But Is It True? (hothardware.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by artifex@piefed.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
292 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Anyone who uses spreadsheets regularly wants the extra real estate. Anyone who works with complex documents wants the extra real estate.

And yet as I have stated this is not the case for most users. I remember when a national here bank decided to do an "upgrade" to 4k monitors there was so much push back from users (in this case mortgage lending) that after installing the monitors I was back two weeks later to change them back.

People who use spreadsheets regularly (myself included) would rather have a second monitor or a bigger one then one 4k one. I have a 32 inch 1080p monitor as my secondary and it works great at a cheap price. I went with one that is brighter and a slower refresh rate since I don't need or want that on a secondary. And if you are going big why spend the money on a 4k one if you are just going to use scaling anyway?

[โ€“] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

I have a 32 inch 1080p monitor as my secondary

I honestly find this hard to believe. I have 2x 32 inch monitors on my desk and in 1920x1080 they're ugly to the point of distraction.

if you are going big why spend the money on a 4k one if you are just going to use scaling anyway?

4k isn't that expensive. you can get 32 inch 4k monitors for a few hundred dollars.

Scaling is not the same as reducing the resolution.