Author Topic: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?  (Read 2123 times)

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 14
  • -Receive: 17
  • Posts: 778
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?
« Reply #15 on: October 14, 2020, 02:38:46 pm »
Andi,

Good sir, that is excellent outcome!

So...when can we going to see some SysBench video benchmarks???

As much as I had always appreciated the SNAP ATI video card support, and the fact that this is the ONLY way to run a dual-head setup, I am starting to re-consider as it appears more and more viable to be able to pull off these high-resolution configurations.

I do have the physical desk real estate to actually put such a behemoth of a display up, which means, maybe I should? LOL

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 44
  • Posts: 1213
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?
« Reply #16 on: October 14, 2020, 02:50:52 pm »
Hi Dariusz,

I'm beginning to wonder as well.  Also wondering if it would work with the built in graphics of the AND Ryzen processors.

If it would and if our version of VNC would work with a Linux VNC Server and not just give a grey window I might end up with the best of both worlds - OS/2 for work and Linux for browser on the same screen.

Rich Walsh

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 13
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • ONU! (OS/2 is NOT Unix!)
    • View Profile
Re: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2020, 06:54:34 am »
I do have the physical desk real estate to actually put such a behemoth of a display up, which means, maybe I should?

Don't - it promises to be an ergonomic nightmare. Displays like this are meant to be used as true "monitors": screens that you refer to but don't actually work with. Here's why:

Normally, a display is positioned so you are looking at a point about a third down the screen. This allows you to see the top 2/3rds with eye movement and the bottom 1/3rd by bending your neck down slightly. Now, look at where the top of the Ilyama is in relationship to the top of the conventional monitors. Your direct line of sight is about half-way down. Given its size, eye movement only covers perhaps 1/2 the screen. This means you have to lean your head back to work with the top 1/4. Try having your neck bent backward for more than a minute or two - you will *not* be happy.

Andi B.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 24
  • Posts: 517
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?
« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2020, 01:00:59 pm »
Quote
Don't - it promises to be an ergonomic nightmare.
Don't think all people are equal and don't forget others may work in a different way than you expect or can imagine.

It's correct that you don't put the focus of your work on the top or bottom boarder when you sit close to such monitor. But as said, one such thing is better than having two 24" displays side by side (same H resolution and nearly same H size). I know there are people who work on small notebook displays. But there are also people like me who need 3 or 4 conventional displays to do their work. Some people constantly switching windows or scroll around. I prefer rolling with my chair now and then. I also have no problem to move my head up and down or from one side to the other. Which is by the way much more healthy (and ergonomic) than staring on a small display for a long time.

People like me who do a lot of things in parallel need a lot of display (or desk) space. I know some others work differently which is not wrong too. But especially people who do programing will quite fast enjoy when they do not only see 50 lines of code at once but 90. Of course the focus of you work is not at the very top or very bottom of the screen. But it's cool to see this portions sometimes without scrolling. The same is true when you make layouts for electronics. Everyone who have done such work knows you have to zoom very often. Of course even with a bigger monitor most of the time you work near the center line of the screen. But it's enormous helpful to see where all these traces run to the other components and have the big picture of the whole circuit board while working on the detail a the center.

Another thing I enjoy is placing some things running in the background to the edges. F.i. the firewall or memory logs or the email client don't need my attention very often. But if something happens there, it's on my workspace. I recognize it even when I'm focused on another part of the display. Our eyes and brain recognizes very much outside the small focus point. Btw. something the consumer industry and the experts in that field learned long ago. Most people enjoy big TVs or a big cinema screen more than small one even if we know for sure that our eyes can't focus on all edges at the same time.

Again, people work different and so are their needs. In fact before I bought this display I spend a lot of time thinking about the pro and cons. In the end the decision was easy. Buying two 24" instead one 42.5"? Costs are nearly the same, H resolution and size too. But the additional size in vertical direction makes a big difference. And there is no gap at 1920 H pixel anymore. Personally I would buy the 42.5" again if I could get it at the same price. But it is true, the most top and the most bottom of the display I use only for not very important things which don't need regular attention. To use the full vertical size you would need more distance than usual. But that's not how I like to work.

Doug Clark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 20
  • Posts: 208
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Someone tried OS/2 with 3840x2160 Display?
« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2020, 07:17:46 pm »
Dariusz,

Could you please hook up the Samsung S32D850T and see what resolutions the ATI X850 XT will drive though SNAP?

I am currently running two 1920x1080 monitors as a dual-head setup and am looking for more vertical resolution - say 1920x1440.
So if SNAP and the ATI x850 XT would drive the samsung at 1920x1440 that would be perfect for me.