Someone:
html, body { max-width: 640px !important; }Reminds me of what the official Instagram client looked like on iPad, a lot of margins, and a bit of that 640px wide feed (or whatever the actual width was)
Don't know if it's still the same
Looks like nothing has changed. This is how it opens up on 4k screen. Although, it looks like they tweaked it a little. Up until recently I remember opening a post would show a hilariously small like 800 by 600-something box, half of which was comment section that'd fit like 5 comments at best. But now they finally made it properly scalable.
The only reason I have an extension for custom css is this bullshit on far to many pages and I only have a normal Ultrawide
And then you have that one guy that rotates his monitor using this.
I'm only 65 inches tall. I would want to make some sort of crazy mirror room with them.
Ew, Linus
I don't understand how this guy has an audience. I saw one video that was alright where he cleaned a water-cooling system. The rest were like, "look at all this garbage we bought on Aliexpress lol," and I bounce after several seconds.
He's got a lot of charisma. And his videos frequently give that "people doing something they should have prepared more for but pushing through anyways" entertainment where you can laugh at how they put effort into creating an illusion of professionalism but left enough gaps to make it clear it was just an illusion and he's in way over his head, but somehow still manages to keep it going.
It's a weird spot where I like the guy and want to see him succeed but also don't think he deserves that success and want to see him fail.
Though I don't really spend much time watching hardware enthusiast videos in general, so I probably won't see either of those unless it goes viral like his last shitshow did.
Canadian Marshall Mathers's kid brother looking ass.
I have 2 24" displays side by side. At some point I unified the desktops (or Spaces if you're on Linux) to make it act "as if" it was a single ultra wide monitor. This was absolutely awful to use, especially during Google meetings where I had to share my screen.
Besides, I like being able to rotate 90° one of my screen because sometimes it's just the best way to work.
This thing is stupid. Appealing maybe, but stupid.
It's not meant for regular use, it's digital signage
I like being able to rotate 90° one of my screen because sometimes it's just the best way to work.
PL setups are the best.
PL setups are the best.
Yes
if you use a tiling wm/compositor or extension, big screens aren't so bad, because it will usually split first in the middle, basically giving you two screens, but with the option to also maximize over the whole area, if needed.
I gotchu guys. My design has a max width.
Looks like 86" to play Untitled Goose Game.
The game with the least reason to play widescreen.
The best game for it! Widescreen honking at its finest! Really feel you are in that village, being chased by a horrible goose!
Honk honk honk honk!
Christ, they can't handle 1920W. Everything is a phone now apparently.
Obligatory fuck Linus
Nvidia spotted. Launching "Nvidia, fuck you!" strike
So at what point does a VR headset end up actually being cheaper than your specialty odd-size curved monitor?
max-w-[1200px], take it or leave it
What would even be the design solution without massive empty space? Add a lot of columns? Make the long content horizontal instead of vertical?
I think for most web apps it doesn't make sense to allow the width to get so wide, except when the content being displayed is a columnar list and even then it's a pretty marginal benefit.
What I've done is limit the max-width to some amount of px/chars and allowed the remaining space be empty, with an exception for when displaying tables. Even with tables, the bigger width is only beneficial if either the contents of the columns are large enough, or there are very many columns to show. The solution in my mind is limiting the column widths to the longest content.
You could go columns for the content, but I think my ideal layout would still have the main content in a single column. I would put all of the chrome horizontally through. For example no header before and footer afterwards, put everything in different columns. Maybe even throw some extra navigation on the screen.
You don't need to use every pixel, just avoid putting things offscreen unnecessarily.
This seems really cool for tiling windows managers (even Windows has tiling options, although I'm not familiar with those). That being said, I still prefer a multimonitor setup on my tiling WM of choice.
You need to turn your head to read the line number.
Besides, your lines shouldn't be longer than 80 characters anyway
Well, as the picture says, with this bad boy you can use 86 characters per line.
80 characters
Two hours and no-one's challenged this? People must be asleep.
(This is not that challenge. Only pointing out that someone usually has by now.)
Something something… pep8… something… 79… darkside…
Eh, depends on the language and the context. I still use 80 for C, but I've found 120 to be a much more reasonable number for Java.
Java devs gotta be able to read the whole name of their WidgetFactoryBuilderRepositoryConstructorFactoryRepositoryBuilderFactoryRepositoryManagerBuilderFactoryRepositoryFactoryFactoryFactoryBuilderFactory
What the heck, is this real?
Yes. It's a commercial signage display, not intended for desktop use.
Oh thanks. That makes (more) sense now!
No
will be able to read motherfuckin' websites really well
I'm pretty judgemental of people who use more than one screen. Do you not have hotkeys to jump between bookmarked parts of your buffers? Is momentarily splitting a screen between two programs so difficult? Does Alt-Tab simply not exist in your universe?
The judgement continues.
What? Are you an actual developer.
It’s pure insanity to work like you suggested. Sure it can be done, I used to work on a Mac and had no monitors but it wastes time switching between displays.
I’ll work with 2-3 monitors.
If it two then I’ll have my IDE on one and if I’m working on UI then I have the application open on the other. That way I change some CSS, save and glance left to see how it looks now. If I’m not doing UI work and I’m working on the server then my other monitor is used for the spec document, SQL server management and just web browsing.
On a three monitor setup then the third one would be where I would keep my email client open with teams.
I am literally at a loss for words with your weird take.
On Linux, using AwesomeWM bindings:
- Caps+E, pull up emacs
- Caps+D, pull up IDE
- Caps+Q, pull up browser (repeated calls pull up different windows)
- Caps+Y, pull up terminal
- Caps+Down, split the last two called windows side by side
- Caps+Down, undo the split
- Caps+Up, maximize the current window
I have many more bindings, but these are the main ones and probably the only one's I will ever need
If I need to do something concurrently I will split my focus between two tasks and no more.
If I need to edit a UI with code, I do Caps+E, do my edit, then Caps+D and refresh the UI.
I'm literally a finger away from everything, and my head does not need to move from center.
You may find the need for 3 different aspect ratios, just to be sure you're doing the whole user interface thing right. Judge if you like but here I still need to have multiple workspaces and stacked windows, so clearly the extra retail space works. Or its obnoxious and I'm merely coping.
Also fuck games that still dont work with alt tab in this day and age
I'm an architect. It's nice having the project I'm actively working on always active on one screen, with design sketches, marked up revisions, email with comments from client, renderer etc. active on the other. Sure it only saves a second not having to tab back and forth, but if you're doing it non stop all day it makes a big difference. Also just less effort.
I guess I can see for more UI oriented stuff how it can be useful to have on persistent graphic window
Just because you can work with one monitor doesn't mean multiple monitors isn't more comfortable though. You can have multiple windows open at once, at full size, and glance between them freely. No need for them to share the limited real estate of a single monitor.
I run Sway on my laptop because it lets me take full advantage of my single monitor, but on my multi monitor desktop setup I use a regular floating DE.
That's because you don't do anything productive on your computer. Two screens is a must.
-
A glance to the side is much faster and easier than pressing physical buttons
-
You can see stuff with your peripheral vision. With alt-tab, you don't see if anything is happening at all
-
Alt-tab is linear, screens are 2d
-
You can't tile absolutely everything unless your screen is huge and has very high resolution, at which point it turns into rich people's version of multi-monitor setup, since a bunch smaller screens are much cheaper than single big one
-
Alt-tab list changes constantly. But some apps are likely to be constantly there, you can throw them on separate screens and unclutter the main one by doing so
Alt-tab was my very last use-case because I literally have bindings to pull up my main programs.
As someone who has gone from tiling(i3), to floating (stump), to tiling again (i3/sway), and finally back to floating (awesome) - I can say floating wins in terms of predictability. You press a button to focus on your desired window and your entire desktop does not need to convulse to accommodate for it.
Floating window managers win on speed and predictability, and I'm wondering now if this is causing the rift in single/multi monitors in this discussion chain.
-
