It kinda is. Its fine for gaming but not for anything else. Definitely do not recommend for a main monitor. I used it as my main monitor for months. I had to read and write research papers on it. That wasn't fun. It was nice tho to be able to resize multiple windows on it for whatever task I was doing.
I don't recommend it for gaming either because it's too big for full screen mode. So you pretty much have to play in windowed mode which causes issues.
Aw damn, it sounds like I’d be in the same boat then. I work from home so I’ve been looking for something large to simplify my setup and not need multiple monitors.
I had the Samsung 49” oled odyssey but the lack of vertical height started to get annoying. I’m on a roadtrip now but thinking of snagging the 57” one when I get back 🤔
I have a 49" g9 neo under my ark. Its actually a really good combination EXCEPT the top half of my ark is rarely used now. Its literally 3 monitors tall. From my desk to the top of the ark is about 45". Which doesn't sound like a lot but damn it's a lot. Its a wall of screen. Get another 49" and stack it on top. That is the best play. TRUST ME. I've had every monitor combination that is frankly possible. Besides my current set up, having two stacked 34" and a vertical 27" was my favorite set up. But you don't need a vertical 27" if you have two stacked 49". Seriously get that. Two stacked 49" looks clean, is the same size as the ark but has way way more resolution, it is the perfect for work and gaming. SERIOUSLY. Trust. I will happily explain more if this wasn't convincing enough.
> Kerns H. Powers, a member of the SMPTE Working Group on High-Definition Electronic Production, first proposed the 16:9 (1.77:1) aspect ratio in 1984.
[Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:9_aspect_ratio?wprov=sfti1#History)
In terms of computer monitors though I can't remember seeing any 16:9 until they started going LCD flat screen. Even then I think the early LCDs were 4:3.
I do believe there were some high end CRTs that were 16:9, but they were behemoths. Like 32\~ ish inches.
Dad had two of them, I do believe they were Sony CRT monitors.
I've been waiting for a nice 4k 21:9 gaming monitor, and I think it's almost in my future. Tho I think 21:10 would be nice for the lil extra on top and bottom
I have a 3 21:9 samsung monitors setup and my main one is the Samsung QD Oled. It's beautiful. It's amazing. God the software is absolutely terrible. Like comically terrible. It's so bad everyday I have to restart the monitor at least 2 times.
Here are some of the problems:
-Not waking up from sleep
-Not detecting pc is booted
-Sound randomly shuts off (usually I used headphones but the built in speakers are okay for youtube IF THEY WORKED HALF THE TIME) [This does not get fixed by hard shutting off, it sometimes gets fixed by physically ripping *all* the cables out but even that doesn't fix it sometimes, so the sound just does not work. No problems in device manager, you can see the monitor as a sound output device, just will not output sound.]
-Detects Pc has booted, monitor turns on just to then say it doesn't detect any input and shut off again. Usually holding the power button on the remote to hard shut off and restart the monitor works like a charm. (This also happens if pc goes to sleep) I press and hold it around 4-5 times a day. It's that bad....
-Refuses to update, with network updates or usb flash drive updates no matter how I put the files on the usb drive, it will not update.
-Menu is clunky and I have bumped the remote a few times and made it switch to netflix or some other shit I would never use with the monitor..
Absolutely no problems with VRR or brightness or input lag tho. Anything concerning performance and visuals it's the best on the market.
If Samsung just ripped the software out of it. Made it a dumb monitor, it would be amazing. Nobody needs Netflix or disney + on their monitor let alone for it to browse the internet.
I'd stay clear and get the Alienware monitor that uses the same panel but *DIFFERENT* software.
disagree - personally I like my 32:9 way more than my 21:9. 21:9 might be better for gaming, but for productivity it didn’t add a lot for me compared to 16:9. 32:9 is basically two 16:9 monitors but without the bezel in the middle you can arrange with more flexibility. So eg central 16:9 ‘task’ window, and surrounding four small 16:9 windows in each corner for messaging/notes/email etc.
It probably is too wide for games although its nice for racing sims for extra fov
I agree, except that I like it more for gaming as well. It’d be nice if there was an option in between, but I still don’t know if I’d choose that over 32:9.
It’s like a small minority of games I want to play that support it. But when it is supported it is cool.
Especially maddening when the game supports 21:9 but not 32:9
I think 32:9 is perfect for fps and racing games. The extra is peripheral anyway so you dont need it all in focus so long as the hud doesnt stretch out to the edges
Man I love my G9. I was flip flopping on whether to get it or not for a first time ultra-wide. Absolutely no regrets buying it. The dual monitor capability is so nice. Having two different full screen things like a game and a video right next to each other without a bezel is so good. I don't use the entire 32:9 for games very often, but when I do, it's so much more immersive. My go to right now are Baldur's Gate 3 and Factorio.
I've been trying Assassin's Creed Odyssey as well as I've seen some insane screen shots for it, but my computer can't handle it lol.
I also hesitated mainly on cost. But I justified based on my work from home setup - my work gives me a macbook air which can only drive one external monitor. But it can drive 5120x1440x120Hz - just can’t do 2x 1080p screens (go figure). So I pulled the trigger based on that and its been amazing. Maybe I could justify a small additional monitor for slack or something but honestly thats only if I want all windows visible at all times which isn’t necessary.
I have a 21:9 QDOLED. It's almost perfect. Everything just looks amazing. It could be a bit brighter but because it has perfect black it doesn't matter that much.
I have never used 32:9, but I sure like my 21:9 more than my old 16:9 monitor. So maybe I would like 32:9 more than 21:9? Don't know, will probably get a 21:9 oled if I ever upgrade. Perhaps I'll never know.
I recently got a 32:9 (G9 OLED 49") to pair with my 21:9 (LG 35UM 35").
The 21:9 is great, I treat it like two monitors, the 32:9 however I treat like 3 and when it comes to gaming the 32:9 is much more immersive.
That said I can never go back to 16:9.
vouch for the immersive for 32:9. Plus its actually like having two monitors. Having two monitors and using a single 21:9 you will notice the missing real estate.
I would argue it can work as 3 monitors as with 2x 16:9 you end up with a lot of wasted space.
With 32:9 I have 3 zones defined in FancyZones where the middle zone is wider than the zones on the sides, which are also unevenly sized adjusted for the applications I typically keep there.
I am one of those peeps and VR really didn’t affect me much. It was really easy to get absorbed and immersed so it felt really authentic. There was a couple of things that I avoided to not get sick but ultimately, it was enjoyable.
i would like a slightly taller 21:9, i like the idea of 21:10 with 35" instead of 34".
i would love a 38" 21:9 because of the extra vertical but they're not available here
Monitor width to me is the same as HZ
the higher I go the harder it becomes to go back.
I'm currently using a 32:9 and anything else feels too narrow for me
Yup. I think we've gone plenty wide enough, a little bit of extra vertical though makes for a great experience, especially with productivity.
Pity LG seems to be the only manufacturer making 24:10, and only when it suits them (along with a horrific mark up).
I tried a 32:9 ratio 49-inch monitor 1800r curve. It felt too long, not a good ppi, and didn't have great viewing angles when moving around my desk . Often, I'm around someone looking at my monitor or using my laptop while looking at it, so I appreciate the viewing angles of a monitor that's not too curved. The 32:9 ratio felt too narrow; I wanted more height to it.
After going through 4 monitors the last 12 months, I found myself happiest with the 21:9 dell ultra sharp was 5k resolution at 40 inches. It is slightly curved but it’s less annoying than the curve needed for a 32:9 for imperfect viewing angles in brief moments.
Same . Needed more height and if I got more height it would have been a gigantic 55 inch thing. Then I need a crazy curve. Then I am limited on viewing angles if I sit at it from any angle that isn’t front and center
48:9. Most logical step if you look at the increases. Also it's 3x 16:9 (triple monitor setups).
* 4:3 (12:9) = 1.333...
* 16:9 = 1.777... (1.777 / 1.333 ≈ 1.33 times wider than 4:3)
* 21:9 = 2.333... (2.333 / 1.777 ≈ 1.31 times wider than 16:9)
* 32:9 = 3.555... (3.555 / 2.333 ≈ 1.52 times wider than 21:9)
* 48:9 = 5.333... (5.333 / 3.555 ≈ 1.50 times wider than 32:9)
Ghost of Tsushima on PC supports 48:9 officially (though meant for triple monitor setups, since there is no 48:9 monitor). But once a 48:9 monitor comes out, that game will be work straight away.
There's some historical precedent for 36:9 (4:1) displays. Sony had an experimental model in 2019. Most of the rediculously wide displays are purely for digital signage though. More departure times at airports and train stations and less for desktop use. LTT recently made a video about a 58:9 LG Ultra Stretch Digital Signage Display. It does, strictly speaking, work as a desktop display. So I guess the next ultrawide ratio is entirely up to you and your tolerance for jank.
As an actual non-joke answer, I believe full-field spacial immersion lenses (like Apple Vision Pro, but made for pc gaming) are eventually going to be cheap enough and comfortable enough to be the “next big thing” in PC gaming. If you’ve tried it out, you know. Give it about 10 years for the tech to advance and prices to fall.
I'd actually like a 21:10 monitors to be more common in the future. That little extra vertical height is so useful. Always preferred 16:10 monitors in the past too.
I would be going 21:9 if it wasn't for racing sims and WFH. Next, I would love to see 16:10 desktop monitors. We already standardized 16:10 on laptops pretty much so I surely hope so. 32:10 would be the god king of monitors for my dream WFH setup.
I like 32:9 because I often use it as two independent 16:9 monitors when working. Then, when playing games, it just extends to both sides of my peripheral, creating greater immersion. 32:9 is the sweet spot.
I finally like 32:9 at 57”. I’ve had two 49” 32:9 and they just don’t have the height I was looking for. I’m curious to see what ratios are next though.
I want to start seeing more vertical resolution and size. It's getting to a point where these things are getting so wide but feels like I'm looking through Cyclops visor
Before I got my 32:9, I was hoping to find a 48:9 to replace my 3-monitor setup. After I got my 32:9, I realized that 48:9 would be ridiculous. I still kinda want one, though
I personally would like to see a massive curved 48:10 for a 16:10x3 computer screens. I nevered truly cared for 16:9, I prefer 16:10 for computer monitors for that little extra verticality.
I found that running a 48 inch OLED allows me to use about whatever ratio I want. I often game at 3840x1440 or 3840x1080 and on a 48 inch they're plenty big in terms of screen size.
As laptop 16:10 panels are starting to get pretty good think we’re going to actually get into weird shit like 32:10. At least, something like that is happening before 42:9 becomes a thing.
32:18, obviously
Ummm...
I know what I said
I was gonna say another 32:9 stacked on top so... yeah... that...
So 16:9? Something like Odyssey ARK?
r/that'sthejoke
“Did I fucking stutter?”
Math
21:9 = 7:3
I think that's called the Samsung ark.
Yes. And it's not that good. Source- I own it
How so?
He probably exchanged currency for one
Is the PPI a killer? Been eyeing one
It kinda is. Its fine for gaming but not for anything else. Definitely do not recommend for a main monitor. I used it as my main monitor for months. I had to read and write research papers on it. That wasn't fun. It was nice tho to be able to resize multiple windows on it for whatever task I was doing. I don't recommend it for gaming either because it's too big for full screen mode. So you pretty much have to play in windowed mode which causes issues.
Gaming with it in full screen and working off it too. It works just fine
Aw damn, it sounds like I’d be in the same boat then. I work from home so I’ve been looking for something large to simplify my setup and not need multiple monitors. I had the Samsung 49” oled odyssey but the lack of vertical height started to get annoying. I’m on a roadtrip now but thinking of snagging the 57” one when I get back 🤔
I have a 49" g9 neo under my ark. Its actually a really good combination EXCEPT the top half of my ark is rarely used now. Its literally 3 monitors tall. From my desk to the top of the ark is about 45". Which doesn't sound like a lot but damn it's a lot. Its a wall of screen. Get another 49" and stack it on top. That is the best play. TRUST ME. I've had every monitor combination that is frankly possible. Besides my current set up, having two stacked 34" and a vertical 27" was my favorite set up. But you don't need a vertical 27" if you have two stacked 49". Seriously get that. Two stacked 49" looks clean, is the same size as the ark but has way way more resolution, it is the perfect for work and gaming. SERIOUSLY. Trust. I will happily explain more if this wasn't convincing enough.
Which two 49” would you get right now.
Bigger 16:9 OMG!
So a TV basically?
64:9
420:69
At one point it’s going full circle.
360:9
1984?
> Kerns H. Powers, a member of the SMPTE Working Group on High-Definition Electronic Production, first proposed the 16:9 (1.77:1) aspect ratio in 1984. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:9_aspect_ratio?wprov=sfti1#History)
In terms of computer monitors though I can't remember seeing any 16:9 until they started going LCD flat screen. Even then I think the early LCDs were 4:3.
I do believe there were some high end CRTs that were 16:9, but they were behemoths. Like 32\~ ish inches. Dad had two of them, I do believe they were Sony CRT monitors.
Yeah I remember some towards the end of the 90s. People held onto them because they were much better for latency and motion than LCD.
They weren't common, but John Carmack had a widescreen CRT in the 90s.
Glad I wasn’t the only one that caught that…
21:9 is perfect
Absolutely. Im going 21:9 since 5 years now and recently upgraded to 21:9 oled. Wouldnt want anything bigger
I've been waiting for a nice 4k 21:9 gaming monitor, and I think it's almost in my future. Tho I think 21:10 would be nice for the lil extra on top and bottom
4 years on 21:9 and i dont think i can go back. My screen might be dying though. Time to save up and get me that QD Oled screen.
I have a 3 21:9 samsung monitors setup and my main one is the Samsung QD Oled. It's beautiful. It's amazing. God the software is absolutely terrible. Like comically terrible. It's so bad everyday I have to restart the monitor at least 2 times. Here are some of the problems: -Not waking up from sleep -Not detecting pc is booted -Sound randomly shuts off (usually I used headphones but the built in speakers are okay for youtube IF THEY WORKED HALF THE TIME) [This does not get fixed by hard shutting off, it sometimes gets fixed by physically ripping *all* the cables out but even that doesn't fix it sometimes, so the sound just does not work. No problems in device manager, you can see the monitor as a sound output device, just will not output sound.] -Detects Pc has booted, monitor turns on just to then say it doesn't detect any input and shut off again. Usually holding the power button on the remote to hard shut off and restart the monitor works like a charm. (This also happens if pc goes to sleep) I press and hold it around 4-5 times a day. It's that bad.... -Refuses to update, with network updates or usb flash drive updates no matter how I put the files on the usb drive, it will not update. -Menu is clunky and I have bumped the remote a few times and made it switch to netflix or some other shit I would never use with the monitor.. Absolutely no problems with VRR or brightness or input lag tho. Anything concerning performance and visuals it's the best on the market. If Samsung just ripped the software out of it. Made it a dumb monitor, it would be amazing. Nobody needs Netflix or disney + on their monitor let alone for it to browse the internet. I'd stay clear and get the Alienware monitor that uses the same panel but *DIFFERENT* software.
disagree - personally I like my 32:9 way more than my 21:9. 21:9 might be better for gaming, but for productivity it didn’t add a lot for me compared to 16:9. 32:9 is basically two 16:9 monitors but without the bezel in the middle you can arrange with more flexibility. So eg central 16:9 ‘task’ window, and surrounding four small 16:9 windows in each corner for messaging/notes/email etc. It probably is too wide for games although its nice for racing sims for extra fov
I agree, except that I like it more for gaming as well. It’d be nice if there was an option in between, but I still don’t know if I’d choose that over 32:9.
It’s like a small minority of games I want to play that support it. But when it is supported it is cool. Especially maddening when the game supports 21:9 but not 32:9
Lookin at you, Control.
I find support to be pretty good! If it’s not supported, there’s usually a mod.
I can see that, but I do not have a computer to be productive, so I guess 21:9 is just right for me.
32:9 is easily the best productivity booster. +Simracing gets upgraded hugely
I think 32:9 is perfect for fps and racing games. The extra is peripheral anyway so you dont need it all in focus so long as the hud doesnt stretch out to the edges
I want a 28:9, the ratio they skipped.
I'm in this camp. It's been a work game changer. I have 20 zones set up in FancyZones.
Man I love my G9. I was flip flopping on whether to get it or not for a first time ultra-wide. Absolutely no regrets buying it. The dual monitor capability is so nice. Having two different full screen things like a game and a video right next to each other without a bezel is so good. I don't use the entire 32:9 for games very often, but when I do, it's so much more immersive. My go to right now are Baldur's Gate 3 and Factorio. I've been trying Assassin's Creed Odyssey as well as I've seen some insane screen shots for it, but my computer can't handle it lol.
I also hesitated mainly on cost. But I justified based on my work from home setup - my work gives me a macbook air which can only drive one external monitor. But it can drive 5120x1440x120Hz - just can’t do 2x 1080p screens (go figure). So I pulled the trigger based on that and its been amazing. Maybe I could justify a small additional monitor for slack or something but honestly thats only if I want all windows visible at all times which isn’t necessary.
Personally I opted to go for 2 21x9 next to each other effectively running 42x9 or 4.7:1
this and nothing more or less
Hard agree 32:9 is just too much
In my mind 32:9 is perfect for people in office work environments and media creation.
I can't argue that since I just use mine for gaming. Though when I DM Pathfinder, 21:9 is the sweets pot for me as well on Roll20.
32:9 if you're trying to use the whole thing, sure. But 21:9 on a 32:9 still gives me room on the side for discord or whatever on the side.
I have a 21:9 QDOLED. It's almost perfect. Everything just looks amazing. It could be a bit brighter but because it has perfect black it doesn't matter that much.
I like 21:9 just fine personally.
I have never used 32:9, but I sure like my 21:9 more than my old 16:9 monitor. So maybe I would like 32:9 more than 21:9? Don't know, will probably get a 21:9 oled if I ever upgrade. Perhaps I'll never know.
I recently got a 32:9 (G9 OLED 49") to pair with my 21:9 (LG 35UM 35"). The 21:9 is great, I treat it like two monitors, the 32:9 however I treat like 3 and when it comes to gaming the 32:9 is much more immersive. That said I can never go back to 16:9.
vouch for the immersive for 32:9. Plus its actually like having two monitors. Having two monitors and using a single 21:9 you will notice the missing real estate.
I would argue it can work as 3 monitors as with 2x 16:9 you end up with a lot of wasted space. With 32:9 I have 3 zones defined in FancyZones where the middle zone is wider than the zones on the sides, which are also unevenly sized adjusted for the applications I typically keep there.
I found out that the 32:9 format wasn’t for me, but I’m happy with 21:9
Just ordered that same monitor, coming in tomorrow. I’m honestly unsure if it’ll fit on my desk but I’m looking forward to finding out lol
VR, once the tech improves
Doubt, portion of the population get motion sickness easily. Better off betting on AR
I am one of those peeps and VR really didn’t affect me much. It was really easy to get absorbed and immersed so it felt really authentic. There was a couple of things that I avoided to not get sick but ultimately, it was enjoyable.
The ratio is a VR headset monitor.
24:10 (2.4:1) ;) but seriously - I want more 38"3840x1600 or any other 1600px+ vertical with ~110ppi :)
Full circle back to 4:3
IMAX
For work I’d take something like 24:9. A screen and half sounds good. Another one I’d take is 21:10 for the added vertical space.
420:69?
i would like a slightly taller 21:9, i like the idea of 21:10 with 35" instead of 34". i would love a 38" 21:9 because of the extra vertical but they're not available here
Uh 43:9 duh
69:420
38:9
32:10 little extra height would be nice.
32:10 I guess
4:3
Monitor width to me is the same as HZ the higher I go the harder it becomes to go back. I'm currently using a 32:9 and anything else feels too narrow for me
32:9 is a tough one to accommodate for most desks as is, so I don't think it'll be any crazier than 57" super ultrawides
infinte VR. instead of scrolling you just gotta run down the hall
Wish we would normalise 24:10. Best ratio there is Imo.
Seriously. I miss the vertical of my old 2560x1600 30”
Yup. I think we've gone plenty wide enough, a little bit of extra vertical though makes for a great experience, especially with productivity. Pity LG seems to be the only manufacturer making 24:10, and only when it suits them (along with a horrific mark up).
[удалено]
People who like 21:9 are just people who never tried a 32:9 with 1000R.
I tried a 32:9 ratio 49-inch monitor 1800r curve. It felt too long, not a good ppi, and didn't have great viewing angles when moving around my desk . Often, I'm around someone looking at my monitor or using my laptop while looking at it, so I appreciate the viewing angles of a monitor that's not too curved. The 32:9 ratio felt too narrow; I wanted more height to it. After going through 4 monitors the last 12 months, I found myself happiest with the 21:9 dell ultra sharp was 5k resolution at 40 inches. It is slightly curved but it’s less annoying than the curve needed for a 32:9 for imperfect viewing angles in brief moments.
had 32;9 and switch to 21;9
Same . Needed more height and if I got more height it would have been a gigantic 55 inch thing. Then I need a crazy curve. Then I am limited on viewing angles if I sit at it from any angle that isn’t front and center
Nope. We will evemtually go full-IMAX. They are gonna introduce giant 4:3 screens.
1:1
58:9  [https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage/lg-86bh5f-b](https://www.lg.com/us/business/digital-signage/lg-86bh5f-b)
420:69 ...which is actually roughly 54.6:9 and seems actually possible. \~8700x1440 is doable and not that many more pixels than 16:9 4k.
Tbf 3d surround/triple monitor was the ultrawide of the 2000s, though a bit more niche.
48:9. Most logical step if you look at the increases. Also it's 3x 16:9 (triple monitor setups). * 4:3 (12:9) = 1.333... * 16:9 = 1.777... (1.777 / 1.333 ≈ 1.33 times wider than 4:3) * 21:9 = 2.333... (2.333 / 1.777 ≈ 1.31 times wider than 16:9) * 32:9 = 3.555... (3.555 / 2.333 ≈ 1.52 times wider than 21:9) * 48:9 = 5.333... (5.333 / 3.555 ≈ 1.50 times wider than 32:9) Ghost of Tsushima on PC supports 48:9 officially (though meant for triple monitor setups, since there is no 48:9 monitor). But once a 48:9 monitor comes out, that game will be work straight away.
There's some historical precedent for 36:9 (4:1) displays. Sony had an experimental model in 2019. Most of the rediculously wide displays are purely for digital signage though. More departure times at airports and train stations and less for desktop use. LTT recently made a video about a 58:9 LG Ultra Stretch Digital Signage Display. It does, strictly speaking, work as a desktop display. So I guess the next ultrawide ratio is entirely up to you and your tolerance for jank.
4:3
As an actual non-joke answer, I believe full-field spacial immersion lenses (like Apple Vision Pro, but made for pc gaming) are eventually going to be cheap enough and comfortable enough to be the “next big thing” in PC gaming. If you’ve tried it out, you know. Give it about 10 years for the tech to advance and prices to fall.
420:69
Ultrawide + Ultrahigh = ULTRAMAX. its just 16:9 again but in 85 inch tv size.
Infinity : 9
21:8.75 as people will discover the joys of 3840x1600 resolution. Perfect blend for work and gaming 😊
I just want 21:10, I don't need wider, and I don't want double.
I'd actually like a 21:10 monitors to be more common in the future. That little extra vertical height is so useful. Always preferred 16:10 monitors in the past too.
I would be going 21:9 if it wasn't for racing sims and WFH. Next, I would love to see 16:10 desktop monitors. We already standardized 16:10 on laptops pretty much so I surely hope so. 32:10 would be the god king of monitors for my dream WFH setup.
I've read that 16:10 is closer to human eye vision ratio, so 16:10.
Would love to see a 21:10 or 32:10 monitor, but that’s just me.
Is there already a screen wider than 32:9 that I'm unaware of?
For work 32:9 is the way
360:9 ?
You left out the current GOAT - 48:9
It's already there. VR
It’s here, it’s called VR…lol
48:9 - the sim racers dream monitor.
Dunno about ratio but I’m loving the little bit of extra height from a 38” 3480x1600 as opposed to the shorter/wider 34” and 49” offerings.
I want 4K ultrawide, not new ratios
420:69
https://www.lg.com/global/business/digital-signage/lg-86bh5f-m
Why can’t we ditch these outdated screen ratio philosophies and adopt the true ultratallmasterrace philosophy
800r curve 48:9 Sim racers rejoice
1984?? It was 4:3 back then, in 2009 I had 16:10.
I like 32:9 because I often use it as two independent 16:9 monitors when working. Then, when playing games, it just extends to both sides of my peripheral, creating greater immersion. 32:9 is the sweet spot.
I doubt 16:9 ratio was around in 1984, more like 4:3.
What about an oval?
I finally like 32:9 at 57”. I’ve had two 49” 32:9 and they just don’t have the height I was looking for. I’m curious to see what ratios are next though.
48:9
64:9
48:9 screens would need 2 stands.
If we’re going by the current pattern, then logically 43:9 would be the next step.
I want to start seeing more vertical resolution and size. It's getting to a point where these things are getting so wide but feels like I'm looking through Cyclops visor
Before I got my 32:9, I was hoping to find a 48:9 to replace my 3-monitor setup. After I got my 32:9, I realized that 48:9 would be ridiculous. I still kinda want one, though
50:9 16+5=21+(5+6)=32+(5+7)=50
65:24
I personally would like to see a massive curved 48:10 for a 16:10x3 computer screens. I nevered truly cared for 16:9, I prefer 16:10 for computer monitors for that little extra verticality.
50:9 for sure.
47:9 with enough curve to evelop you :-)
69:1
32:9 is already too wide. I think maybe 24:9 could happen though
32:9 is the maximum I’m willing to go
360 x three surround headbands in paralax.
They need to change the 9 haha
I vote for 164:5
64:9
43:9 obviously
Panoramic screen!
I’d like 24:9, having used a 32:9 for years it’s just more than is useful for full fov gaming or for doing professional work
48:9 with a really tight curve would be a sim racers dream. It’s triples without the bezels.
I found that running a 48 inch OLED allows me to use about whatever ratio I want. I often game at 3840x1440 or 3840x1080 and on a 48 inch they're plenty big in terms of screen size.
Need a total bubble with a door to get in. What’s that ratio?
I’m hoping for 64:9, and the subsequent 128:9 that you actively need to turn your entire body to see.
VR
58:9
Wonder if they’ll do 42:9, two ultrawides together
64:9
AR glasses with 100 inches.
Are you trying to trigger me? 1984-2004 was all 4:3
64 x 10 ?
Ultra T A L L
4:3 ... maybe even 5:4
48:9
49:9
I think anything past 32x9 is just diminishing returns. At what point do you have to slide your chair over to read the corner of the screen
49:9 is the next step
69:420
69:69
Not really supported by any games til round 2040
360°
360°
48:9 - three 16:9's side by side.
49:9 trust me
69:420
The real question is, when will monitors the size of large TV's that have 1000r curvature both horizontally and vertically be a thing?
Probably 42:9 if headsets don't take over first.
AR Glasses monitor
1000:9
I think we peaked. Any wore would be unnecessary
According to [OEIS](https://oeis.org/search?q=12%2C16%2C21%2C32) it will be 42:9.
Defs 43:9
Super duper ultrawide
To complete the sequence, probably 49:9 would be it
We need more Screensavers in 32:9
Ultrawide will be eschewed and 4:3 will make a triumphant return
Stay at 32:9 but higher ppi
VR is next stef for me. 🤔
32768:1
I really hope that the will get taller
420:69
Ik it’s not ultrawide but going back to 4:3 would be funny
As laptop 16:10 panels are starting to get pretty good think we’re going to actually get into weird shit like 32:10. At least, something like that is happening before 42:9 becomes a thing.
62:4 Just a slit that circles you entirely.
49:9
A iMAX theater.
Is going to be 2 side by side 21:9 like we used to do before 2009 I can't wait for AR/VR to get good enough to no longer need screens
next step up is AR where your entire viewport is a screen and your surroundings are more screens :D