[seanmcdirmid]

A 4K 39" TV has less resolution than a 4K 24" monitor. Just do the math!

This isn't about real estate; it is easy to buy a big monitor, but about pixel density.

[prutschman]

Your point about the importance of pixel density is a good one, but the pedantry is misplaced. Resolution in the context of display resolution has referred to pixel count, not pixel density, for decades.

[seanmcdirmid]

Yes, that was a mistake on my part. I meant to just talk about pixel density and somehow wrote in resolution.

[lelandbatey]

Well, a 4k 39" TV still has about a 12% higher pixel density than the 1920x1200 24 inch monitor I'm using right now.

Additionally, you can take that extra size and just sit a little bit further away from it.

[seanmcdirmid]

That isn't going to work in my cubicle, or any kind of coding situation, really.

[eropple]

I used to use 2x30" very comfortably for coding, I don't think this is that tough.

[seanmcdirmid]

I tried two 24 inches once, my neck got sore for a week. My cubicle is simply too small for it to work well.

[eropple]

Ah, yeah, I WFH in a home office with a standing desk. Right now I'm using 3x1080p + my rMBP panel and I find it pretty solid.

[kenrikm]

I have a Seiki 39in that I use as a second monitor for my rMBP - the PPI (110) is the same as the Apple 27in Thunderbolt and they have roughly the same picture quality once you calibrate the Seiki. 39 Inches of uninterrupted space is awesome the only downside I've noticed is some mouse lag under OSX which can be fixed with some quartz settings that then cause screen tearing, I've read it's not present under windows so maybe it's something that can be worked out with a software fix.

[jfb]

Exactly: the most interesting thing here isn't the 4k, but rather the 183.5ppi.