Why don't they make more square monitors?

for drawing then also i presume
neat

Where can I find a vertical monitor to tate muh shmups? It's fuckin impossible.

On your fucking desk
Turn it 90 degrees

Sorry. Didn't realize I was arguing with a reddit grad who has a degree in armchair econ.

it really bothers me they didn't make the web browser full screen here

I miss them desu

Because TV rules the world, and computers are just an afterthought.

Same reason they started making wireless shit which someone in front of a computer couldn't care any less for.

Use it to display 2 desktops instead of having 2 separate monitors.

To use all sorts of ultra cool wallpapers that are only properly rendered as a square.

Earth is approximately an ellipsoid, not a sphere.
There is just enough space for the window decoration.

Genius
2:1 > 16:9

Leave the leftover as a border between screens.

People are designed to see on the horizontal plane. Vertical is secondary. 16:9 is the standard for more than just companies pushing it on us, it just feels better to look at a wide screen. 21:9 may become the new standard as the market is testing it out.
TL:DR, people like looking side to side, not up and down.

>21:9 may become the new standard as the market is testing it out.
I hope not.

These square monitors just remind me of dysfunctional and underfunded offices/health/community services.

>People are designed
Stop.
Stop.
Stop.

We have two eyes and a field of view wider than it is tall. Right ?

You know exactly what he means my semantically-triggered friend.

What's going on. I don't get it.

Because we love movies and TV series.

We reddit now

Absolutely pointless. All that unused horizontal space.

The only true ratio is A4.
>Best for designer
>Split screen keep the same ratio
>PDF

The top screen in English.
The bottom in Spanish.

>BUILD A WALL

Tipped.

DUBS

manufacturers make things for consumers. all consumers want to do is watch wide format movies and play vidya.

if you're a professional you're shit out of luck.

what is he doing with those rectangles??

well that would be great, if only computers had no UI elements to display

I think he's trying to show the length and height are the same

filmmaker fag here

What I want is more anamorphic ratio monitors

>get triggered by muh ID
Wew lad

Can you develop your argument?I don't see the point for a private company to sell a product at loss.

You just posted one though

it's more profitable to cater to the mediatard market and let all the other niches deal with it

>actual cinema aspect ratio
>actually competent for multitasking
>practically a bezel-free dual 5:4 setup
Why would you not want this over a limp dick like 16:9?

I'd rather just have dual 5:4 monitors with a 16:10 monitor for media

>tfw you'd have even more screen space if it was 16:9
1:1 is the worst ratio, smalles screens

So would I but 5:4 isn't coming back no matter how badly we want it, I would rather take the next best option, any things better than 16:9/16:10 trash.

Why the fuck is it so expensive?

a 16:9 display occupying the same width footprint would be literally around half the size

>24" 16:9 screen area = 244.53sq"
>24" 1:1 screen area = 288sq"

5:4 never went anywhere, it's just not available in the consumer market anymore. I want a 2560x2048 monitor so fucking badly.

But if it had the same height it would be about twice the size

and as a result would cost more money

16:9 would probably be even cheaper since it's a mass manufactured standard, unlike 1:1 which probably has way less supply

Monitor in OP's image is £900+?????????

>120,000.00 JPY = 1,192.73 USD
Dunno

I like the wallpaper.

true, its also a poor aspect ratio for many tasks, this one aspect ratio for all shit is bollocks.

see scale of production

>the moment you realize why it's 16:9 and not something closer to a golden ratio

that's a really retarded way to do it

And yet designers still insist on sticking their UI elements to the bottom/top of the screen and not the sides.

Historical reasons, etc, analogue transmission limitations in the hardware causing locked resolution ratios. With DVI/HDMI there is no reason anymore to keep this limit, but graphics cards still do it for VGA and textmode compatibility.

Is Cred Forums retarded?

>The only true ratio is A4
That's like saying the only true ratio is 24" 16:10

Probably because our vision is wider than it is tall.

Where can we get the wallpaper?

24" 16:10 is the only true ratio.

I'd be interested in knowing the normal aspect ratio of human vision. If you assume eyes are perfectly round you might assume it is 2:1, but the ends of your peripheral vision aren't exactly useful.

Perhaps 16:10 really is perfection, not that it is much different than 16:9.

artist is named okada. can't find the original. seems like it was a commissioned work so EIZO probably holds some exclusive rights to it.

>screens are sold by their diagonal length
>the diagonal/area is minimal for square monitors

It wouldn't be 2:1 because your eyes share area on the inside of the view

Good point. I clearly didn't think that through.

1:1 will give you the most area of any aspect ratio given the same diagonal measurement.

Yes, and the least diagonal given the same area. It's therefore bad for manufacturers because they advertise the diagonal length, which is the same despite having higher production costs.

I imagine each one represents a conventional screen.

Doesn't this negatively impact the tensile strength of the monitor? I always assumed that was the reason monitors are wider than they are tall.

No. The reason why monitors are wider than they are tall is that the human field of vision is about twice as wide as it is tall.

cos they don't fit anywhere
the universe is rectangular

cos 35mm film is rectangular

this fits better on a rectangular screen

if you had a square monitor you would either crop or have black bars, top & bottom (wasted screen space)

accept the rectangle

Won't VR make screen size moot over the next fifteen years?

yes, moot will be a hologram

The orientation you posted is that of photographic 35mm film.

Film used for movies is rotated the other way round. + it's usually squashed horizontally with anamorphic lenses for wide screen projection.

4:3 displays are still manufactured, but mostly for workplaces. e.g. You might see 4:3 touchscreen displays at the check-out in grocery stores.

Speaking of EIZO, second hand eizo screens on eBay, yea or nay?

thnks for info - didn't know what anamorphic was .. have read up on wikipedia

Who gives a shit if it's bad for the manufacturer? I'm not a fucking display manufacturer, are you?

The useful vision is a pretty narrow band.

Everything else is for detection of moving objects.

I agree we need more square monitors!

this fits better on a rectangular screen with more height than width, if you had a rectangular monitor you would either have to crop it or have black bars, left and right (wasted screen space), though a square panel would waste less space on average than either a longer or a wider display

accept the square

This is the only real answer. Also gaming.

Because I'm judging everyone

What the fuck is he doing with the sheets in the screen?

is 1600x1200 bad for playing dota?

Don't see how it would fit better on a 1:1 than on a vertical 16:9

because your eyes are stacked sideways not on top of one another. alien fuck.

If the monitors were all vr goggles you'd be right.

most companies dont shell out extra for rotating displays

>not having a monitor arm/stand

blue board, asswipe

How about using a tape measure?

it's a comic

Furry things belong in the containment board. Also, there is a penis in that comic.

I bet you are one of these people that thinks that also pepe the frog is evil, when in fact, he's just saten

dumb frogposter

No, but I'm also not scared of dumb frogs

I actually replied to the wrong post, but you raise a valid inquiry friend.

blame the shitty phonefaggots and their culture for that. They're carrying on the trend of top bars that follow you when you scroll, like AskToolbar except you can't uninstall...its built right into the website! Don't get me started on infinite scroll or those stupid three lines/dots. Phones stunted the growth of technology. Theyre not even used as phones anymore!

youd need to rotate your pixels too, buddy

Yeah, I hate it when I tilt my head to the side and the display becomes unusable.

Irrelevant.

thats also something he does

A4 has nothing to do with the golden ratio
21/13 ~= 1.6
sqrt(2) ~ = 1.4
16/9 ~= 1.78
Each ratio has its own reason behind it

your guys' shitposting is way worse than a drawn dick which you cant even see unless you click and scroll all the way down on that autistic image

tldr, hang yourselves m8s

also, while human stereoscopic view is wider than it is tall, you're eyes are focused on the same target, its not like they cover more ground by focusing on two different things at the same time. the view is almost spherical, with more peripheral blurryness on the left and right, and eyelash light diffraction on the top and bottom. Though it is definitely wider than tall.

Imo, screens should be square. Its not like they cover your entire vision to warrant the "humanlike widescreen"

Sauce on BG pic yet?

I wish I could justify the cost of this.
>literally no 1:1 IPS monitor on the market besides this
Damn shame. Gamer-kiddie demographics have ruined desktop workspace.

kys

meme resolution.

Man, I'd love to have a rectangle monitor, but those fuckers are unreasonably expensive.

You already have a rectangular monitor. What you want is a square monitor, which is also rectangular.

Are they good enough for shitposting?

Peripheral vision is irrelevant for viewing content on a screen. It's useful in nature to detect shit like predators, but you'll have to focus on it specifically either way.

You know perfectly well that I fucked up and meant square.

>Not buying a Dell

The total field is extremely wide. I can lie down on the ground facing up and see the ground on both sides. However, if you look at the fovea, which is the are in the center of the eye with the highest resolution, and area of stereopsis where the eyes over lap are both very nearly circles.

cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

1:1 angle A = 45°

16:10 angle A = 32°

Oh i didn't see the artist's signature. Thanks user!

because anime is retarded