Justify using a screen resolution higher than 1366x768

pardon me

I'm not fully proficient in degenerate animated sexual objects, that I fap to.

there's literally no use-case that 1366x768 isn't enough for

K Chad

where can I go, to worship your level?

Not good for lots of lines of text.

How can I edit 4K images on a 1366x1608 display

Prove it.
the second we strayed from 768p was the second the world went to shit
the world has no need for "4k" meme shit
Also just zoom out nigga

By 768p do you mean 1024x768? Because that's almost the right shape for text, but still not very high resolution. That's still only 85 lines of 9px text.

1024 and 1366 are interchangeable as far as I'm concerned.
Going over that is why the world went to shit.
Just fucking scroll down for more text.

And if I want more lines I should just stack them? One 2048x1536 seems much better than 4 shitty monitors.

scrolling + virtual desktops
again, there's no argument for those retarded resolutions

That's not looking at all of it at once.
Being able to see more information at once is hardly a bad thing.

The microsecond it takes to scroll down is that inconveniencing to you?
You realize there's a limit to how many lines of text we can keep in focus right?

Try using a 24" with 1366x768

yeah, me too

Even 1280x800 is better for excel sheets than 1366x768 is. Those 32 extra pixels make all the difference if you ask me.

>this makes the poorfag REEEE

Attached: 01.png (3840x2017, 2.66M)

Just a scenario I've experienced is referencing text in the same document that is further up while editing the same document. I either continually scroll up and down or have to open the document twice. If my screen was taller and within the limit in terms of locations of the data then a taller screen is more useful.

Using 2 x 1440p monitors right now, development would be less comfy on smaller screens, and any kind of design work is a pain in the arse on a smaller screen. Basically doing any kind of real work is more comfortable at higher resolutions.

Even 1080p monitors are dirt cheap now, if you're too poor to get an entry level 1080 you might as well just neck yourself.

This

But careful user, OP is a deity with a higher level of consciousness. You better switch to HIS preferred resolution or he might sense the dissent.

absolutely no problem
Also computer screens should be, at most, 17"

2001 called, they want their monitor size back

Attached: square destap 2048.png (2048x2048, 3.69M)

Or a satyr.
But neither fauns or satyrs have tails that long.

Justify using a screen resolution lower than 8K.
You literally can't.

Just FYI, satyrs/fauns are actually mythlogical creatures from greek and roman mythology.

ok user, I'll give you that.

lame bait 2/10

Attached: 7PoXt5c.jpg (501x506, 55K)

>less resources used
>makes you work cleaner and smarter
>less harmful impact on society
>less eye strain

too weird

>less harmful impact on society
Blow that out your ass

Now I know you're full of shit

if you don't understand what I'm talking about, it's too late for you

/thread

It looks better

it really doesn't though

>less harmful impact on society
>too late for you
>impact on society
all of my oscillating sides

Attached: 1404203825486.gif (400x206, 1.76M)

A FUCKING RESOLUTION
>less harmful impact on society
gr8 b8 m8 i r8 8/8

The height is what is most important. Something 4:3 or 16:10 that's 1400x1050 or higher (or maybe I could just say at least 1000 pixels of height) is pretty good. It's best to have a bit of a decent resolution for splitting a bunch of panes in tmux and still being able to see stuff in each one, or similarly to tile a bunch of windows.

You can tile just fine in 1366x768

The human eye can't see more than the ppi of 1366x768

VR? The screen door effect is real.

Attached: 1393392895386.png (625x626, 122K)

Fucking commies I swear to god.
Consumerism drives innovation.

>heart shaped butt fur

Attached: 1526478434317.jpg (305x551, 36K)

Just a mythlogical creatures from greek and roman mythology. NOT a animated sexual object to fap to.

Seems legit

Attached: 1431920206351.jpg (562x437, 54K)

Every technological "innovation" that happened after 2004 has made the world a worse place, not a better one.

How tho, have never seen a 1:1 monitor

This and it's damn sad

That's only if you're the sort of sad person who always focuses on the negative side of things.
Technology has enabled large scale datamining but it has also let us land things on Mars.
Nukes can blow up some pretty huge areas but nuclear reactors power the world.

why would I give a shit about landing stuff on mars?
We wouldn't need nuclear power if we didn't have all these useless "innovations" sucking up so much energy either.
Just like we don't need any display resolutions above 1366x768

>Justify using a screen resolution higher than 1366x768
Fonts that don't make your eyes bleed.

>why would I give a shit about landing stuff on mars?
Ahh, you're the sort of idiot who would choose to blow up Area51 in Deus Ex, aren't you?
If you want to live simple lives in mudhuts you can just move to africa, meanwhile I will stay here in the civilized world, powered by nuclear power, with the ability to travel to distant planets, and soon enough the ability to give functioning arms to those who have lost theirs. Eyesight to the blind, hearing to the deaf. Speaking of, when did the cochlear implant become viable? It wouldn't happen to be after 2004, would it?

There's a word that describes people like you:
Shabbos Goy.

Nice argument you got there.
Oh wait.

Attached: 08860832.jpg (367x446, 41K)

>there's literally no use-case that 1366x768 isn't enough for
Try video editing with that resolution and on a laptop. Audio production? Good luck.

The best music was made without computers.
And if your video is great than 720p it's not worth watching

>goes to movie theater
>30 foot projection
>1366x768
Wow so worth $15

I do a lot of academic writing and two monitors is annoying, in my opinion.

A single 1440P monitor is perfect for me and great for the application of having multiple documents open at once.

I liek 2560x1080 moar than 1366x768
Fite me

Yeah, best music that no one would ever hear again.

nigger you what?

Because Thinkpad displays are fucking garbage.

still waiting

Music production begs to differ.

Attached: 1456293419204.jpg (900x900, 109K)

all the best music that humanity has made was produced using analogue methods.
fuck off with your numusic garbage.

i want to breed this faun

Wow. Pure 2^22 monitor.

The human eye can't see less than 1366x769

>rainbowing text on purpose
No.

but niggers oogabooga'ing to a thumping monotone beat is the best music there is, get with the times, goy.

I don't care what the world "needs" normies eat that shit up and that's how I make my money

You make money by actively making the world a worse place to live in.
Good job faggot

>selling a product people willingly buy is making the world worse
>a fucking computer monitor
So melodramatic

clearly you don't understand the deeper meaning and implications of moving beyond 1366x768

Same

>not 800x600
pleb

Just don’t buy it
>there is a hidden agenda behind higher resolutions
I gotta hear this

>furfag
opinion discarded, enjoy your shitty screen and enjoy being poor.

Attached: 1516541446594.jpg (469x480, 59K)

I do whatever the fuck I want

I use this resolution in CS 1.6 and Quake, still to this day. The hit boxes are the most accurate with this resolution.

>The hit boxes are the most accurate with this resolution.
Bullshit. You just got used to playing stretched.

When the beta of CS came out in 99, 800X600 was the standard CRT resolution.
>ESEA Invite champion season 7
>CAL Main champion season 4
>CEVO Main champion season 11
I don't see a problem here.

Good luck listening to that music without someone recording it, or paying out the ass for concert tickets. You do realize recording is a part of audio production, right?

>recordings didn't exist before computers
you dumb nigger

My phone has a higher screen resolution than that desu

>buying a tracking device

>Justify using a screen resolution higher than 1366x768.
>You literally can't.
If you consider a good sigh angular resolution of 1 arcminute it's something like 22°×12° of visual field. this is the reason why it's advised to watch a full hd at 2.6 time the diagonal, the resolution matches your eyes them.
such a low resolution keeps a big part of your visual field free

>such a low resolution keeps a big part of your visual field free
good
less distractions

I watch movies for the distraction though

stop "multitasking" then, you're neither focusing on your work nor the movie.

Attached: rimming.png (720x502, 277K)