Finally, an optimal monitor configuration! : science_memes@mander.xyz

Finally, an optimal monitor configuration! (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 4 months ago by Gork@sopuli.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 156 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Why have many monitor when few monitor do trick?

PXL_20211202_035205492

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 55 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Finally a screen wide enough to display a single error in Java.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] EpicFailGuy@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

oh dear jesus ... this sent me on a spin

parent

[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 49 points 4 months ago (1 child)

https://sprocketfox.io/xssfox/2021/12/02/xrandr/

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 months ago

that's awful, thanks for sharing

parent

[–] ConstructiveVandalism@piefed.zip 22 points 4 months ago (1 child)

This is so wrong and right on the same time!

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 months ago

29º represent!

parent

[–] mech@feddit.org 8 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Wayland isn't ready until it can do that!

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 7 points 4 months ago

It actually can.
No extra protocol should be required for it.

Just needs someone to implement it in their compositor.

parent

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 months ago

Is there any use to having a DMM with a screen that large? (Off topic, but the o-scope caught my eye then the 'mini o-scope')

parent

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 80 points 4 months ago (1 child)

I literally cannot conceive of a more efficient arrangement of 17 monitors

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

As long as the monitors and space are squares and all monitors have the same side length

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

And the side of the space for monitors isn't an integer multiple of the monitor side.

parent

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 55 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Where are you getting so many 1:1 monitors?

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 41 points 4 months ago

Ideal aspect ratio for sudoku

parent

[–] witty_username@feddit.nl 23 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Thanks now someone must redo the optimisation for 16:9 blocks

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

Here you go. 22 16:9 monitors.

I chose 22 monitors, because all other numbers have very expected results:

spoiler

17 monitors:

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

So what's that gap for?
You can clearly either fit a few more, or make the total area smaller.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You are right, actually. I blindly trusted the computer to figure this one out, but just looking at it I found a better solution by hand. Maybe there really are some better solutions for the 22 monitors problem.

spoiler

This better not end up in any scientific papers, ever.

To answer your question: fitting more monitors into these gaps would not result in the optimal placement for that amount of monitors. 23, 24, and 25 monitors all have "expected" results. And closing the remaining gap would not result in a smaller bounding box square.

parent

[–] craigers@lemmy.world 40 points 4 months ago (1 child)

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Ratio_Tile@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 months ago

Where can I buy this

parent

[–] drmoodmood@lemmy.ml 34 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Would Lemmy on Firefox look like this on the diagonal screens?

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] ViaGetty@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 4 months ago (1 child)

This slaps though! Where are all the diamond monitors at??

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] quantumcrop@lemmy.today 4 points 4 months ago

Step 1: Buy This

Step 2: Rotate 45 degrees

Step 3: Idk

parent

[–] pticrix@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago

parent

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Hmm, that is kind of cool, in that you can have text on all 4 sides and it's still generally readable. Not really possible for vertical panels...

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

But it reduces the usable space in the middle, as any rectilinearly-designed webpages will have areas on the far left and right that aren't viewable except in small parts while scrolling.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago

Oh yeah, I was kind of playing devil's advocate. It is certainly also cursed in many ways...

parent

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (3 children)

where can I get square monitors?

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 months ago

2005

parent

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Bolt cutters should work, no?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

an angle grinder might be a better tool for the job

parent

[–] Venat0r@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

you could get the type that's used for large led/micro led displays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBd7_uxrq6c

parent

[–] UxyIVrljPeRl@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (1 child)

16 should be rotated 37 degree to the left

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

Who are you to think you know better than the computer that came up with this

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] UxyIVrljPeRl@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Well my Machine always believes Displays have to be overlapping

parent

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 7 points 4 months ago*

https://sprocketfox.io/xssfox/2021/12/02/xrandr/

Edit: someone already posted it somewhere is in the thread lmao

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Make sure to implement the arbitrary angles in your Wayland compositor.

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rustydrd@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

arbitrary angles

You may not like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.

parent

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

I cannot even conceive of how angles not based on 90° increments would render various things without issues. Or why you'd want that.

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

X11 already supports this lol

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

X11 supporting it likely doesn't mean that all software would support it flawlessly. What about Wayland?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago*

I mean I don't see any reason why a Wayland compositor couldn't support it, it's pretty cursed either way though.

There's a screenshot in one of the other comments in this thread (from owenfromcanda, I think the other screenshots are fake)

parent

[–] psoul@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Also the table layout at my local Chinese restaurant