For fullscreen photoviewing, 16:10 matches better with the 3:2 photos than 16:9
Between the U2415 and U2515h; the 25" has 13mm less viewable area and a much higher pixelpitch. If you have any use for smaller pixels depends on your eyes, viewing distance and if you like to get into the mess...
I mainly see a crappy jpg from a noisy picture.
But still I can see the backlightbleeding. But whatever; you can manipulate surroundings to make it look better or worse. Most people with bad screen settings probably will see one huge black area.
Colors and brightness to the human eye are all...
At first I had a CorePad EyePad or something like that (very similar, different name), but when I bought that Steelseries QcK mini for another place I noticed how much smoother the gliding was on the new pad compared to my 7(?) year old greased-up pad.
I has been washed now, but I think it's...
Less dust on the desk vs the floor. And the floor is occupied by file cabinets that support the desk and my subwoofer.
Also standard-length display cables for a 20-30-20 PLP setup ends up tricky with tower on the floor.
Monitor on top of the case doesn't work anymore with the current 0.6mm...
I like the lower thermal conductivity of my mouse pad vs my desk. Just for that I would use a pad. Another reason being that the surface of my desktop is not 100% flat, there are some very local imperfections that the mouse pad helps smooth over. I am using the Steelseries QcK mini.
Euh no, that's 10% off. 1440x900 on 17" is 100 DPI, the 34" 3440x1440 screens are 110 DPI.
Or pixelpitch of 0,255 mm for these 17" and 0,232 mm for the 34".
Plus they can't be bought new.
Facebook is a waste regardless of screen :)
More like you value the $500 in pocket more than you miss the 160 pixels.
All in all it does matter. No such thing as a nice looking PLP setup with the middle being a 27" 16:9
I know someone that went from 30" to 27", but very soon after that he bought a 2nd 27", and that one now is used...