Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

levmc

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 18, 2019
687
25
Some monitors I noticed since they are so big, it's made curved to account for the users' viewing angle, but iMac 27 isn't curved.

Do you think it would be a better set up to use one vertical and one horizontal with Windows?

There doesn't seem to be enough room for two monitors when using 27 iMac, because 27 inch is already quite big, unless you have an L shaped desk and roll your chair to the second screen when you want to use it?
 

chscag

macrumors 601
Feb 17, 2008
4,622
1,946
Fort Worth, Texas
Yeah, that's true. I have a rather large executive desk with my 27" iMac on it and there really isn't enough room for a second monitor.

What would be better is a well equipped Mini with two 27" monitors.
 

glenthompson

macrumors demi-god
Apr 27, 2011
2,983
842
Virginia
Depends on what type work you do. A lot of the people on the company’s SAP project used one vertical and one horizontal monitor and found it great since they could keep more code on the screen without scrolling. I find the 27” too tall for my bifocals and have to use special glasses. Width isn’t a problem as my peripheral vision handles it well.
 

grmlin

macrumors 65816
Feb 16, 2015
1,108
775
I use a 21:9 34“ ultrawide and it’s glorious. I don’t use my 4K 24” monitor that I use vertically that much anymore
 

LeeW

macrumors 601
Feb 5, 2017
4,246
9,237
Over here
I don't think the 27" iMac is big enough but also the proportions are wrong, but that depends on what your workflow is, for many it will be just fine. I was using 2x 25" Dell Ultrafine then switched to a single 34" 21:9 and it makes such a difference.
 

xraydoc

Contributor
Oct 9, 2005
10,816
5,283
192.168.1.1
I use a 21:9 34“ ultrawide and it’s glorious. I don’t use my 4K 24” monitor that I use vertically that much anymore
Same. I have an Asus ROG 34" 21:9 monitor. Can't recall the model # off hand. It has an IPS panel and it's truly fantastic. The 1440 pixel height is tall enough for my work and getting three documents/pages side by side makes me more productive. And gotta admit, movies and games look pretty damn cool on it, too.
 

Silvestru Hosszu

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2016
345
221
Europe
Its very workflow dependent.
At home I use a Surface Studio mainly for photo editing which is even taller that the 27 iMac.
At work I use a 49'' 32:9 monitor for editing 3 documents side by side.
 

pshufd

macrumors G3
Oct 24, 2013
9,967
14,446
New Hampshire
Get a bigger desk. I have two 28 inch 4ks by Dell and a Dell 25 inch QHD on my desk. I was thinking of adding another QHD but would have to add another desk.
 

levmc

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 18, 2019
687
25
I don't think the 27" iMac is big enough but also the proportions are wrong, but that depends on what your workflow is, for many it will be just fine. I was using 2x 25" Dell Ultrafine then switched to a single 34" 21:9 and it makes such a difference.

Was the one you got something like this? https://www.amazon.com/LG-34WN80C-B...eywords=34+inch+monitor&qid=1599067470&sr=8-4

The rez of the above LG product is "Ultra Wide Quad Definition (WQHD 3440 x 1440)." What was the rez of the one you got?

What did you find about the single 34'' that made it much better than other setups?
 

LeeW

macrumors 601
Feb 5, 2017
4,246
9,237
Over here
What did you find about the single 34'' that made it much better than other setups?

I got this one:


What made it better that two monitors in my view are that you get way more real estate to focus on single tasks, I was always restricted to one monitor in terms of how big I could make any single window. Sure you can stretch it across two but that split in the screens was no good.

When working with several windows I can resize them however I want, two monitors still restricted you. The LGs have software you can use to snap to all sorts of different windows sizes from 1 to 8 but I never really need it, with so much space I can just have several open and move them around as needed.
 

levmc

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 18, 2019
687
25
I have this one

I see that it has 163 ppi.

That's not bad, as normal 1080 displays of 15'' laptops have 147 ppi. So it has about 16 ppi higher than a typical display.

Would you not miss the sharpness of 27'' iMac with 218 ppi?
 

levmc

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 18, 2019
687
25
I got this one:


What made it better that two monitors in my view are that you get way more real estate to focus on single tasks, I was always restricted to one monitor in terms of how big I could make any single window. Sure you can stretch it across two but that split in the screens was no good.

When working with several windows I can resize them however I want, two monitors still restricted you. The LGs have software you can use to snap to all sorts of different windows sizes from 1 to 8 but I never really need it, with so much space I can just have several open and move them around as needed.

When I click on the link, I don't get the 34UC99 but instead, a whole bunch of similar LG displays. How much was it? When I searched it, it says it has 109 ppi. That seems really grainy, compared to the 218 ppi of iMac. Did you find it grainy?
 

throAU

macrumors G3
Feb 13, 2012
8,944
7,106
Perth, Western Australia
Some monitors I noticed since they are so big, it's made curved to account for the users' viewing angle, but iMac 27 isn't curved.

Do you think it would be a better set up to use one vertical and one horizontal with Windows?

There doesn't seem to be enough room for two monitors when using 27 iMac, because 27 inch is already quite big, unless you have an L shaped desk and roll your chair to the second screen when you want to use it?


I've done multi-monitors for years in the past, and inevitably what happens for me at least is that I end up making heavy use of one screen and the other gets left running something I barely look at because its inconvenient to sit directly facing the middle of them due to the bezels being there.


I've settled on a 27" monitor at home for this reason.

I did ultra wide for a bit (21:9, 29") and really wanted more vertical space. It was good for gaming when it worked properly but a lot of media/games didn't support it properly and you either end up letterboxed or stretched and unfortunately the form factor just hasn't taken off to make it worth it, imho.
 

grmlin

macrumors 65816
Feb 16, 2015
1,108
775
@levmc It's the 34WK95U-W. 34" with a resolution of 5120 x 2160. It's not as sharp as the OLED in my laptop (4k@15") or the 27" iMac, but as there are no alternatives to it, I use this one.

I would have probably bought/gotten a 5K 27" monitor instead, but there are none for Windows PCs... well, you can use the 5K LG one, but that thing is clearly made for Macs, does not even have any buttons to adjust the settings of it. My LG is basically the same as a 4K 27" screen, but wider.

I also have a 24" 4K monitor which is sharper, yes, but in normal day to day use, it's not an issue for me. It's so much better than everything else. Something like 1080p on a 27" screen simply is unacceptable.


I do have to say, that I friggin love the Ultrawide nature of it though. It totally changed the way I use my PC. I don't even have a second screen attached anymore. Great stuff
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.