M0oP0o

Maybe we are all in the bad place.

Its often the worst part of working in the industry, I used to have to deal with these sort of people professionally (investment bankers are the worst). I am just pointing out that sometimes the solution is just to do the work and move on, and that is how we get to where we are.

I get it but let me give you an example of the sort of thing Linux is dealing with:

I have a nephew who wanted a PC, and had a small budget (they where 11 at the time and I was not going to let them pay) so I used some parts around and made a not so bad mint machine. It worked very well but can not play fortnight (not an issue with mint or the hardware) or other such anti-cheat games. The child was ok with it but his parents got mad at me as to why I would not just "be normal" and put a real operating system on the machine. They tried to tell my nephew that he should not use his PC until they can bring it to someone that can "fix" it by putting windows on it (they are kinda asshats). Lucky for my nephew the place they took the PC said the same thing I did and that it would not run as well with windows on it, but would do it if they wanted (they said no when they got the cost).

So the PC gets used and is enjoyed (it was the nephews birthday present from me), and used by his father as much as him. But all this time I am getting constant complaints about the "weird stuff" I forced on them, and that one day they will get him a "real" computer. Keep in mind my brother has a PC that is running windows that has more bloat and malware then you would think possible at this time (I think why he kept using his son's) that was about the same in hardware (1060, am4 3600ish, 8 gigs of ram sort of machines). The mint PC was clearly better, and when their child started to point out how much more time my brother spent on his Linux computer then his own my brother just happened to "spill" a whole glass of water directly into his son's computer. Then he hid the PC away and just blamed it not working on the "bad software" that it was running, and how it was a "trash" machine anyway. (I did get it back eventually, replaced the board and shipped it back to my nephew who is now using it again).

So the point of the story is this, would you if you had to deal with users (and lets assume you are not related to them) like this put Linux on their machines or just not want to deal with them and put a ripped and custom windows on it?

One of us has clearly stronger feelings on 4K+ monitors. And that is fine.

And that's not releated to the resolution yet people have tied higher resolutions to better quality.

It is your fault if you start an argument over your inability to read however.

Oh I said it before there are use cases. Most working monitors are 1080p since excel is not really benefited from 4k+. However I have seen some graphic designers want the higher resolutions for example.

The vast majority of people working will get pissed at you if you changed their monitor to an ultra high resolution (I have been the one getting yelled at) without scaling it to look like 1080p. No one wants to squint to use their workstation.

Why is it that this example keeps coming back as if having your ultra high resolution using scaling to look like 1080p is not a self burn? Its not a worth while cost for the monitor, more so when you run them in lower resolutions for performance anyway. You would be foolish to go for a ultra high resolution monitor over a lower response time or higher frequency. The desktop argument is pathetic, its the desktop, no one but arch users spend their time stareing at it.

Oh there are more pixels, sure. But not worth the money and most (and a big most) applications want more frames and smoother movement with less input lag over more pixels. The push for 4k gaming has went no where and it has been more then 10 years. You want to watch some 4k video? sure! That is a use case, but just get a TV with the nicer lumen, slower rates and comparably tiny price tag. I can not stop people from buying stupid crap, but I am judging them.

Yes, we are clearly using so much fidelity that 4k is needed.... and 3d TVs are going to come on back. I am not saying you can not tell the difference, I am saying people want smooth frame rates over pixels and that 4k monitors are not worth it. That all the bullshit sold to users is just that. But hey thanks for bringing up my mother, who does not have curves (unless ash is curvy?).

Ok mr manager. Do you also call IT when your monitor is turned off to tell them your CPU is broken?

What are you on about, just tell me why anyone who likes money should buy a 4k or more monitor? So I can fiddle with my desktop settings? Is this a arch thing?

What is your point? Why would someone pay for a 4k monitor? Its a waste of money, that is the point I made. How does showing me that even after 10+ years of 4k or higher monitors being for sale that 30% of users have them (well Linux users at least)? That is not showing what you think it is.