Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
I’ve been one who believes bigger means better when it comes to monitor size. I went from two 21-inch panels that I relied on for many years to a 49-inch super ultra-wide screen. It was huge and allowed me to do so much more throughout the day. After all, more pixels result in more space, more windows, and better efficiency, right? Going from a single screen to two monitors was transformative, but so was the move from these two screens to a single ultra-expansive monster. But this love story did not last.
It took me a few years to yearn to migrate back to a multi-screen setup. Basically, this is me discovering that size doesn’t always matter, but rather how you use the tools you have available. The same can be said for monitors. I finally got to a point where, while ultrawide gaming and work was special enough to justify sacrificing the desktop, it just didn’t do everything I needed, including recording 4K footage (without having to deal with sidebars) and enjoying YouTube more comfortably while playing something else.
After going from two smaller screens to one massive behemoth, I finally landed with two different sized panels. A 32-inch 4K screen that acts as the primary method of displaying content. Added to this is a 27-inch 2K panel that can be used vertically or horizontally, depending on my current mood and workload. It’s the perfect solution for me, as it almost allows you to adjust the same virtual workspace on the fly without having to deal with some of the more obscure ultrawide inconsistencies.
Why did I leave two screens?
The physical barrier that divides workflows
My original setup consisted of two 21-inch panels. These were simple and affordable 1080p displays from AOC. Nothing special, but they got the job done and weren’t bad for gaming, sporting a 60Hz refresh rateand decent color accuracy. Dual screens are often preferred because they feel more natural when it comes to separating tasks. Take Windows on macOS, Linux, or Windows. We use different windows to separate tasks and the screens can be viewed as such. Whether I was gaming or communicating on Slack, there was a place for everything.
However, over time I began to tire of the physical separation between the two workspaces. These AOC displays had thick bezels. After all, they were around 2013. That’s when a super ultra-wide display started to look more attractive, especially with improved support for GPU drivers and the operating systems that make such unique aspect ratios and resolutions work. I’m not talking ultrawide, but a 32:9, 49-inch monster that spanned my entire desk.
I effectively went from a dual 1080p setup to two 1440p panels, but I combined them into a single seamless experience. No frames to separate windows, no sudden cursor jerks when moving between screens. There is no need to waste time with the configurations to place them perfectly within the virtual space. That’s the entire promise of a single super-ultrawide: take two existing monitors, remove the center bezel, and use a few bottles of your favorite cyanoacrylate.
The ultra-wide immersive experience
The king of genre-specific games
Super ultrawide monitors are attractive to those who play specific game genres. Space simulators like X4: Foundations, EVE Online, Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous are just a few that looks great on a larger panel. These huge things have the aforementioned 32:9 aspect ratio, which perfectly matches the analogy of our two 16:9 screens glued together. Some, like the trusty ElectriQ eiq-49CV5UWD120FSHQA I have, are even curved to slightly wrap around your field of view.
It all sounds great and really was a sight to behold for many months, but I slowly became annoyed with the whole setup. I couldn’t understand window management well. What would traditionally fit into each corner of the screen must now be handled freely, as there is a single plane of virtual space instead of two physical monitors. Having more free space may seem like the ideal solution to this problem, but I found the opposite to be true. I like having applications linked together.
I tried running a tile-based desktop environment with Hyprland, but found it to be too restrictive, especially with some applications where scaling was handled strangely or I needed to jump through hoops to get other things to work well enough. I found myself losing time instead of gaining it, which is not what should happen with larger panels. Having the browser maximized to fill the entire 49-inch panel is not exactly pleasant. So, I decided to go back to a dual screen setup.
Larger Monitors Have Their Place
But they’re just not for me
Super ultra-wide screens are great at many things, but they fall short in some areas. The video editing was incredible, with the entire screen dedicated to cleaning. The spreadsheets were also very nice. But most of my work and play didn’t fully support this aspect ratio or didn’t work as well as multiple displays. Instead of trying to maximize size and opt for two 32-inch screens, I went back to my current 32-inch and 27-inch setup, focusing on usability. Bigger isn’t always better, especially when it doesn’t match your workflow.
What may certainly look impressive on the desk may turn out to be more of a hindrance than anything else. But it was not a total failure. I really enjoyed using a huge 49-inch panel, but it just didn’t quite fit what I needed it to do. The wife, on the other hand, has made the most of the larger screen space. Your job almost demands it, making it a much better choice for your PC. I’m once again switching from a hybrid vertical/horizontal setup to conjoined twins, although I wouldn’t say I’ve downsized at all.
