I used to think you lot with jumbo sized monitors were barking mad. I thought nothing could be beat my trusty 27”.
I owe all of you an apology……this 32” is MENTAL!!! 
9 Likes
27 for my needs (and vision) is way too small. I’m 32" minimum and 43" ideal.
1 Like
Damn this forum is going to cost me money 
I’d ordered a 4K 27” 4K to replace my current 27” on Amazon Prime Day.
2 Likes
I want to do this and start using my m3 max macbook pro exclusively but…
my 2020 iMac 5K is still too awesome to discard. I still use it more than my m3 max.
1 Like
I would freaking love a 32" Studio Display.
3 Likes
I had a coworker that must have had like a 50" monitor. He did/does circuit board layout and was struggling squinting at a conventional monitor (developed back problems). Being a mere mortal, I had a 19" monitor albeit three of them. At home I have a 27" iMac plus a 27" 4k monitor. I’d never go smaller and am very unhappy that Apple has dropped the 27" iMac format.
4 Likes
I was somewhat surprised that 32’’ was not too big of a monitor even in my small Ikea desktop. Though I had to get a bigger one due to my poor eyesight (running at 1920x1080), I understand someone with better eyes than could benefit of the increased screen real state.
1 Like
I have been considering this guy, at the 40” size:
I thought about going with multiple 27” display. However, since my iPad Pro can only drive one external display, a single large display seems like the way to go.
1 Like
I think ~40" 5120x2160 is the next logical upgrade from a 4k 32". Doesn’t reduce the pixel density like so many other options do (and 4k32 is already as low as I’d go). For anybody not already familiar, 5k2k @ 40" is a 21:9 version of 4k 32". Stretch it sideways and add more pixels into the new space you’ve created.
1 Like
Can you get these larger displays with higher pixel densities? I don’t have a great grasp on display technology. Probably, why I’ve stuck with my Apple Thunderbolt Display for so long. 
1 Like
I think the only higher pixel density options are Dell’s 8k, or the few 6k options. All of those are 32" 16:9.
1 Like
What is the brand and model for that please?
I have a 49" ultrawide that I use for work. The only downside is that I have to put it in picture-in-picture mode when I use my Apple TV for Fitness+ (or when I’m screen-sharing at work).
10 Likes
It’s what we do 
#15characters
AWE COME ON! A 40” #ugh
1 Like
ViewSonic VX3276-2K-MHD 32 Inch Widescreen IPS
$219 on Amazon right not but got it on Prime Day for like $150
1 Like
I really thought about the widescreen, but wasn’t sure I’d like the height restraint.
I have 3x 27" 1440p monitors and IMO THIS is the sweet spot. I have tried so many setups and I love this one the best.
1 Like
I work with a chap who uses a 42" 4K TV as a monitor on a PC at home.
I guess what people have to think about is all screens have two sizes that fulfil completely different needs.
- The point (pixel if not retina) count.
- The physical size.
If I switched to my colleague’s TV approach, I’d have a lot larger physical display, ironically with less usable space. And that’s less usable space in a digital and physical desktop sense.
Of course pixel density comes into it, but even that is not an absolute measure. I mean… in pixels per inch of screen it is, but in terms of “is it retina?” it depends entirely on how far away you sit. My 55" TV is retina in my lounge but would not be on my desk.
It gets better… some people desire a larger display because they cannot resolve small detail. But… higher pixel densities do help some people resolve smaller detail!
About the only “simple” measure is what you can fit on your desk.
Fun fact…
I use 27" 5K Apple Studio Display at home and a 32" 2.5K AOC monitor at work. When I Remote Desktop from home to work, the screens are identical in size — absolutely nothing moves.
4 Likes
I recently purchased a 38in 1600p monitor for my work desk setup and really love it. 40in 2160p would be even better so I recommend if you have the funds!
I think the absolute dream ultrawide would 38in or 40in at 6880x3200. It would be “retina” in terms of PPI plus you get the extra vertical pixels compared to a 16:9 display.
4 Likes