The widest screen

LG insists it’s 58:9, which presumably means the pixels aren’t square. This isn’t uncommon, especially for signage (which this is)


Aimed at photographers?. (Some companies made a digital version of the old 110-film cameras-- they call it the micro four thirds system.)

Record your review in portrait mode on your phone. It’s the only sane way to do it.


Somewhat off topic, but I had the opportunity to play with a 49" 32x9 aspect ratio monitor (essentially 2 27" 2560x1440 monitors taped together) for work.

I would recommend against it. For every time I was grateful for a very wide window with no bezel in the middle (because the programming IDE wants to fit everything into 1 window), there were at least 4 instances where it was incredibly irritating because even with screen splitting software, programs would maximize to absurd sizes.

Also, sharing one’s screen was generally a futile exercise. Plus the far edges of the screen are just too far away (at least for my eyes).

And yes, the few full-screen games I tried after hours all crawled horribly, hated the screen ratio, or were just generally weird.

So, my recommendation is go for multiple monitors (cheaper too).


That’s quite light for the size, honestly. Makes me question the structural integrity of it. My first flat screen was a 50” plasma and it weighed 80lbs. I had to bolt it into the studs with 4” lag screws. Of course, my current 55” Samsung weighs something like 13lbs. It’s crazy how light it is is, and it feels…fragile. This 8 footer? I’d hope it weighs 300.

1 Like

Vertical. Tetris. Go.


The real issue is wind shear at the upper end, and electrical discharge from the ionosphere. Otherwise you could stack a few of these end-to-end and get a space elevator.


Ohhhhhhh. That makes sense.

[puts down pitchfork]

at such a low resolution, no - signage.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.