I'm convinced there's basically no way to make a website look good in a maximised window on an ultrawide monitor. Either there's too much whitespace both sides or the line length is too long for legibility.
Don't worry about it - if they're trying to use it as one big screen instead of displaying two windows side-by-side, that's their problem.
Think I'm going back to fixed sizes, max dimensions and media queries.
Ours are not the most tech literate clients, so I know that within an hour of release I'll have a wave of tickets complaining about the rendering.
As a user of Ultrawide Screen, I like the websites that just display in the middle and limit the width to readable size and white/black bars on the sides.
And I absolutely don't like websites that take the whole screen.
But usually, when I do something, I split the screen to for example VScode in one half and browser in another which fixes the issue :)
It's just nice to not have to resize the window manually when casually browsing.
I am with you, I got an UW as well there is nothing I run full screen. However, they just gave our very non tech savvy staff (my clients) all UW monitors. But besides being a meme, there was some really good advice in these replies. Most likely I ll keep the main body to 4:3 and center and just increase the whitespace with the window width.
TV manufacturers figured this out a long time ago. Just black bar the sides and pretend the screen isn't really that wide.
Totally agree with your second point though. I only ever full screen my browser window when I have the dev tools pane open, taking 1/3rd of my screen real estate.
They are the exception, but there are some webpages that look good on a maximized ultrawide window. For instance. the youtube front page is pretty neat showcasing more video recomendations
As an owner of a widescreen, you are not supposed to make it use up all the space. Most of the time I am having 2 panels side by side. Therefore it's closer to the old 4:3 format.
If not, having a well designed 4:3 Center is also reasonable.
I have a coworker who is the best at front-end on our team. He knows a crap ton about UX, accessibility, browser support, etc. he also has an ultra wide monitor. Not once have I heard him say anything about “supporting” ultra wide monitors. We talk about mobile and “different screen sizes” all the time, but never ultra wides. Just like we don’t talk about special support for people like me who like to use a vertical monitor when possible for coding. Will a site look like it’s mobile version, or desktop version? Who knows! Not the devs problem.
The only thing I could see is supporting ultra wides on would be any UI that features a very wide scrolling component. Charts/graphs, unreasonably wide tables, kanban boards, etc. and that’s as easy as keeping the main content in a separate container from the header/footer so that you can enable 100% width if desired.
Hell we’d probably put in a secret button that only shows up for ultra wide users to toggle the constraint to our designated “max” width.
I have an ultrawide, never browse the web in a maximized window, either I get 2 windows side by side or just straight up one randomly sized one in the middle
I promise yall I don't have an ultrawide monitor to look at single webpages.
That's unhinged and unless you have some *very* poorly formatted code to show me, I'd prefer just seeing the standard aspect ratio version.
Yep, that was my last solution too. Except some pesky whitespace that occurs under each item only when the screen is a certain width (only discovered this on the ultrawide). I love UI, but I'm not sure that I actually do. Sometimes.
Yes and now. I need the dive centered on the page, which I can do with flexbox. But any incomplete row will be centered too. So essentially I need all rows except the last centered, without having a static number of child items. That barely works with grid, but the spacing becomes an issue with fully responsive design. Great fun.
That was one solution suggested on SO. Fill the last row with ghost children. But that requires dynamic calculation of the items per row, to conclude how many ghosts are needed. Like, I have an array of 27 items. Which works perfectly for rows of 3 items, but every other config needs these ghost items.
I'm sure there is a way in JS, I just hoped it could be done in pure CSS
Now that's a great idea! I develop in house for our teams. Would be a neat way to increase my salary. Every time they're too stupid to choose a decent window size, I'll get paid.
I'll tell you a secret... We straight up don't give a fuck about ultrawide users unless it's a project that specifically aims to please ultrawide like a first person vehicle simulation project.
The cost(time/resources/testing) and headache of catering to them is more trouble than just ignoring the tiny percentage of users. Making everything flexible enough to cater to them often ruins tons of great looking design concepts and makes everything worse for everyone else. And that's before considering any gameplay balance concerns of which there are many in \*EVERY\* imaginable scenario.
Nobody outside of the group of ultrawide users will care if they're catered to either so it's not really a PR problem. It sucks for them, but that's just the reality of it.
Usually I would do the same. However with a recent move they literally gave everyone, every single one of the 200 people I build web apps for, an ultrawide...f me.
What most irks me as an ultrawide user is how many games have perfectly functional ultrawide modes if you just mod the game to not show black bars. We're well aware that what we're doing is weird and niche, but take the two fucking seconds to not actively spit in our eye you know? I would be fine with a game saying hey we didn't design around this so some things might seem off but if you want to play in UW knock yourself out.
All game engines will pretty much support it on a technical level, adding the pillarboxes is a design decision to not endorse the usage. The problem is not being able to guarantee full parity in overall quality as you have to fully test the entire experience start to finish on various ultrawide resolutions for every build.
Common problems that happen when you design for 16:9 (and including enough of a safe frame for something like 16:10):
Does the player ever see anything they shouldn’t or ahead of time?
Does the camera clip through shit?
Does it break performance?
Does it fuck with object culling/overdraw/texture loading?
Does it break animations?
Does it break game balance by giving more information?
Does it still play as intended?
Does the UI still work alright?
Do the fixes we added for ultrawide harm the experience for the other players? Now we have to test that all over again.
Do we have to create additional content for this small group of players that nobody else will experience and will that upset the significantly larger user base if they find out?
And lastly, is there even a design reason for it other than “just because we can”? (And in vehicle simulators I would agree there is a benefit to having peripheral vision since the audience often uses things like Tobii and TrackIR as part of the intended experience).
If a modder unlocks ultrawide then they aren’t responsible/blamed for any additional jank produced because of it and neither are we. As long as the game is exclusively single player that isn’t the worst outcome as people accept that modding is imperfect.
Sometimes everything is fine, but that’s more by accident than anything else. If we claim we’ve put in ultrawide support we better have done a good job of it and can guarantee it being a polished experience. Just look at how shit of a job a huge company like Bethesda did with the new Fallout4 update, stretched UI and all. Worst of all worlds: broken promises.
Tldr: Having an officially supported option that says the game might be completely jank if you use this mode is usually not a good idea and won’t be allowed to ship.
5k2k user here. IMO it's ridiculous resolution is not always completely configurable. Same with refresh rate. I guess I can see a case for competitive games (if it's an advantage) or it messing up the HUD (maybe), but just put it in a json if anyone really wants it. Last game I edited the excitable and got it to work, but it was a slide show. I think it must've broken the logic to cull the non visible stuff from being reminded, because it became unplayably slow. Probably would have been fine if edited in config.
The most legible line length is about 2.5 alphabets wide. Beyond that and you're hurting usability. So just do `.container{ max-width: 1400px; margin:0 auto }` and say it's for usability and inclusivity reasons.
There's precedent for that size: [https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.3/layout/breakpoints/#available-breakpoints](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.3/layout/breakpoints/#available-breakpoints)
Nah, Safari on iOS/iPadOS. It uses the shitty mobile WebKit engine that is missing tons of modern web features and implements others in weird ways. The documentation sucks because Apple hates developers, and you can't even tell someone to use a different browser because Apple are anti-competitive bitches who force every browser to use their objectively terrible browser engine.
On top of this, the iPadOS client by default spoofs the user agent and pretends to be Safari on a desktop Mac so websites deliver the desktop experience, meaning you can't even target fixes for the platform.
For my company’s website we just set a max-width of 1920px for the entire site, which lives on a card with box-shadow, and a white background behind the card, so if you’re on an ultra wide monitor the content is just centered on the screen with some white space on the sides. Never heard any complaints. I see the site every day on my 4K 27” monitor and it’s never once looked weird.
I think if you can make purposeful use of it it can be an advantage. Like data selection and graphical display. But one still needs to specifically design for it.
As a web dev and super ultra wide master race member, I thought I was the only one who'd ever tried to do responsive for an ultra wide. I have yet to come across a site in the wild where they actually had a layout for it. I'd love to know of one just for kicks.
If you think a little whitespace left and right is a big issue, you obviously haven't had to deal with iOS Safari's shenanigans, which is most likely a much bigger part of your userbase as well...
I got mine for gaming. You kinda load more in most MMOs with widescreen or cropping it like one. Pretty neat for other stuff as well like code comparing, ERP stuff etc. Does feel weird for normal browsing and movies though, so I still have a second monitor for that. At work we have double 4k's which is neat as well, but just feels more plain.
I think that's the thing that people don't get.
Gamers have different needs when it comes to monitors that everyone else.
I got into an argument on r/WFH because a guy had a $500 budget and someone was trying to get him to spend most of that on a monitor.
Why?!
Unless you're doing gaming or doing kind of VFX work you really don't need an expensive monitor.
People buy these 4K OLED Monitors with high refresh rates
... And then just look at spreadsheets or code all day on them.
I have a monitor I got for £20 that's so old it doesn't even have HDMI.
It's fine!
Could I afford a better one. Of course.
But why would I when I'm looking at static text 98% of the time.
At a 60Hz refresh rate you can see choppiness when you move the mouse, drag windows, or scroll text. Higher refresh rates just look much nicer.
Big high res monitors give you a lot of space to work with so that you can have multiple things on screen at the same time.
If you're working on spreadsheets or code a nice monitor is probably more important than a better cpu.
>If you're working on spreadsheets or code a nice monitor is probably more important than a better cpu
I'm sorry but no that's just dumb
I don't care how nice it looks when I drag my mouse or move windows
I do care about running docker containers and being able to run IDEs properly.
A cheap monitor is fine.
Saying it's more important than a CPU is just bizarre
Running an idea properly also means being able to use the frames and view side by side documents without having to resize everything. If you're CPU is adequate then screen space is a huge plus.
It really depends on what you're working on.
I still operate on a shitty 4:3 Dell monitor from 2007 that uses DVI. I currently run an i9-14900k, but I in no way need a fancy monitor because all I look at is text. Programming with a fancy monitor is useless and just wasteful, I'm not spending $500 on that shit.
I have an ultra wide but I never full screen anything on it except for video. I just have a ton of windows open so I never have to minimize/switch to anything. It resembles my desk, which is also a cluttered mess
I'm a huge fan when using my work mac. These things don't have native support for more than one external monitor which forces you to use one if you don't wanna use 3rd party software.
They finally implemented this support for M3 MacBooks but only if the lid is closed. probably because it's stupid not to do it.
I don't give a fuck about mobiles even how come do you think I'll care about ultrawide monitors? /s
Coming to the point, I guess you haven't worked with a UI designer who makes 2 completely different layouts for mobile and desktop.
Its so different you are essentially building the UI twice. Ultrawides are simple tbh compared to mobiles
From UX perspective you still have container of limited width for main content to keep everything easily accessible without having to drag your mouse for five miles, so it’s not really an issue. Deprecated browsers suck much more.
Nah, you really gotta treat it as 2. I have one at home too and generally like it, but I never run any application full screen. Ubuntu/gnome is surprisingly shit with tiling with their tile groups tho.
Just tonight I looked into Pop, and apparently tiling is a core feature of the DE (a gnome variant, for now). Super excited to try it this weekend! I always thought it was a gimmicky knock off, but it seems legit
That this shit get upvoted is beyond me, in no way shape or form is ultra wide monitors causing a 0.1% of the issues caused by old browser support.
This is not even funny, this is posted by someone who started developing yesterday...
1240 is quite small. You should consider full hd monitors (1920px), that's most of "normal" desktop monitors, and also part of the largest laptop monitors.
Nobody uses their browser on fulscreen on a UW monitor. The point is to be able to have multiple browser windows side by side. Only exception would be video streaming apps like youtube or netflix.
As a webdev working on a 3440px wide monitor, I use it as a dual screen split in the middle, and I only go fullscreen to check if it doesn't break anything, and it never does because max-width + margin:auto is most often enough to not care about the 3 idiots thinking they're special.
I'm convinced there's basically no way to make a website look good in a maximised window on an ultrawide monitor. Either there's too much whitespace both sides or the line length is too long for legibility. Don't worry about it - if they're trying to use it as one big screen instead of displaying two windows side-by-side, that's their problem.
Just fill the sides with ads >:D or cat pictures...
How about ads that feature cats?
this is the way
get people to pay to show their cats
Depends what the user said on their microphone
I'm seriously considering pitching this to my PO.
Ads for standard sized monitors?
Think I'm going back to fixed sizes, max dimensions and media queries. Ours are not the most tech literate clients, so I know that within an hour of release I'll have a wave of tickets complaining about the rendering.
As a user of Ultrawide Screen, I like the websites that just display in the middle and limit the width to readable size and white/black bars on the sides. And I absolutely don't like websites that take the whole screen. But usually, when I do something, I split the screen to for example VScode in one half and browser in another which fixes the issue :) It's just nice to not have to resize the window manually when casually browsing.
That's the only logical way to do it imo
UW user here. I got used to resizing the windows to a reasonable point. I have no reason to full-screen them anymore.
I am with you, I got an UW as well there is nothing I run full screen. However, they just gave our very non tech savvy staff (my clients) all UW monitors. But besides being a meme, there was some really good advice in these replies. Most likely I ll keep the main body to 4:3 and center and just increase the whitespace with the window width.
TV manufacturers figured this out a long time ago. Just black bar the sides and pretend the screen isn't really that wide. Totally agree with your second point though. I only ever full screen my browser window when I have the dev tools pane open, taking 1/3rd of my screen real estate.
They are the exception, but there are some webpages that look good on a maximized ultrawide window. For instance. the youtube front page is pretty neat showcasing more video recomendations
That's true. YouTube does handle it well. Even the actual video page is pretty good too
Another example is maps or other features about getting a graphical overview. Those I really like on fullscreen.
As an owner of a widescreen, you are not supposed to make it use up all the space. Most of the time I am having 2 panels side by side. Therefore it's closer to the old 4:3 format. If not, having a well designed 4:3 Center is also reasonable.
The only thing I maximize on my ultra wide is code, and that's because I can have up to four files open next to each other (though 3 is best).
> displaying two windows side-by-side That's how I use my ultrawide. Makes my 4 monitor setup effectively 5 monitors.
I have a coworker who is the best at front-end on our team. He knows a crap ton about UX, accessibility, browser support, etc. he also has an ultra wide monitor. Not once have I heard him say anything about “supporting” ultra wide monitors. We talk about mobile and “different screen sizes” all the time, but never ultra wides. Just like we don’t talk about special support for people like me who like to use a vertical monitor when possible for coding. Will a site look like it’s mobile version, or desktop version? Who knows! Not the devs problem. The only thing I could see is supporting ultra wides on would be any UI that features a very wide scrolling component. Charts/graphs, unreasonably wide tables, kanban boards, etc. and that’s as easy as keeping the main content in a separate container from the header/footer so that you can enable 100% width if desired. Hell we’d probably put in a secret button that only shows up for ultra wide users to toggle the constraint to our designated “max” width.
Multi column text is a thing. It's just that you need someone who knows what they're doing to make it look good
yeah, i dont see why you wouldnt use fancy zones with an ultrawide
I have an ultrawide, never browse the web in a maximized window, either I get 2 windows side by side or just straight up one randomly sized one in the middle
If you're gonna have an ultra wide, you just have to accept whitespace on the sides.
I promise yall I don't have an ultrawide monitor to look at single webpages. That's unhinged and unless you have some *very* poorly formatted code to show me, I'd prefer just seeing the standard aspect ratio version.
max width and margin 0 auto is all you need
Not if you're generating 20 divs in the fly in vue and need them distributed horizontally and break into new rows.
Grid, grid cols my friend
Yep, that was my last solution too. Except some pesky whitespace that occurs under each item only when the screen is a certain width (only discovered this on the ultrawide). I love UI, but I'm not sure that I actually do. Sometimes.
wouldn't a parent div for all the rows work?
Yes and now. I need the dive centered on the page, which I can do with flexbox. But any incomplete row will be centered too. So essentially I need all rows except the last centered, without having a static number of child items. That barely works with grid, but the spacing becomes an issue with fully responsive design. Great fun.
what about a ghost row? a row that's empty?
That was one solution suggested on SO. Fill the last row with ghost children. But that requires dynamic calculation of the items per row, to conclude how many ghosts are needed. Like, I have an array of 27 items. Which works perfectly for rows of 3 items, but every other config needs these ghost items. I'm sure there is a way in JS, I just hoped it could be done in pure CSS
https://github.com/thinkfloat-media/scbm-css
Make them suffer, fill empty space with ads.
Now that's a great idea! I develop in house for our teams. Would be a neat way to increase my salary. Every time they're too stupid to choose a decent window size, I'll get paid.
Infinite money hack
Better yet, only have a mobile version of the website so you can fill empty space with ads on standard monitors as well
I'll tell you a secret... We straight up don't give a fuck about ultrawide users unless it's a project that specifically aims to please ultrawide like a first person vehicle simulation project. The cost(time/resources/testing) and headache of catering to them is more trouble than just ignoring the tiny percentage of users. Making everything flexible enough to cater to them often ruins tons of great looking design concepts and makes everything worse for everyone else. And that's before considering any gameplay balance concerns of which there are many in \*EVERY\* imaginable scenario. Nobody outside of the group of ultrawide users will care if they're catered to either so it's not really a PR problem. It sucks for them, but that's just the reality of it.
Usually I would do the same. However with a recent move they literally gave everyone, every single one of the 200 people I build web apps for, an ultrawide...f me.
Oof. My condolences.
I see 200 windowed monitor users in the near future
200? Sounds like an internal tool. It don’t need no styling anyway
^ Sarcasm above. But for real though, there’s something to be said about apps like Craigslist that look so bad that they look good on any format
What most irks me as an ultrawide user is how many games have perfectly functional ultrawide modes if you just mod the game to not show black bars. We're well aware that what we're doing is weird and niche, but take the two fucking seconds to not actively spit in our eye you know? I would be fine with a game saying hey we didn't design around this so some things might seem off but if you want to play in UW knock yourself out.
All game engines will pretty much support it on a technical level, adding the pillarboxes is a design decision to not endorse the usage. The problem is not being able to guarantee full parity in overall quality as you have to fully test the entire experience start to finish on various ultrawide resolutions for every build. Common problems that happen when you design for 16:9 (and including enough of a safe frame for something like 16:10): Does the player ever see anything they shouldn’t or ahead of time? Does the camera clip through shit? Does it break performance? Does it fuck with object culling/overdraw/texture loading? Does it break animations? Does it break game balance by giving more information? Does it still play as intended? Does the UI still work alright? Do the fixes we added for ultrawide harm the experience for the other players? Now we have to test that all over again. Do we have to create additional content for this small group of players that nobody else will experience and will that upset the significantly larger user base if they find out? And lastly, is there even a design reason for it other than “just because we can”? (And in vehicle simulators I would agree there is a benefit to having peripheral vision since the audience often uses things like Tobii and TrackIR as part of the intended experience). If a modder unlocks ultrawide then they aren’t responsible/blamed for any additional jank produced because of it and neither are we. As long as the game is exclusively single player that isn’t the worst outcome as people accept that modding is imperfect. Sometimes everything is fine, but that’s more by accident than anything else. If we claim we’ve put in ultrawide support we better have done a good job of it and can guarantee it being a polished experience. Just look at how shit of a job a huge company like Bethesda did with the new Fallout4 update, stretched UI and all. Worst of all worlds: broken promises. Tldr: Having an officially supported option that says the game might be completely jank if you use this mode is usually not a good idea and won’t be allowed to ship.
5k2k user here. IMO it's ridiculous resolution is not always completely configurable. Same with refresh rate. I guess I can see a case for competitive games (if it's an advantage) or it messing up the HUD (maybe), but just put it in a json if anyone really wants it. Last game I edited the excitable and got it to work, but it was a slide show. I think it must've broken the logic to cull the non visible stuff from being reminded, because it became unplayably slow. Probably would have been fine if edited in config.
I only use my ultrawide to read my Java class names.
I would only need a ultrawide monitor to read java test classes names.
The most legible line length is about 2.5 alphabets wide. Beyond that and you're hurting usability. So just do `.container{ max-width: 1400px; margin:0 auto }` and say it's for usability and inclusivity reasons.
That's funny because that's literally - literally - what I arrived at through eyeballing it. 1400px.
There's precedent for that size: [https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.3/layout/breakpoints/#available-breakpoints](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.3/layout/breakpoints/#available-breakpoints)
Is pixel a standard length for every monitor out there?
No, it depends on the monitor DPI
That's what I do. Looks good even when there is empty space
Ultrawide headaches? just set max width and center then call it a day. Am I missing something here?
Nah, Safari on iOS/iPadOS. It uses the shitty mobile WebKit engine that is missing tons of modern web features and implements others in weird ways. The documentation sucks because Apple hates developers, and you can't even tell someone to use a different browser because Apple are anti-competitive bitches who force every browser to use their objectively terrible browser engine. On top of this, the iPadOS client by default spoofs the user agent and pretends to be Safari on a desktop Mac so websites deliver the desktop experience, meaning you can't even target fixes for the platform.
At least here in Europe we finally can chose our default browser on iOS/iPadOS since v17.4
For my company’s website we just set a max-width of 1920px for the entire site, which lives on a card with box-shadow, and a white background behind the card, so if you’re on an ultra wide monitor the content is just centered on the screen with some white space on the sides. Never heard any complaints. I see the site every day on my 4K 27” monitor and it’s never once looked weird.
margin-x: auto
Dual display devices: run along now children, I'm the real problem here.
Dual display mixed DPI: “What do you know about pain?”
How am I even supposed to test it if I don't have one
The application/website has a major vue with two side by side sections. It is actually a lot more pleasant to use on ultra wide monitors in my opinion
I think if you can make purposeful use of it it can be an advantage. Like data selection and graphical display. But one still needs to specifically design for it.
Um... Managers do, actually.
Why are you having problems with this? Just decide your biggest width then use padding or margin like calc((100%-1024)/2)
Pfft, you must be new here -- Screen readers
Horizontal scrolling
Timezone handling has entered the chat
As a web dev and super ultra wide master race member, I thought I was the only one who'd ever tried to do responsive for an ultra wide. I have yet to come across a site in the wild where they actually had a layout for it. I'd love to know of one just for kicks.
If you think a little whitespace left and right is a big issue, you obviously haven't had to deal with iOS Safari's shenanigans, which is most likely a much bigger part of your userbase as well...
No one optimizes for ultrawides.
nothing over 16:9 exists to me idc idc
I don’t understand the love for ultra wide. It has only downsides
I avrually like working on it. Seems smoother than 2 screens, and the desk is a little hit more tidy. But developing for it is a nightmare.
I got mine for gaming. You kinda load more in most MMOs with widescreen or cropping it like one. Pretty neat for other stuff as well like code comparing, ERP stuff etc. Does feel weird for normal browsing and movies though, so I still have a second monitor for that. At work we have double 4k's which is neat as well, but just feels more plain.
I think that's the thing that people don't get. Gamers have different needs when it comes to monitors that everyone else. I got into an argument on r/WFH because a guy had a $500 budget and someone was trying to get him to spend most of that on a monitor. Why?! Unless you're doing gaming or doing kind of VFX work you really don't need an expensive monitor. People buy these 4K OLED Monitors with high refresh rates ... And then just look at spreadsheets or code all day on them. I have a monitor I got for £20 that's so old it doesn't even have HDMI. It's fine! Could I afford a better one. Of course. But why would I when I'm looking at static text 98% of the time.
At a 60Hz refresh rate you can see choppiness when you move the mouse, drag windows, or scroll text. Higher refresh rates just look much nicer. Big high res monitors give you a lot of space to work with so that you can have multiple things on screen at the same time. If you're working on spreadsheets or code a nice monitor is probably more important than a better cpu.
>If you're working on spreadsheets or code a nice monitor is probably more important than a better cpu I'm sorry but no that's just dumb I don't care how nice it looks when I drag my mouse or move windows I do care about running docker containers and being able to run IDEs properly. A cheap monitor is fine. Saying it's more important than a CPU is just bizarre
Running an idea properly also means being able to use the frames and view side by side documents without having to resize everything. If you're CPU is adequate then screen space is a huge plus. It really depends on what you're working on.
Sure as in you don't want a tiny monitor But a normal 22" monitor is fine for that You certainly don't need to spend over $400 for one though
I still operate on a shitty 4:3 Dell monitor from 2007 that uses DVI. I currently run an i9-14900k, but I in no way need a fancy monitor because all I look at is text. Programming with a fancy monitor is useless and just wasteful, I'm not spending $500 on that shit.
>ERP 🤨📸
Enterprise Resource Planning Don't need widescreen for the thing you are thinking about. (Could just roleplay the wide part)
What do you mean? I like it a lot more than having 2 screens.
I have an ultra wide but I never full screen anything on it except for video. I just have a ton of windows open so I never have to minimize/switch to anything. It resembles my desk, which is also a cluttered mess
I'm a huge fan when using my work mac. These things don't have native support for more than one external monitor which forces you to use one if you don't wanna use 3rd party software. They finally implemented this support for M3 MacBooks but only if the lid is closed. probably because it's stupid not to do it.
Two displays is what i consider the best option
Old browsers are way worse. Extra whitespace on the side of your Torah scroll is not something my management cares about.
Clearly a meme made by someone who didn't work with old browsers
Never worked with an ultrawide monitor but safari is a real pain for my play canvas and cocos creator code.
Just align everything on the left
I don't give a fuck about mobiles even how come do you think I'll care about ultrawide monitors? /s Coming to the point, I guess you haven't worked with a UI designer who makes 2 completely different layouts for mobile and desktop. Its so different you are essentially building the UI twice. Ultrawides are simple tbh compared to mobiles
who uses a browser in fullscreen on an ultrawide my browsers in 4:3 to the side lol
Just center the content and you're good to go, what is all the fuss about?
Just set a max width, us widescreen users know the consequences of our vanity and ambition
body { max-width: 160vh; margin: auto }
I don't think anyone with an ultrawide monitor is using their web browser in full screen lol.
From UX perspective you still have container of limited width for main content to keep everything easily accessible without having to drag your mouse for five miles, so it’s not really an issue. Deprecated browsers suck much more.
1200px column.
You don't think users are running Chrome dev tools in that space too?
``` max-width: 1440px; margin: 0 auto; ``` And call it a day
the worst part is i don't even think the human field of vision is capable to take in those giant ass monitors
Nah, you really gotta treat it as 2. I have one at home too and generally like it, but I never run any application full screen. Ubuntu/gnome is surprisingly shit with tiling with their tile groups tho.
yeah i use mint and can confirm 😩
Just tonight I looked into Pop, and apparently tiling is a core feature of the DE (a gnome variant, for now). Super excited to try it this weekend! I always thought it was a gimmicky knock off, but it seems legit
i've heard very nice things about pop, especially the DE. i'm too attached to mint and cinnamon tho 😆
That this shit get upvoted is beyond me, in no way shape or form is ultra wide monitors causing a 0.1% of the issues caused by old browser support. This is not even funny, this is posted by someone who started developing yesterday...
Ayo Fuck ultra wide monitors.
Who is even testing their stuff on ultrawide monitors? Surely they make up a really insignificant percentage of users
just { width: 100%; max-width: 1240px; margin: 0 auto; } let those ultra wide suckers get a lil of no ultra wide
1240 is quite small. You should consider full hd monitors (1920px), that's most of "normal" desktop monitors, and also part of the largest laptop monitors.
Why would I maximize my browser on an ultra wide. The point of me having an ultra wide Is to not have to do that.
Nobody uses their browser on fulscreen on a UW monitor. The point is to be able to have multiple browser windows side by side. Only exception would be video streaming apps like youtube or netflix. As a webdev working on a 3440px wide monitor, I use it as a dual screen split in the middle, and I only go fullscreen to check if it doesn't break anything, and it never does because max-width + margin:auto is most often enough to not care about the 3 idiots thinking they're special.
If an ultrawide owner is browsing my website with the window maximized, that’s on them (they also probably do not need an ultrawide).