▲ 672 ▼ Finally, an optimal monitor configuration! (thelemmy.club) submitted 7 months ago by Gork@sopuli.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] witty_username@feddit.nl 24 points 7 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children) Here you go. 22 16:9 monitors. I chose 22 monitors, because all other numbers have very expected results: spoiler17 monitors: permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago (1 child) So what's that gap for? You can clearly either fit a few more, or make the total area smaller. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) You are right, actually. I blindly trusted the computer to figure this one out, but just looking at it I found a better solution by hand. Maybe there really are some better solutions for the 22 monitors problem. spoiler This better not end up in any scientific papers, ever. To answer your question: fitting more monitors into these gaps would not result in the optimal placement for that amount of monitors. 23, 24, and 25 monitors all have "expected" results. And closing the remaining gap would not result in a smaller bounding box square. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children) Here you go. 22 16:9 monitors. I chose 22 monitors, because all other numbers have very expected results: spoiler17 monitors: permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago (1 child) So what's that gap for? You can clearly either fit a few more, or make the total area smaller. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) You are right, actually. I blindly trusted the computer to figure this one out, but just looking at it I found a better solution by hand. Maybe there really are some better solutions for the 22 monitors problem. spoiler This better not end up in any scientific papers, ever. To answer your question: fitting more monitors into these gaps would not result in the optimal placement for that amount of monitors. 23, 24, and 25 monitors all have "expected" results. And closing the remaining gap would not result in a smaller bounding box square. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago (1 child) So what's that gap for? You can clearly either fit a few more, or make the total area smaller. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) You are right, actually. I blindly trusted the computer to figure this one out, but just looking at it I found a better solution by hand. Maybe there really are some better solutions for the 22 monitors problem. spoiler This better not end up in any scientific papers, ever. To answer your question: fitting more monitors into these gaps would not result in the optimal placement for that amount of monitors. 23, 24, and 25 monitors all have "expected" results. And closing the remaining gap would not result in a smaller bounding box square. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lemmyartistforhire@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) You are right, actually. I blindly trusted the computer to figure this one out, but just looking at it I found a better solution by hand. Maybe there really are some better solutions for the 22 monitors problem. spoiler This better not end up in any scientific papers, ever. To answer your question: fitting more monitors into these gaps would not result in the optimal placement for that amount of monitors. 23, 24, and 25 monitors all have "expected" results. And closing the remaining gap would not result in a smaller bounding box square. permalink fedilink source parent
