Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by cletus | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

cletus

Great. If only monitor manufacturers would do the same thing.

I have a monitor with exactly 2 inputs (1 DP, 1 HDMI). What do I need to do to switch between them?

1. Press the Menu button

2. Move the option to Input Source

3. Select Input Source

4. Move from one to the other

5. Press Select

Some monitor will compress 1-3 into a single Input Source option. Still, 3 presses? Why does literally NO ONE make a monitor with hardware input source buttons? WHY?

I HATE OSD menus. With a passion. I don't care if it's a few cents cheaper. They are literally AWFUL. Just look at the Macbook touch bar and how much it's generally reviled.

View on HN

I really believe we would be better off if every piece of technology we used was open source. All the display manufacturers really want is to make displays. Making the OSD doesn’t have to be their doing, and an open source community could build a common interface with some basic button requirements. We could maintain a list of supported manufacturers and before long you know to avoid devices that don’t support it. This doesn’t happy because open source is uncommon in non-software industries, but I truly believe no one is maintaining any competitive advantage with their proprietary OSD. They could share their source with, I believe, no negative impact on competition. In fact the industry would be healthier because consumer friction would be lower.

This is a great idea.

Or make monitors have a USB device profile, or just use the serial profile and have a command response protocol (http rest) for query and setting configuration. Standardize this protocol.

Now all displays could be configured using external standardized logic. I'd prefer something over SPI, but either is really ok.

DDC/CI?

> Some monitor will compress 1-3 into a single Input Source option. Still, 3 presses? Why does literally NO ONE make a monitor with hardware input source buttons? WHY?

Because they want to use essentially the same chassis case when they have 2 inputs or 20, and they have dozens of models over the life of the tooling to support. It's much easier to swap out the die for the backplate or to use a snap in backplate than it is to have a variable number of buttons, knobs and dials. The zero-bezel design craze is what makes them really difficult to use because they're a line of tiny, poorly labelled buttons on the front, or an awkward line of buttons on the back with tactile bumps.

So this reminds me of a joke. There are only 3 numbers software engineers care about: 0, 1 and 2^32.

The point of this joke is that as soon as the number of "things" (in this case input sources) is >1, someone somewhere starts looking at solutions as if that number might be 5, 10, 100, 1000, 1 million. Most monitors will have less than 5. Some will have up to 10. This number is known when you make the monitor.

Just let me buy a monitor with hardware input selection.

> There are only 3 numbers software engineers care about: 0, 1 and 2^32.

Also known as the Zero-One-Infinity Rule: http://catb.org/jargon/html/Z/Zero-One-Infinity-Rule.html

This is exactly right.

My monitor has one plug (DVI-D dual link). My monitor has 5 buttons.

But thankfully the manufacturer removed basically all software, so only the power button does anything, and the other 4 buttons are unconnected in the background. (Unfortunately this means the brightness can only be controlled by the connected computer's software)

The chassis is the same as more complicated monitors though.

Uh, just have a single input source button that cycles through them. No need for an OSD menu, and usable for any number of inputs.

Dell U2412M has two configurable physical buttons. So I can immediately switch between VGA / DVI or DVI / DisplayPort by pressing button twice and it's super handy for my VMs with GPU passthrough. I might guess other DELL monitors have the same option.

What beyond me is that monitor firmware almost never have sanity check on input source switching. So every time I use wrong button I have to wait 2-3 seconds when it's attempting to switch to already active input.

> Some monitor will compress 1-3 into a single Input Source option. Still, 3 presses? Why does literally NO ONE make a monitor with hardware input source buttons? WHY?

I have an old display with hardware input source buttons, but if your display has 4+ inputs, and especially given most users aren't going to ever switch inputs, that's a lot of additional complexity with little point.

Isn't a single "next input" button (which cycles through) common though?

Amen! Why can't that be software? I'd be happy to hook up a second cable or a BT connection to send control signals.

If not that, how about a simple Dpad at least!?

It is, and your monitor probably supports it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_Data_Channel

https://clickmonitorddc.bplaced.net/

OOO that is fantastic, thanks for sharing!

And my familiarity with DDC is mostly finding the wonky app that overrides EDID information because the monitor and the computer can't seem to agree today.

I have the same annoyance with my monitor, but to be fair it at least asks to switch if I plug in a new source.

The problem with these manufacturers is that they don't give a shit about UX. It would be trivial to implement 3 clicks on the menu button to switch inputs or long press to switch input immediately.

Dell monitors either have (often even backlit to show state) physical input source buttons or the arrow buttons can be remapped in OSD menu to serve as input source shortcuts (both for particular input and for the input source menu).

On my Acer I can save presets as 3 Game Modes OR do:

  any button
  right x4-7 (depending on previous mode)
  enter x2
  down
  enter
  left/right (brightness)
  exit
  down
  enter
  left/right (contrast)
  exit x3

Basically there are only 3 brightness modes on $850 monitor with 400cd/m2 range. Thanks to some fucking idiot who thought that a pair of knobs would look too old.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com