Unclescar

I've been using the Cataclysm WoW mouse for about 8 years now, got my first one not long after it was released, but the buttons had lost their strength and became difficult to get to register, some would even get stuck if I didn't press them at a specific angle. I absolutely LOVE the layout though having all the buttons spread out over the hand rather than all on the thumb, and I use literally every button on the mouse when I play. When it came time to replace my first one, I got a brand new one of the exact same mouse (because it really had been an awesome mouse and a few years is respectable for a heavily used piece of mechanical hardware). Well, a few years later again, This one is starting to fail in the same way and it's started to cause mistakes in game. Hard to play well when you are fighting with your hardware... So alas, here I am, needing to replace my mouse very soon again. I've been looking around and I have not found many mice that have similar layouts. I've used Razer mice but I don't like having all the buttons on the thumb, and I need more than just 2-3 extra buttons, I want something that has 10+ extra buttons spread out over the whole hand. I've noticed the Roccat Tyon has a similar layout (no pinky finger button) but mixed reviews. I'm curious if anyone here has experience with this mouse and if you'd recommend it? Kinda bummed LMG didn't do a review of it (that I could find!) Any other similar layout mice that you'd recommend instead? I don't care for anything flashy or RGB or ultra precision dpi or any of that (they aren't make-or-breaking features, I am just indifferent to them).. I just care about the buttons and the comfort.

Next they will start posting things on your behalf! *we noticed you didn't update everyone on your visit to grandma in the hospital, nor let anyone know that she was in the hospital, let alone why.. so we went ahead and announced all the traumatic health struggles in your family and posted all the pictures from your phone that you weren't going to publicize.*

"THIS BILL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING LIKE EVER WE NEED TO SAVE OUR PLANET!!! IT'S SUPER POPULAR AND PEOPLE LOVE THIS THING WE NEED TO MAKE IT LAW LIKE YESTERDAY!!!!"" Okay fine let's vote on it. *Fails completely* Even if a few people did happen to be absent, how many people voted yes on that thing again? Pretty sure it was a bunch of "No" and a bunch of "I want to say No but my friends would be mad." Also what does it even do other than give complete power over everything to the federal government as a socialist authoritarian tyranny under the guise of making people feel good about stuff? yeah that's a no from me too, dawg.

something universally illegal (stealing) is banned? Let me get my "surprised" colored crayon and scribble all over my face. Conversing with people and sharing opinions is not and should not be illegal, and peaceful civil methods of sharing those opinions should not be banned, even if some opinions are absolutely disgusting. The actual actions of specific evil individuals should not incur punishment to the non-evil everyone else.

"we are punishing masses because of the misdeeds of a few"

LG's website has it listed as "Coming Soon"

That might get you punched in the face by "champions of tolerance"

sure, that's at least partially true and I didn't try imply that it wasn't. It is, however, incredibly hypocritical that heavily democrat areas (who usually hate big corporations and private businesses, and tax breaks) are offering millions (billions) of dollars in tax breaks to one of the biggest businesses in the world. I don't like government helping private businesses, at all. If I want a business to have my money I will give that business my money by using their product or service, I don't want it happening through taxes. If you are going to do tax breaks for businesses, do it for ALL businesses and leave it as an open incentive for everyone, not just hand selected businesses. This is not capitalism (as often gets blamed), this is corruption.

This is exactly it.

This specific line worries me, because we can't ignore the possibility of ISP's in Montana just jumping ship and leaving the state with no internet at all. Some people consider access to the internet a human right (it's not, but that is also not the point). What good is a right to the internet if there is no one to provide it? Montana may have the "best" and "most fair" rules for regulating the ISPs, but if there are no ISPs to regulate those laws are a moot point and the citizens ultimately lose. This is just hypothetical, I highly doubt ISPs would completely shut off that state, but we can't ignore that possibility, as cutting off incentives to do things often results in them no longer being done, look at socialist countries that have declared healthcare a right but have no doctors. Providing internet is a service that has to be profitable otherwise the companies that provide it will no longer do so. Unless every state legislates similar rules, it is entirely possible for companies to relocate to a place where they can make more money. I am very much for the principals that all internet data should have equal priority, but I do want to point out that the internet rules are now similar to the same rules that wireless phone companies have for cellphone service, as it was just two years prior to the ruling. When "Net Neutrality" was introduced (and it wasn't actually how most people describe it, nor followed as well as you'd think), internet service stopped progressing in any meaningful way, new ISPs are essentially non-existent (thanks to local governments regulating things), speeds have not really gotten improved and many think their service has gotten worse, accessibility has not improved much and I personally suspect that some ISPs have actually stopped servicing areas creating fewer options for residents, etc.. But cell service that has been regulated differently has continued to improve both in speed and accessibility in the meantime. Time will tell if the FCC's ruling is beneficial in any way, though. I also agree with state rights and believe that local governments should have more power over their immediate area and states over their land and the federal govt having the least amount of power and influence, so this "states can't make their own rules" is a line I dislike even more-so, not just in the FCC ruling but the idea of that kind of law is totalitarian in principal. Like I said, I agree with the all data being treated equal, and in that sense I very support 'Net Neutrality', but I don't think it's quite fair to shout doomsday just yet.

but unless your room is pitch black, and the screen is completely non-reflective, meaning a flat matte finish (all OLED screens I've seen have all been glossy, very reflective [and I have a 65" OLED on the wall right next to me]) you likely wouldn't notice the difference past certain dark shades. QLED offers higher brightness and arguably better colors. If the marginal difference in dark shades you likely wouldn't even notice is that important, then sure OLED is the only option, but reality is that everyone (except you, apparently) will be ridiculously satisfied with either unless they ended up with a DOA or dysfunctional product. I can't wait to get a monitor like this in my next system build, but alas school starts and I'll have to save up to splurge as a graduation present in a few years. by then everything will be even better.

or like 2011 to 2011v3 if they changed the mapping of the pins, I trust that they'd modify the name just enough to differentiate the two as they have in the past.

Plenty has been said about how people with lots of freetime will play video games to fill that time whether they have a job or not. I know I got a TON of video gaming in while working over full time hours in the restaurant business, but that was also before I was married. Video games did not cause unemployment. Now, if you are failing at work due to video games, showing up late because you gamed too long, or calling out "sick" to get more gaming in, then yes, video games can indirectly lead to unemployment. Secondly, if you are already unemployed and you spend all of your time gaming instead of looking for work, then again, video games can indirectly continue unemployment. Here's the thing though, indirectly. The reason that someone lost their job was not because they gamed, but because they prioritized gaming over work and were a bad employee. They did not lose their job because they played games, they lost their job because they were playing games when they were supposed to be working. The reason that someone continues being jobless is not because they play games, but because they prioritize gaming over finding work. They aren't unemployed because they game, they are unemployed because they were playing games when they should have been looking for work. Games aren't the problem, priorities and self moderation are the problem. We live at a time where everyone and everything is to blame for someone's behavior except the person doing that behavior. Instead of blaming your kid for playing games all day instead of doing their chores, it's not the games fault, its the kid's for choosing to do the games instead, and yours for allowing it. Games are fun! but unless the game IS your job, you need to put it down a notch or six in your list of priorities.

something being a "right" simply means the government cannot take it away from you or prevent you from having it. It does not have to provide it for you, nor give you the means to get it, and it's use is not necessarily anytime anywhere (ie, guns, and the "gun free zones") it's still your responsibility to cover those yourself, but the Govt can't say "No, ___, You can't have social media."

Its basically a really big 4K curved screen but with the top half cut off.. or two 1080p screens side by side, flush with no bezel.

Nearly every where I look, OLED is being praised, and QLED is being ridiculed. I had no experience with either, but am very excited for the new Acer/Asus x35 ultrawides, both of which are QLED, and my first thought was "bummer, too bad they aren't OLED" but.. why did I have that thought? I was just unintentionally following mob mentality on subjective thoughts where if you don't agree that OLED is superior then you are wrong, and that seemed silly. While my wife and I were running errands today, we stopped by Best Buy, and I stood in front of their TV's for probably half an hour or so. They had two 65" displays, side by side, running the same video clip. One was LG's OLED, the other Samsung's QLED, all other features were pretty much identical. I cannot say how well they were calibrated but on their own they were absolutely gorgeous, and it was pretty easy to spot a poorly calibrated TV from the rest. These two both looked good. I'm going to disagree with the mob mentality here now that I've seen them side by side. The OLED has objectively blacker blacks because the pixel can be completely off, but in a room that isn't very dark, it's not noticeable. The QLED's blacks were just as deep and dark as far as I could tell. As for color, my observation was the the vibrancy on the QLED was better. not by much, but the colors seemed to be more rich and deep. The OLED, while much richer than some of the other TVs, did not look quite as rich as the QLED. Sure OLED is new, but new doesn't ALWAYS mean better than something that is refined.. so I guess we'll see the next generation of stuff after OLED has been refined a few times on the consumer market. So basically, when you compare side by side a QLED and an OLED that have identical specs otherwise, my opinion (admittedly based on minimal experience) is that the QLED actually comes out on top, barely, but anyone would be absolutely thrilled with either and should care far more about price than which display tech it uses. I no longer have slight disappointment in the type of display on these upcoming x35 ultrawides. So what do YOU guys think about the two techs?

this is like, the dream monitor for me! must have NEAOW! Well, must start saving up, NEAOW!

is an ultrawide 1440p out of the question?

Unless you play in tournaments or in very high rank competitive play, you are going to be pretty much unaffected by the difference in FPS when you are at 90hz+, And it is pretty common that people playing at that level have their graphics turned down as well just to be extra sure max frames, which is much less enjoyable, You got a sick video card setup, I'm assuming you want graphics to be nice. The Asus PG348Q and the Acer Predator X34 are virtually identical with marginal difference in specs, mostly just different in appearance. I've been tossing back and forth between the two for a few months, have now seen them both in person (and also seen a 144hz monitor as well), and oh man are those two are fantastic, you will absolutely love it and will not at all be upset about the 100hz cap. The only reason I have not jumped on the Asus PG348Q myself is I'm not quite ready to build my new rig yet, and I'm waiting to see what gets announced or becomes available soon.

... exactly... the 3770K will work on an LGA 1155 socket. The first PC I built was on a z77 board.

why would you go from the 3570K (3rd gen i5) and "upgrade" to a 2700K (2nd gen i7) and not the 3770K (3rd gen i7)? (unless there is something obvious that I'm missing..)

I wish LTT did a video review of this monitor, or at least a video comparing this monitor to the Acer Predator x34.. Linus DID do a review of the Acer Predator x34 though, which is almost exactly identical in nearly every aspect (not including aesthetics), if you want to have a good idea of what Linus would say about the Asus PG348Q. I read some article reviews that compared the two and they were so close performance that it could have been two tests of the same monitor with differences within margin of manufacturing error. I recommend going and watching Linus's video on the Acer predator x34 and then decide between the Acer x34 and the Asus PG348Q based on which one you like the look of better, as they are basically identical otherwise. I too will be upgrading monitors this year and have been looking around for the same question you seem to be asking. I've been back and forth between the Acer Pred x34, the Asus PG348Q and the LG34UC97 (or 98W) (or or or the LG38UC99!!!![which Linus himself said is probably in his top 3 favorite monitors ever]) I hope to help more with your question, Linus's favorite screen that he chose to use is the LG34UC97. That is an older model, there is the LG34UC98, which is the same thing but adds freesync. After seeing Linus's video for the LG34UC97, which has since been upgraded to a slightly better model by adding freesync, the difference between the LG34UC98 and the Asus PG348Q is freesync vs Gsync. If you have or plan to have an Nvidia GPU, then you should go with either the Acer or the Asus, but if you have or plan to have an AMD card, then I'd go with the LG34UC98 or LG38UC99. I know there are some decent price differences, but when you are spending $1000+ on something, its often not too hard to spend just a touch more and get the best you can. There isn't an LTT review on the specific Asus model you are asking about, but there are LTT reviews for two other very very similar screens and you should be able to pick between them based on whether you want/need Gsync or Freesync and which you like the looks of.

curious why you would go with a z68 instead of a z77?

I'm currently on Nvidia and a few year old 1440p Dell screen, so I've not experienced Gsync, though I also haven't had an AMD card since I switched to an Nvidia card many years ago, so I haven't had experience with freesync either. I no longer live near a microcenter and there aren't really any tech stores nearby aside from best buy, which is unfortunate. I have a very big computer upgrade workstation build planned for the year (I've yet decided on parts) and I'm looking for some thoughts on main screens. My current main screen will be rotated 90 degrees and used as a vertical secondary monitor. My more professional work is DAW related, in which case multiple screens and more screen real estate is a huge plus, and my wife and I both do some mild hobby-quality photo and video editing. as I mentioned, my current screen is 1440p, at 27" is that ~110 ppi "sweetspot" and I actually really like it, though I am very confident that an ultrawide would be a very good fit for my main screen as with many DAWs horizontal space is prime real estate. There is some casual non-overly-competitive gaming as well, but 4K isn't really that enticing. There are some great 1440p ultrawide "gaming" screens with Gsync or freesync, and there are also some fantastic 1440p ultrawides with neither. I'm looking at LG's 34UC98 and LG's 38UC99 though, and they both have freesync. If I was planning on using an Nvidia card, I know I wouldn't be able to make use of freesync, I'd have to switch to a Vega card.. I'm just stuck. So many good things coming out, and so many fantastic choices, but they don't seem to line up in the way that I'd like to spend the money on.

oh man! that new mobo seems legit. I hope you love it. Sorry about the bad microcenter experience. that sucks.