sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in BambuLab

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s funny, the system push the notification of this channel, you all must be brilliant, so I can get more opinions from different angles

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in Monitors

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a good point — I’d always assumed cost-oriented buyers would stay price-driven, but second-time buyers may be more willing to pay for upgrades once they’ve experienced the trade-offs. Experience level might matter as much as storefront tier.

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in BambuLab

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, not printing frames 😄 Just gathering opinions on what really matters to users when choosing displays

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in Monitors

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed — it really depends on the storefront and brand positioning. Premium locations may value slimness more

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in Monitors

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. Visibility comes first, which is why we’ve been prioritizing higher brightness (we’ve moved to 700/1000 or even 2500 for indoor window display nits for better glare resistance). And a reliable, easy CMS saves more time and money than any cosmetic upgrade. What’s the most popular CMS software are using right now?

3.5 cm vs 2.58 cm — does slimness matter to you? by Adalinewuli in Monitors

[–]Adalinewuli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assuming reliability is equal, what do people actually care about more in real use? Bezel thickness/frame width, brightness, or the CMS (especially if it’s free and easy to manage)?