Floor-to-ceiling windows - Why floor-to-ceiling windows? Advantages and disadvantages?

I find this floor-to-ceiling window discussion rather uninteresting. What scares me much more is the fact that the [Flair 113] is the best-selling house in Germany. This boring and super old-fashioned shack?

I find this floor-to-ceiling window discussion rather unexciting. What scares me much more was the realization that the Flair 113 is the best-selling house in Germany. This boring and super old-fashioned hut?

The best-selling house from Town & Country. That probably appeals to most of their customers. It’s not mine either. But maybe it also has to do with the fact that this house simply fits into many development plans? At least I could imagine that.

Where did you get that rumor from? An extremely expensive "passive house window" has a Uw = 0.7 W/(m²K), a typical exterior wall in new construction has a U = 0.2 or even lower (KFW 55/40).

So on the one hand, I have read values of 0.5 W/(m²K) for good windows and not just 0.7. But above all, I was not talking about new construction when I compared the two values. And sand-lime brick like brick is close to or even above that.

However, it was not about seeing it as a "better wall," but that you don't have to accept so much loss through worse values for the added value (more light) as is often assumed.

In the end, the conclusion remains that it mainly depends on personal taste what you do. One person gets annoyed afterwards when the neighboring plot is built on, another is happy about the beautiful garden to be seen there. To each their own, I say.

So on the one hand, I have read values of 0.5 W/(m²K) for good windows and not just 0.7. But above all, I was not talking about new buildings when I compared the two values. And sand-lime brick and bricks are close to or even above that.

But it was not about seeing that as a "better wall," but that for the added value (more light), you don't have to accept as much loss due to worse values as is often assumed.

In the end, the conclusion remains that it depends mainly on personal taste what you do. One person gets annoyed afterward when the neighboring plot is built on, another is pleased about the beautiful garden visible there. To each their own, I say

0.5 is only the glass, not the entire window. The frame has worse values than the glass; combined, you get about 0.7.

Of course, you can construct comparisons as you like. But then it has little to do with reality.

Taste is one thing. But you get the impression that people "blindly" go for floor-to-ceiling windows. This then leads to oddities like tilted windows, which some even defend here. But by then, it's probably taste again (or a protective claim for one’s own bad planning. So what).

Also, children's rooms etc. are generally brighter with a 2m wide window (about 120 cm high) than with a 2m high floor-to-ceiling element. Because the light simply comes in over a wider area.

This has often been repeated here, but it is and remains wrong. Links are, as far as I know, not desired here, but it has been scientifically studied, and with exactly the same window area, a vertical format "clearly appears brighter" than horizontal formats. Not somewhat or slightly but a clear and significant difference in favor of the vertical, floor-to-ceiling window. The so-called light bands, on the other hand, hardly deserve their name and are the worst solution to make a room appear bright.

Just as a source: Prof. Dominic Haag.

The whole thing is scientifically so clearly established that practically every developer nowadays follows it, because with this method the brightest room effect can be achieved with minimal effort. This makes apartments easier to sell, better, and at higher prices, while the costs for windows remain low.

You just have to go to a show home exhibition for that. All these "strip window living rooms" look like basement apartments, whereas even my parents' 70s place feels very nice and bright in the rooms with balcony or terrace doors. Completely without investigation^^