4 ms·
I think multiple monitors is still better than one no matter the resolution, I personally run 3 monitors, and when working I have the one on the right always on
by tetraodonpuffer 10y ago
I think multiple monitors is still better than one no matter the resolution, I personally run 3 monitors, and when working I have the one on the right always on email/chat, the one on the left switching between terminals and firefox, and the one in the middle on emacs or intellij depending on language.
With i3 I have keyboard shortcuts to move the focus to any monitor and/or to change workspace in any of them and/or to move windows between them, this seems more usable than a single monitor no matter what the resolution of it is.
If money was no object I think the best setup would be a 40" 4k in the middle, a 27" 1440p portrait on one side, and a 27" 1440p landscape on the other side, but I would rather have 3x27" than 1x40" any day of the week (and the 27" to be 1440p not to have to deal with scaling)
- cma 10y agoWith a good tiling window manager (not osx or windows) you can do that kind of spatial separation of concerns on a big 4k, (curved if you aren't doing any kind of graphics work).
- macintux 10y agoUnclear from your description as to whether you would think it sufficient, but Divvy (http://mizage.com/divvy/ http://mizage.com/divvy/) does a good job of spatial window management on macOS.