8 ms·

Disagree. Just got rid of my second screen after neck aches and headaches. I’ll take one decent sized (27” for me) 4K screen over two. Completely solved all pr

by m0xte 6y ago

Disagree. Just got rid of my second screen after neck aches and headaches. I’ll take one decent sized (27” for me) 4K screen over two. Completely solved all problems. Productivity? I can only focus on one thing at a time. Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with.

core-questions 6y ago
Disagree. Working with four (shitty) monitors now and I just want more. I'll spin around in my chair if I have to.
- ericol 6y ago
  I also disagree. When the pandemic started I left a couple of my monitors at the cowork space where I had my desk, and had to do with what I had at home (one 1920 x 1080 and another at 1366 x whatever). I had another monitor lying around, and eventually I plugged it into my box as well. As I didn't have a way to keep the monitor in a decent position... I put it as a "console" window, almost on level to the keyboard and right in the space between it and the larger monitor I had. Eventually I went to pick my stuff from the cowork, so now I have 3 HD monitors arranged in portrait mode side by side; and I still crave for the "console" window. Although I do reckon I wouldn't mind having a 4K monitor, but the price of those in my country are prohibitive (To the tune of +400 USD last time I checked). Also I'm looking forward to the point that I can buy a decent VR headset, and then I think I'll be at a point of no return.
  - nicoburns 6y ago
    I've recently upgraded to a 27" 4k monitor (luckily work paid), and it's actually made a surprisingly big difference. The main advantage being much better text legibility, which enables me to fit a lot more on the screen in practice. I'd love to have 2 or 3, but alas I don't think my MacBook is powerful enough to handle it (even aside from the expense)
- cecilpl2 6y ago
  I have a 6-monitor stand at home filled with 24" monitors in a 2x3 grid. It's amazing, and yet I still don't have enough room for everything. I want 8.
gknoy 6y ago
> I can only focus on one thing at a time. Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. I find that having different things live on different monitors (and virtual desktops on those monitors) helps me focus on things more easily. E-mail/calendar/Jira is on my side monitor, whereas my main one is filled only with my editor and terminal. It helps because I can _avoid thinking about_ things that aren't on my main screen, until such time as I need a break and deliberately shift focus.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Is there a reason you don't simply put them on a virtual desktop and switch to that desktop instead of turning your head to look at a different monitor? Maybe it's my slightly lowered perception threshold, but having a screen in my peripheral vision where e.g. new emails could be seen wouldn't be useful: I'd still see that a new email has arrived and would still need to decide whether I want to look at it now or whether that can/has to wait. And that's only a small step away from having a popup notification on my main screen about a new email.
  - gknoy 6y ago
    I've found switching between four or five virtual desktops (e.g. when I'm using the laptop without any extra monitors) is more annoying. I'm not sure why but I think it's the extra hassle of switching between three things, vs only two.
silentwanderer 6y ago
I definitely agree that large single screens are better in some cases, but not everyone can afford a 27” 4K monitor. I can however, afford the 1080p monitor I found at the thrift store. Most of the time I use my second screen for documentation, anyways - I don’t have to interact with it heavily.
- gowld 6y ago
  $250 for something you are going to use for 1000-5000 hrs seems worth scrimping for.
strig 6y ago
For me, the second screen isn't there for me to focus on. It's there to keep the focus on the main screen. I keep my less-used programs (spotify, discord, etc) on the secondary display so I don't have to constantly alt-tab on my main display.
- julbaxter 6y ago
  What an electronic and energy waste only to avoid doing some keystrokes!
  - majewsky 6y ago
    I have a work notebook, so the second screen in my setup is the notebook screen. This screen is there anyway, so there is no electronic waste. As for the energy, the notebook overall consumes about 10 W during normal use. My estimate for the screen's power usage is about half of that, so maybe 4-6 W. To put that into perspective, my body's baseline energy usage is 90 W.
    - julbaxter 6y ago
      I do also have two screens: one laptop for work and one PC for personal usage (my company does not allow me to use the laptop for personal usage). Individually we can all find "mitigating factors" but collectively we failed finding the right balance between comfort and sustainability. The multi-screen trend is now pursuing its mainstreamification to every offices and home desktops. But at the same time Earth is sending us warnings: we need to slow down. Given the state of our knowledge on that matter, I am surprised that the general consensus on YN is not to have less screens and reserve the resources to better usage.
  - strig 6y ago
    It's not a waste if I use it.
- WesleyJohnson 6y ago
  I second this. The tech team at my company has become increasingly more reliant on Teams, but I don't always see the notifications. Having a dedicated Teams monitor helps he me catch things in my peripheral that might otherwise go unnoticed. It also means I can shift my point of focus throughout the day, by looking over at the secondary monitor to catch up on anything I've missed in the last 10-15 minutes. I know the idea of changing focus to help eyestrain is more geared towards looking at things much further away, but every little bit helps.
vonmoltke 6y ago
> Productivity? I can only focus on one thing at a time. Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. I have two 28" 4K external monitors, and both are completel covered in multiple windows for the one thing I am working on right now (well, would be if I wasn't posting this). It really depends on what your workflow is like and what constitutes a "thing".
- gowld 6y ago
  > multiple windows for the one thing I am working on right now Are they windows you need to look at at the same time?
MaulingMonkey 6y ago
> neck aches I get these when I have monitors unbalanced off to one side and have my head constantly turned in that direction. On the other hand I've had 5-wide monitor setups and been fine, because they were properly balanced. > Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. Conversely, constantly managing which windows are on top and visible is overhead I don't need to deal with. I use a quad 4k 29" monitor setups at minimum these days, and bought the extra monitors for workplaces that won't provide them. I want documentation, my IDE, my fullscreen game I'm debugging, etc. all visible at once without the need to constantly alt+tab around. In many cases I yearn for a 5th monitor. Debugging networked stuff, for example, might benefit from two debuggers, two fullscreen games, and then I'm already forced to split monitors if I want documentation. For desktop games I can at least split one monitor between two game windows - although that's not an option for console dev, typically, unless I want to resort to even more fiddly picture-in-picture nonsense... EDIT: I'll also print off sheet music single-sided so all pages are visible at once - and so I don't have to raise my hands off the instrument to flip pages. Same principle IMO - place stuff in a relatively stable configuration once up front, so it's not constantly interrupting my flow.
- scruple 6y ago
  What do you mean by "unbalanced" and "balanced" here? I'm curious because I've recently started to suspect some neck pain may be due to the way I have my two desktop monitors placed.
  - edoceo 6y ago
    Prime view is center, so with two it's one middle, one left (or right). Balance meaning your head direction is equal parts left/right
    - joezydeco 6y ago
      And balance for two screens means you’re staring directly ahead at the gap between the monitors.
gpderetta 6y ago
Agree with you. I have a three 24” (or is it 26?) monitors setup back in the office. Being stuck at home for a while, I bought an ultrawide 32” 4K for my home. Even with my ageing laptop being able to only drive it at 30hz, I vastly prefer the single 4k to the three monitor setup (I think the actual pixel real estate is larger even if the physical surface is smaller).
- cpursley 6y ago
  Which ultrawide monitor did purchase and do you recommend it?
  - gpderetta 6y ago
    I have a curved Samsung U32R590; got it for ~£370. It is pretty nice, but the black is at best light gray. It doesn't matter for work (which is the primary reason I bought it), but it might be an issue for watching movies. Only other issue I had is that my aging x220 couldn't do 4k with displayport-to-HDMI adapter I had at home and I had to buy a proper displayport cable. It wasn't my first choice (I was interested in some more expensive BenQ models), but when I bought it the options on amazon (or elsewhere, really) were limited. Still I would buy it again. edit: also, I called it ultrawide, but while wider (and curvier) than other monitors, it is not actually ultrawide.
csomar 6y ago
I know to each his own but multiple screens is kind of a must for web dev. I'd like my main screen to be a regular 1920x1080 "27 and have two 24" screens flipped. One for documentation, one for coding and one for the actual browser. I even make use of three screens for Rust dev. One for documentation, one for the editor and one for execution.

by m0xte 6y ago

core-questions 6y ago

Disagree. Working with four (shitty) monitors now and I just want more. I'll spin around in my chair if I have to.

ericol 6y ago
I also disagree. When the pandemic started I left a couple of my monitors at the cowork space where I had my desk, and had to do with what I had at home (one 1920 x 1080 and another at 1366 x whatever). I had another monitor lying around, and eventually I plugged it into my box as well. As I didn't have a way to keep the monitor in a decent position... I put it as a "console" window, almost on level to the keyboard and right in the space between it and the larger monitor I had. Eventually I went to pick my stuff from the cowork, so now I have 3 HD monitors arranged in portrait mode side by side; and I still crave for the "console" window. Although I do reckon I wouldn't mind having a 4K monitor, but the price of those in my country are prohibitive (To the tune of +400 USD last time I checked). Also I'm looking forward to the point that I can buy a decent VR headset, and then I think I'll be at a point of no return.
- nicoburns 6y ago
  I've recently upgraded to a 27" 4k monitor (luckily work paid), and it's actually made a surprisingly big difference. The main advantage being much better text legibility, which enables me to fit a lot more on the screen in practice. I'd love to have 2 or 3, but alas I don't think my MacBook is powerful enough to handle it (even aside from the expense)
cecilpl2 6y ago
I have a 6-monitor stand at home filled with 24" monitors in a 2x3 grid. It's amazing, and yet I still don't have enough room for everything. I want 8.

gknoy 6y ago

> I can only focus on one thing at a time. Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. I find that having different things live on different monitors (and virtual desktops on those monitors) helps me focus on things more easily. E-mail/calendar/Jira is on my side monitor, whereas my main one is filled only with my editor and terminal. It helps because I can _avoid thinking about_ things that aren't on my main screen, until such time as I need a break and deliberately shift focus.

luckylion 6y ago
Is there a reason you don't simply put them on a virtual desktop and switch to that desktop instead of turning your head to look at a different monitor? Maybe it's my slightly lowered perception threshold, but having a screen in my peripheral vision where e.g. new emails could be seen wouldn't be useful: I'd still see that a new email has arrived and would still need to decide whether I want to look at it now or whether that can/has to wait. And that's only a small step away from having a popup notification on my main screen about a new email.
- gknoy 6y ago
  I've found switching between four or five virtual desktops (e.g. when I'm using the laptop without any extra monitors) is more annoying. I'm not sure why but I think it's the extra hassle of switching between three things, vs only two.

silentwanderer 6y ago

I definitely agree that large single screens are better in some cases, but not everyone can afford a 27” 4K monitor. I can however, afford the 1080p monitor I found at the thrift store. Most of the time I use my second screen for documentation, anyways - I don’t have to interact with it heavily.

gowld 6y ago
$250 for something you are going to use for 1000-5000 hrs seems worth scrimping for.

strig 6y ago

For me, the second screen isn't there for me to focus on. It's there to keep the focus on the main screen. I keep my less-used programs (spotify, discord, etc) on the secondary display so I don't have to constantly alt-tab on my main display.

julbaxter 6y ago
What an electronic and energy waste only to avoid doing some keystrokes!
- majewsky 6y ago
  I have a work notebook, so the second screen in my setup is the notebook screen. This screen is there anyway, so there is no electronic waste. As for the energy, the notebook overall consumes about 10 W during normal use. My estimate for the screen's power usage is about half of that, so maybe 4-6 W. To put that into perspective, my body's baseline energy usage is 90 W.
  - julbaxter 6y ago
    I do also have two screens: one laptop for work and one PC for personal usage (my company does not allow me to use the laptop for personal usage). Individually we can all find "mitigating factors" but collectively we failed finding the right balance between comfort and sustainability. The multi-screen trend is now pursuing its mainstreamification to every offices and home desktops. But at the same time Earth is sending us warnings: we need to slow down. Given the state of our knowledge on that matter, I am surprised that the general consensus on YN is not to have less screens and reserve the resources to better usage.
- strig 6y ago
  It's not a waste if I use it.
WesleyJohnson 6y ago
I second this. The tech team at my company has become increasingly more reliant on Teams, but I don't always see the notifications. Having a dedicated Teams monitor helps he me catch things in my peripheral that might otherwise go unnoticed. It also means I can shift my point of focus throughout the day, by looking over at the secondary monitor to catch up on anything I've missed in the last 10-15 minutes. I know the idea of changing focus to help eyestrain is more geared towards looking at things much further away, but every little bit helps.

vonmoltke 6y ago

> Productivity? I can only focus on one thing at a time. Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. I have two 28" 4K external monitors, and both are completel covered in multiple windows for the one thing I am working on right now (well, would be if I wasn't posting this). It really depends on what your workflow is like and what constitutes a "thing".

gowld 6y ago
> multiple windows for the one thing I am working on right now Are they windows you need to look at at the same time?

MaulingMonkey 6y ago

> neck aches I get these when I have monitors unbalanced off to one side and have my head constantly turned in that direction. On the other hand I've had 5-wide monitor setups and been fine, because they were properly balanced. > Managing windows and which screens they are on is an overhead I don’t need to deal with. Conversely, constantly managing which windows are on top and visible is overhead I don't need to deal with. I use a quad 4k 29" monitor setups at minimum these days, and bought the extra monitors for workplaces that won't provide them. I want documentation, my IDE, my fullscreen game I'm debugging, etc. all visible at once without the need to constantly alt+tab around. In many cases I yearn for a 5th monitor. Debugging networked stuff, for example, might benefit from two debuggers, two fullscreen games, and then I'm already forced to split monitors if I want documentation. For desktop games I can at least split one monitor between two game windows - although that's not an option for console dev, typically, unless I want to resort to even more fiddly picture-in-picture nonsense... EDIT: I'll also print off sheet music single-sided so all pages are visible at once - and so I don't have to raise my hands off the instrument to flip pages. Same principle IMO - place stuff in a relatively stable configuration once up front, so it's not constantly interrupting my flow.

scruple 6y ago
What do you mean by "unbalanced" and "balanced" here? I'm curious because I've recently started to suspect some neck pain may be due to the way I have my two desktop monitors placed.
- edoceo 6y ago
  Prime view is center, so with two it's one middle, one left (or right). Balance meaning your head direction is equal parts left/right
  - joezydeco 6y ago
    And balance for two screens means you’re staring directly ahead at the gap between the monitors.

gpderetta 6y ago

Agree with you. I have a three 24” (or is it 26?) monitors setup back in the office. Being stuck at home for a while, I bought an ultrawide 32” 4K for my home. Even with my ageing laptop being able to only drive it at 30hz, I vastly prefer the single 4k to the three monitor setup (I think the actual pixel real estate is larger even if the physical surface is smaller).

cpursley 6y ago
Which ultrawide monitor did purchase and do you recommend it?
- gpderetta 6y ago
  I have a curved Samsung U32R590; got it for ~£370. It is pretty nice, but the black is at best light gray. It doesn't matter for work (which is the primary reason I bought it), but it might be an issue for watching movies. Only other issue I had is that my aging x220 couldn't do 4k with displayport-to-HDMI adapter I had at home and I had to buy a proper displayport cable. It wasn't my first choice (I was interested in some more expensive BenQ models), but when I bought it the options on amazon (or elsewhere, really) were limited. Still I would buy it again. edit: also, I called it ultrawide, but while wider (and curvier) than other monitors, it is not actually ultrawide.

csomar 6y ago

I know to each his own but multiple screens is kind of a must for web dev. I'd like my main screen to be a regular 1920x1080 "27 and have two 24" screens flipped. One for documentation, one for coding and one for the actual browser. I even make use of three screens for Rust dev. One for documentation, one for the editor and one for execution.