4 ms·
I know exactly where each bit of info is, and I just dart my eyes to the appropriate monitor, or tilt my head slightly, which is far, far easier and faster than
by leptons 3y ago
I know exactly where each bit of info is, and I just dart my eyes to the appropriate monitor, or tilt my head slightly, which is far, far easier and faster than switching through dozens of windows to find the one I need. The windows I need are already open exactly where they should be, I always know where they are, and the latency between me and the data I need is practically nothing, zero.
My three 32" 4k screens are equivalent to 6 pretty big 24" screens, essentially one big 55" screen and sitting with my head against my chair's headrest I my eyes can see every corner of all of it without having to move my neck one millimeter, my eyes effortlessly move around and I can see all the data. Maybe you have some kind of problem with your eyes that prevents that, but it's absolutely easy to find the data I need with zero additional effort.
It's way more efficient than having 1 screen and locating the data required constantly. The difference in friction is very noticeable and painful when I'm only on one screen because it does slow me down, and there's no way around that for anyone, one screen always means more cognitive load and higher latency to getting the data in front of your eyes. Shortcuts and virtual desktops don't change that. And, often things happen that I catch in my peripheral vision, like console logs I'm expecting to happen, that I wouldn't be able to catch if the window isn't visible.
Sorry but you'll never convince me that 1 monitor is in any way superior to multiple monitors, it just does not compute.
- d-lisp 3y agoWell, I don't even have to turn my head, <super + ]> and the screen for the web browser appears in front of my eyes. To be fair, on my keyboard super + ] is right thumb + right index finger. I have shortcuts for every program that I use, and every program that I use has its virtual desktop binded to some key combination on what is a very weird keyboard. And I maintain that a small screen is perfect for redacting code (and I had a similar setup of yours in the past).
- leptons 3y ago>Well, I don't even have to turn my head NEITHER DO I. I don't know how much clearer I can make that, yet you still refuse to understand. ><super + ]> and the screen for the web browser appears in front of my eyes. To be fair, on my keyboard super + ] is right thumb + right index finger. I have shortcuts for every program that I use, and every program that I use has its virtual desktop binded to some key combination on what is a very weird keyboard. None of this is relevant to me in the least. I don't have to do any of it, because all the info I need is already in view of my eyeballs >>without moving my head at all<<, as if that's even some kind of manufactured inconvenience. >And I maintain that a small screen is perfect for redacting code (and I had a similar setup of yours in the past). Sure, if all you do is interact with one single text editor, and not any of the many other screens that modern development requires. Having this conversation with you is pointless, enjoy your mediocre computing experience.
- d-lisp 3y agoThat's not mediocre by any mean, it's highly probable my setup virtually covers more screen area than yours.
- leptons 3y agoI use virtual desktops with my huge monitor real estate, so no, you don't get to claim that. And I can see more going on at the same time. It's absolutely more efficient than a single screen for my complex development needs. There's just so many workflows that are so much better with multiple displays, but you really just can't see it? I'm sorry, but you have a mediocre computing experience, and I know it, because I have a laptop and I know what using one screen is like vs. efficiently being able to see more data at the same time. I know all the tricks, I've been computing for 40+ years. I also know that hardware is cheap, and my time is not cheap, and more information being displayed definitely does increase my efficiency. I was just developing a 3d model using OpenJSCAD with code in one window, and a view of the 3D model in 2 perspectives in 2 other windows. I write code, hit save, and see the 3d model update, and it's a very visual oriented thing, switching windows so I can see the result would remove my ability to see the updates happen, which informs me that the model is updated correctly. I also have a debugger window open and other windows that I always need to see all the time. You just can't do this with a single screen, it's not possible without cutting the screen up into tiny sections or constantly flipping between them which is DX friction. It's simply an excruciatingly cramped experience to get what I have within a single screen, and no mental gymnastics you could do would change that.
- d-lisp 3y agoWell, I honestly do such things on one monitor and I don't need more, I don't know what else to say; switching virtual desktops seamlessly is second nature and from this I fail to see the point of having multiple monitors when there is a clever approach to the problem. Shader editor, game engine, IDE, debugger, all of this can fit on a single screen, be peeked when needed to, you can layer stuff, make use of transparency, whatever you want given the appropriate window manager and keybindings server, I prefer to invest on this than on monitors as it seems a clever way to get informations from the computer. You can develop a 3d model by not looking at it when you code, because you are coding and not drawing or sculpting and because what you do is deterministic.