3 ms·

from gapingvoid: "10. The more talented somebody is, the less they need the props. Meeting a person who wrote a masterpiece on the back of a deli menu would no

• scott_s 18y ago
  The difference is that a fancy pen and a fancy writing table are functionally the same as a cheap pen and a cheap writing table. One is just a more expensive version of the other. On the other hand, an aeron chair can be appreciably more comfortable than a cheap alternative, and multiple monitors can reduce the amount of friction a developer experiences (e.g., code in one window, documentation in another). While it's true that good people can make good with little, they can do better with more. If, of course, that "more" is something of actual productive value.
  • windsurfer 18y ago
    I don't know about you, but I can't look in more than one direction at once. I have never really needed multiple monitors, and when I've tried them, I find them a hindrance. I find it frustrating when monitors have different resolutions and things don't line up. I also lose the "edges" of desktops when I have multiple monitors. For example: I can't easily click something on the top right of the screen because if I move too far right, I'm on the other monitor. And not to mention the constant managing of windows and setting things up to open on the right monitor. I much prefer virtual desktops on my 1280x800 screen. Some tools might reduce the "friction" but reduce functionality and usability in ways that you don't think of. As another example, I frequently see people creating huge hierarchies of folders in their home folders such as "/home/user/projects/school/year/class01/week_number/assignment_number/revision/". They think they're being organized, when really, they're just slowing themselves down. It makes it easier to classify things, but it makes it harder to actually get things done.
    • scott_s 18y ago
      I don't use multiple monitors, but I know several people who use them, and feel they are more productive with them. Their reasons seem reasonable to me.
      • deleted 18y ago
        [deleted]
      • prewett 18y ago
        Multiple monitors is really handy for GUI development. Particularly on Windows. Visual Studio eats up tons of space, so your program overlaps the code you are stepping through, leading to a lot of repaint messages that can make tracing through code tedious. Plus, windows can't be moved, resized, minimized, or otherwise interacted with until Windows can call their wndproc. Debugging an always-on-top window (like a menu) is a pain. Multiple monitors is less effective on Linux. X can unmap, move, etc. windows without their permission, so virtual desktops still work when a program is being debugged (like when you need to look up documentation). Plus, emacs is pretty slim, visually, so you can often fit your program right next to it. 'Course, if you use eclipse, it sucks up extra space like VS. (Vista might be able to move windows without their permission, since the contents are redirected to a buffer. I don't have vista to try.)
        • kingnothing 18y ago
          I like using multiple monitors largely for the aforementioned reason that you can have code on one screen and documentation / web page output / forum discussions / IRC on another. In my opinion it is far easier to context switch by simply looking left and right as opposed to continuously switching between windows being in the foreground or background. I also think it's faster to look around than alt-tab, plus you don't lose your spot on the page you're reading / document you're writing as easily when compared to having the text completely disappear from view after switching window focus on a single monitor setup.
    • hhm 18y ago
      I have used twice monitors once, in a different office setup than mine, and I found it incredibly useful. After that experience, I wouldn't stop before, say, five monitors no less. But I keep using only one as I don't really care that much.
  • anamax 18y ago
    > The difference is that a fancy pen and a fancy writing table are functionally the same as a cheap pen and a cheap writing table. One is just a more expensive version of the other. Actually, while some forms of the output may be functionally equivalent (it's hard to do good calligraphy with a ball-point), the experience isn't. (Some folks really enjoy using fine pens.) It's unclear how the experience affects the output.