|
PC supports 4 but have 3 - which seems to be enough for my usage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Mac has been able to support 2 monitors providing a single Desktop since the MacSE[^] was intro'd in 1987.
I've been using *at least* 2 monitors since 1988, Boyz!
It was way cooler when the Mac II [^]came out with 6 NuBus slots. We added 6 video cards and [with *NO* change to the OS needed] Voila! We had a 6-monitor Desktop!!
Here's a fun "multi-monitor" story for ya:
I was at an Education-focused computer trade show (NECC at the time) in Dallas, TX, in 1990. I was there to do tech stuff for the Apple booth and set up a Mac-based Kiosk (we called it "HyperKiosk) system for show attendees.
I'm in the "Executive Briefing Ceneter" [a dedicated area Apple used to do it's sales pitches; it opens 10am] around 9:40am and a knock comes at the main door. The actual sales staff aren't around (yet) and this group looked "important". I'm dressed business casual, so I put my Apple Badge on and answer the door.
I learn they're there for a 10:00am appt. I check their credentials and let them in (things were casual back then; none of today's security crap) and invite them to look around; I had already turned on some Macs the could 'play around' with.
One guy was looking at the Mac IIci [^], which had internal video and 3 NuBus expansion slots. I keyed in this guy was involved in IT of the major School District they represented.
He asked me about the "video" difference between the Mac IIcx [^] which has no internal video but 3 NuBus slots and the Mac IIci's internal video + 3 NuBus slots.
I noted they both technically had practically the same video chips.
"I can show you them side-by-side, if you'd like," I noted.
"Sure, that'd be great," he responded, "I've never used Macs; not exactly impressed by their limited abilities."
I then shut the systems down. I glanced at him and he had a slightly perplexed look.
I then took the video card out of the IIcx. Another glance at him and he was getting more perplexed
I then put the video card into the IIci. Another glace his direction and he's really perplexed.
I then powered on the IIci. Both monitors were on, 1 monitor with the menubar, hard disk icon and Trash. The other had only basic gray desktop with no other objects on it.
I double-clicked the disk, showed the Finder window, then double-clicked into a MacWrite document. I then found a small MacPaint file (a sailing ship) and open it up. I then opened a new MacWrite document. All 3 documents were on the same monitor.
These next steps happened lightening-fast (well, the then "lightening-fast" speed of computers!).
I dragged the new MacWrite doc to the 2nd monitor. I then copied the sailing ship and pasted it into the new MacWrite doc, then copied some of the content from other MacWrite doc and pasted it into the new MacWrite doc.
"What did you just do?!" he exclaimed, seeming hard to hold his lower-jaw back up, for I guess it dropped to the floor.
In about 5 minutes, I explained awesomeness of a multi-monitor computer system.
It was 9:55am and the Sales Executive came in (I met him the day before).
I said my customary "Howdy" and noted what I just demo'd. "Wow, I didn't know you could do that," he quietly noted.
I left and went about my business for the day.
2 weeks later I learned that the large School District, of whom I gave that 2-monitor demo to their chief IT dude, moved forward with a multi-year multi-million dollar contract, of which the School District execs noted their decision was majorly based on my "demo". All I got was a "Thank You" T-shirt from the Sales Executive. Ce La-vie!
==== END story
Then things got totally radical when the Mac IIfx[^] came out and NEC had a NuBus 6-port expansion setup.
We got a-hold of 6 of these 6-port NuBux expansion bays and slapped in 36 video cards. Now, this did require a change to the video-portion of the then Mac OS Toolbox and a rebuild of the Mac OS; that change stayed in.
PRESTO! A 36-monitor desktop. We dubbed it "MacFly Vision".
Man, dem wuz da dayz!
|
|
|
|
|
interesting story you shared...thnk you
|
|
|
|
|
Me too, I use two monitors. Two is enough for me.
Roberto
|
|
|
|
|
I like two monitors but I prefer 4:3 rather than the two 1080p widescreen god awful things I have on my desk at work.
Firstly, I like vertical space not horizontal, and rotating a 1080p through 90 degrees just marks you out as some sort of deviant.
Secondly I keep losing the cursor as it goes out of my peripheral vision, two 1080p monitors side by side are just too wide.
I keep asking toying with the idea of a single 27" with a 2560x1440 resolution, but then would I just want a 2560x1600, which I can't afford at present?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gee, what's up with you CP poll makers? that's the best option for development, and by far my best pick in the last few years!
What's the point of developing on my slow limited local machine, unless you have to?
Never underestimate the difference U can make in the lives of others.
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
I also considered this alternative, but only if you can do everything on the remote server (even watching movies on Microsoft's Channel9), and if you can use two monitors in the Remote Desktop connection.
Enjoy life, this is not a rehearsal !!!
|
|
|
|
|
Edo Tzumer wrote: What's the point of developing on my slow limited local machine
Well, why do you have a slow limited local machine and a powerful remote one in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
First thing's first - I only need an RDP and I work from any place I wish.
This is besides the fact that keeping a powerful server as your desktop isn't in most cases an option.
Never underestimate the difference U can make in the lives of others.
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
What's the machine your RDP into?
Your thin client isn't a development machine. It's a thin client into a development machine.
So what is really missing is "[ ] Workstation or Supercomputer".
Except I challenge any single developer here to say that that's what they'd buy if they needed a new development machine for themselves.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The machine I RDP is usually project dependent,
the current one is Xeon(R) E5530 @ 2.4GHzX2.4GHz, with 36.0 GB (with Win2k8 R2 as OS), (which is [at the moment] too expensive for me to get as a desktop  )
I accept the citation on the missing option 
However:Chris wrote: Except I challenge any single developer here to say that...
I challenge any\most single developers here owns their LTD\LLC and are working from home...
Never underestimate the difference U can make in the lives of others.
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
What's the point of developing on my slow limited local machine, unless you have to?
Gee, could slow and expensive network bandwidth have anything to do with it? 
To iterate is human, to recurse divine.
|
|
|
|
|
Edo Tzumer wrote: my slow limited local machine
I actually have a powerful local machine, with an SSD, 16 GB RAM, a 23' and a 24' screen.
Fair enough, a physical whiteboard for notes beside my desk does a wonderful job as notepad.
|
|
|
|
|
Marco wrote: SSD, 16 GB RAM
This is great 
However most of us don't get as powerful PC as (the usually) many available servers at work.
Never underestimate the difference U can make in the lives of others.
∫(Edo )dx = Tzumer
∑k( this.Kid) k = this. ♥
|
|
|
|
|
Why a laptop?
Although desktop machines can still achieve much better performances, laptops are already much better than we usually need as software developers. There are some exceptions, but 99% of us could still develop pretty well on a powered up 10 year old machine (hand up who still does!  ).
So a top class Ultra Laptop connected to an external big monitor is the best of two worlds, power and portability.
Thin && Light
Although I don't usually take my work home, I like to always have a computer with me.
Phones are getting better but are still miles away from a proper computer.
This said, I like to carry a portable machine, not a transportable one 
P.S.: They also look nicer in meetings. 
Power
Although I don't really need the top CPU + all the memory the board can handle, I need to work on a machine that doesn't waste my concentration.
I get annoyed and distracted on slow machines so I tend to buy the best I can get.
Still to improve
Batteries... definitely...
I know this fight goes well beyond laptops but batteries technology, in general, is deprecated.
Devices power last longer but it's not because the batteries are getting better.
Having a battery 24/7 connected to the plug will screw the battery sooner than later, and if it's a Ultra Laptop usually the battery isn't easily removable.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: laptops are already much better than we usually need as software developers
Personally, I hate them for anything serious - simply because the keyboards and "mouse substitute" are cr@p.
The keyboards are too cramped, and don't have enough travel for good feel on the keys.
Those stupid touch plate things drive me round the twist - give me a proper mouse (or better trackball) anyday. And with a mouse wheel for scrolling / zooming / closing tabs as well.
Yes, I know you can plug two monitors, and a proper keyboard, and a proper mouse into a lappy, but then all you have is a desktop that takes up too much desk space, costs three times as much, and is both more easily stolen and left in the train / tube / pub.
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, true.
I kind of got used to laptop keyboards, and I manage to be pretty fast on these new chiclet keyboard style but I agree it's not the same.
For the mouse it's ok... I don't use it that much anyway.
And I might be one of the few that prefers the TrackPoint over the MousePad.
Another advantage is that you can have only one machine instead of having multiple on each desk, and if it's a true Ultra Laptop you'll never miss a Tablet (so one less gadget to carry around).
But yeah... a powerful desktop is always a powerful desktop!
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: true Ultra Laptop you'll never miss a Tablet
I disagree to an extent - my 7" tablet fits in my coat pocket, so along with my keys, wallet, phone and so forth it it pretty much always with me. A lappy (or even a 10" tablet) needs to be carried - and that's not always that easy.
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
|
|
|
|
|
I guess there are enough devices and form factors to suite everyone's needs
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: I need to work on a machine that doesn't waste my concentration.
I get annoyed and distracted on slow machines so I tend to buy the best I can get.
That's why I have desktop. There are not laptops that have very quick SSD and 12gig of memory and which have also reasonable price.
AlexCode wrote: Although I don't usually take my work home, I like to always have a computer with me.
And that's why I have also small and cheep laptop. If I need to go to customer or to a meeting it's sufficient for Word, Powerpoint and few emails. Most of my work I do in home (remote job rocks! ) anyway on my quick desktop.
No more Mister Nice Guy... >: |
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, but no. Ultra-whatever laptops are great for answering e-mail in a train/plane/boat, but for serious work they are too uncomfortable and underpowered.
|
|
|
|
|
The comfort I agree... but for the power...
For me a Core i7 (Core i5 is good enough also) with 8Gb and an good SSD works pretty well.
Usually I have multiple instances of VS open, (consuming 1Gb each ), Eclipse and SQL Server running with Management Studio.
Other apps and services also running like IIS, Sublime Text 2, multiple browsers... whatever.
And it works without any problems with Windows 7.
The mSATA SSD makes the difference here but my other laptop (a normal 3kg DELL laptop), currently also with 8Gb of RAM can go up to 16Gb and hold normal SATA 2.5" SSD.
So, unless our needs heavily depend on Graphical performance, any top notch ultra-laptop powered up to the max should be enough for any application developer.
And as usual, it all comes down to what you need on-the-go.
For my usage makes no sense to carry around a Browser or a Powerpoint. I need a full powered machine on my backpack.
Geeks!
Cheers mate!
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: For me a Core i7 (Core i5 is good enough also) with 8Gb and an good SSD works pretty well.
The product I am currently working on[^] will refuse to start on such a machine - I believe the current limit is 24 GB RAM. My workstation has 256 GB RAM, 32 CPU cores and 1 TB SSD drive. Give me an ultrabook that comes even close to that.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
