|
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote: I will go for "whatever" only.
Often the "whatever" is a deathly boring video conference with the boss.
|
|
|
|
|
That is the afterjob life, in my beforemarriage life, I am usually on a Skype call with my girl. So, I can understand your problems! 
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, more screen real estate, the better. I could use one screen, but switching application slows my productivity. I use 2 27 inch monitors and a laptop screen and I still wish I had more. We think nothing of adding more disk space or processors when we need them, so why not add hardware to increase your throughput, even if it is extra monitors.
For me, I will have my IDE open in one screen, email in another, google in a third (or MSDN). Rather than switching between them (unproductive), I prefer to be viewing them together. Less work for me and more work output from me.
I did come across a company a couple of years ago that allows you to have this setup. It is called Matrox. I don’t have the original add or email any more, but you can google it. Look at http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/displayport/.
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum 2 now I'm using 3 given I have a laptop as my dev machine and a dock station with two 24" displays...
On for the programming environment, the other one for testing and executing and the last one for e-mail internet...
|
|
|
|
|
3 is still satisfactory, I mean I understand using 3 screens, but more than that is confusing and not at all useful, unless required by the framework (as already discussed for Medical or other such uses).
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
You won't believe the increase on productivity the second display means.
And then, of course, depending on the kind of job you do it will help (or not) having more displays.
2 big ones is ok for me, but 3 is even better. Only a few times I've wished having more than 3...
There are cases in which I need a virtual oscilloscope to keep an eye on the behavior of my PLC while the code is being debugged and other tasks are running there... but this (in my case) is not common.
I guess everyone will have it's own preferences/needs but 2 displays in one computer is a great thing.
|
|
|
|
|
I have just one, but use Linux screen[^] on several virtual machines, do they count?
|
|
|
|
|
Virtual setups are fine as I already said, I can create multiple desktops in Windows 10, similarly creating everything virtual is fine and physically up to 2-4 is also fine.
But physically adding screens and making up, like 6 or 5, for programming purposes? I won't fathom.  Can you?
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Having just one, I buy 'the more the better' argument. 
|
|
|
|
|
2 works for what I do but I use a laptop always in "feet up" mode so I suffer along with one screen and side by side if I have to.
|
|
|
|
|
Oddly, I'm comfortable within 1 to 6. I've been doing a lot of work on a laptop recently with just 1 screen, and my desktop has 3, which is awesome, as I often have multiple browsers, IDE's, and other documents open. I've used 6 (spread across a couple computers using Synergy to share the mouse and keyboard) which was a huge advantage when I was having to remote into several different machines as well as keep my development environment open. Never had the opportunity to use more than 6, but the way I see it, the more the better.
Of course, a couple of these babies[^] would do too.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
After reviewing many comments, in which 3 is the most common term, I think I am lagging behind for having 2 laptops only.
I will from now on purchase more screens only. JK, I will stick to using one machine for each purpose. 
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
I use two. Generally one for VS and one for SQL.
I see Philips now have a cheap 40 " UHD monitor for the same price as their old 28". It has software that allows you you set it up with up to four virtual monitors.
Looks good. I just need to get work to get one as a test
modified 22-Aug-15 16:12pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I will consider this 40" option for myself also.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Most have 1 or 2 screens, occasionally 3, and this guy in question has 6.
In my work, my system is so powerful, that it GOES UP TO 11 ![^]
|
|
|
|
|
Terry Pratchett was asked why he had six monitors. His reply: "Because I don't have enough space for eight"
Two is brilliant - orders of magnitude better than one. Three, I'd like to try. Four, I could fit in - just - but I'd need a new video card, which means a new PC as it's only half height. Six? I could use it. I don't think that for what I do, it'd be that much of an improvement - but I didn't think two would make that much difference either.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm.
*Makes plan about going to the nearest market to purchase a bunch of new screens for system!*
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
At work I have only five on my main machine. It supports six but I don't have room for the other one as I also have my laptop plus another screen to provide a total of seven. ...and I use all of them almost all the time. One for email, one for SQL, two more for VS (sometimes two projects simultaneously), another for remote access to a few servers and I also have to support four different browsers (IE, Chrome, FF & Safari) so I run tests on the other screens and then there's CP, Google and other stuff.
At home I manage on three, across two PCs but with one keyboard and mouse using Input Director (a tool like Synergy).
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
For me, it's not a matter of number of screens, but total real-estate, aka resolution.
I have a 40" 4K TV (3820x2160) and a pair of 24" monitors (1920x1200) on my desk.
The 4K display by itself provides you with a ridiculous amount of space, but I'm not going to give up the two other displays I already had.
There's no going back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am always amazed how people can manage more than one screen. I had 2 for a while at office and never really made any good use of it. I am probably way too much used to Alt + tab and Ctrl + tab.
|
|
|
|
|
Just being able to have Chrome or a PDF open full screen on one monitor, while coding fullscreen on the other makes it soooooo worth while!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am using 2 (24" - 1920 x 1200) Screens. And it really makes the difference.
I have tried using 3 screens, but that's too much. (Apart from the functional part - You often look stupid when trying to find windows on it )
So IMHO 2 is the right setup. Anything less or more will affect the productivity.
... and 6 - he must be really using his revolving chair instead of alt+tab.
|
|
|
|
|
I use two, and I could make use of a third. I don't think I would like the whole row-on-top thing.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
