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.
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.
> 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.
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.
> 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".
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).
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.
Two screens seems like a no-brainer for what I consider the typical HN reader as I think they are likely a software developer.
Especially if the one screen is a laptop screen.
I find myself much more productive having a standard keyboard, mouse, and large monitors. Then when I have to attempt to do my work using just a laptop with no accessories.
I am impressed with the people who are highly productive with a tiny laptop screen. I have seen them in action. Unfortunately that isn't me :(
I haven't used two screens in years! A 4k single display is great for me. I can get two windows side-by-side and that is the most I ever need. If I need more than 2 windows I feel my workflow needs help.
The funny thing is I work so much better with just the single 13" screen on my laptop. Every window I work with is maximized and allows me to focus on one thing at a time.
About the only thing I use a second screen for is videoconferencing.
But, to each their own. Everyone's work style is different.
I've really come to love ultrawides with a nice tile window manager (currently amethyst on MacOS). Reduces the need to either have my head tilted towards one of the screens, or move between them.
I've also got an ipad with sidecar as a second monitor for always on things like spotify or the occasional zoom.
Just to be clear, he decided he needed a second screen after he decided he needed a second home, and a home office with a separate room for a video-conference app.
He may be right that the second screen helps. But maybe it's worth saying it in a way that isn't tied in with a level of wealth that signals that his problems are often unlike most people's problems.
I was thinking that the author was going to be arguing that anything more than 2 screens is a bad idea. (Because seriously, where the heck did my mouse go? I can't find it and it's somewhere on one of these 3 monitors in front of me).
I can't fathom being a professional in the tech world and not having two monitors.
Windows' mouse properties control panel has "Display pointer trails" and "Show location of pointer when I press the Ctrl key" options to make the pomouse pointer more findable.
On Windows I recommend using the Inverted (Extra large) scheme for the mouse cursor. It’s dynamic - becomes black on a white background and white on a black background; works with other colors too, even with complex textures. It’s a life saver.
When this topic comes up I like to chip in to remind the quiet readers that not everyone does the 4k * N screens thing.
I was confused for a long time as to why people seem to need larger and larger screens (not want, but need, it would seem). That changed when recently I had to use a GUI static analysis toolkit on my 1440 screen. It was too small. The GUI wasn't customizable and its usage on my screen was very awkward. Its single window was split into a number of panes, all of which were too small to use comfortably without constant horizontal and vertical panning.
The mentioned GUI's devs created it for big screens. I'd guess that this happens with popular IDEs as well, right? In a way it's about modifying hardware to adhere to software. Sounds backwards.
The reason why a 1440 laptop screen is enough for me is that I use vim and cli for pretty much everything except browsing. That makes my workspace relatively space efficient.
Primary 4k monitor center of desk; macbook on a stand to the side. Put the speaker video fullscreen on the macbook and now you are making eye contact when you are looking at them, and not when you're not.
I've been sharing this tip (joining an online meeting using two devices / screens) ever since the beginning of WFH. I will join a meeting using my phone as the camera and have the UI set to display a grid of faces. I will join that same meeting using my PC and have the UI set to display whatever the presenter is projecting. This lets me minimize the parallax when I'm talking to someone and it lets me use my 43" monitor to see whatever it is that the presenter is projecting (often in some tiny font because ... we're all learning).
This works for both Zoom and Teams - I haven't tried other meeting solutions.
I'm doing something similar. I have a laptop for communications (mainly Zoom, but a bit of Cisco SeeMe as well) and an iMac for remoting into my work machine. Many times I put Zoom on full screen on the laptop, it's great. The screen dedicated to work is not very large (24in), can't wait for a new iMac to be released so I can upgrade. But for the time being, I can function.
I do this too, but for more practical reasons. I work from home normally, and I like being able to move around (while the video is off). So, connecting from my phone is my default.
Also, when I’m the one presenting (from the big screen), I can see what everyone else sees on my phone. This helps a lot. You then know when slides actually changed, how big things are, etc.
You might think, well if you're just using FancyZones to split the screen up again doesn't that take you back to close to a two monitor setup, but the key is the flexible sizing. I have a main pane centrally for core focus and then I have really small side windows for scripts, upcoming reminders, and a bigger side section for calendar and chat, which are both handy to glance at (eg to confirm things during calls)
I honestly think it'll be a struggle to compete with "home me" when I go back to the office, as it's just so much better. A certain amount may be a placebo effect but I sense the effect all the same!
As a maker (and permanent remote worker, even before COVID-19), I am constantly struggling to convince people to have fewer meetings, and having a second screen for the meetings I do have, isn't the answer: the answer is fewer meetings!
I know this whole "remote-work" thing is somehow new to people, but, in a word: evolve!
I am so not into a second screen that I have embarked on using a cellular-capable tablet as my sole device, so that I can do work anywhere, anytime. The "home office" with multiple monitors is not the answer to remote-work, doing your job with simple tools, is. But, of course, this is just my opinion.
One does not disqualify the other. Over time, I managed to get my weekly calls from 10+ to 4. That’s great.
At the same time, if I’d lose my second screen, I’d lose more productivity than I gained from all the won time. I think most dev related jobs benefit greatly from a 2nd monitor. I couldn’t imagine working on a website, having an IDE open, browser dev tools etc. and constantly alt-tabbing between all of those.
Im a big fan of using a single ~36" 4k display. The pixel pitch ends up being about the same as for a typical 1080p monitor, but it comfortably fills the whole field of view without bezels. Any larger and its uncomfortable to read the edges without moving.
In other screen-related news, I recently ditched my LG 24” 4K display and replaced it with Sidecar and one of my iPads. What a change in perspective! While with the large external display, my MacBook’s internal display felt like an irritating afterthought.
An iPad screen is much closer in size to the MacBook display, and I find I make better use of this more balanced setup than I did my very lopsided previous big monitor and small laptop display configuration. Less can be more.
NB: Sidecar sometimes flakes out on wakeup, so it’s not a total win.
I stopped using multiple monitors when I started using a keyboard-driven tiling window manager. At the time I had a 3-monitor setup in my office. I found that it was more efficient to switch applications by keyboard than to turn my head. I have used a single monitor ever since. At times I put 2 windows side-by-side, but mostly I display a single window at a time.
I use a laptop and an iPad that way. Instead of being fixed I can go to a convenient corner, esp if my gf has a meeting at the same time.
Another trick that works well is to use my phone as the Zoom camera. There are a bunch of apps you can use (why? Quicktime can just connect to the phone) but I simply connect in multiple times.
[+] [-] m0xte|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] MaulingMonkey|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] strig|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gknoy|5 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] core-questions|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csomar|5 years ago|reply
I even make use of three screens for Rust dev. One for documentation, one for the editor and one for execution.
[+] [-] vonmoltke|5 years ago|reply
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".
[+] [-] gpderetta|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] silentwanderer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] graton|5 years ago|reply
Especially if the one screen is a laptop screen.
I find myself much more productive having a standard keyboard, mouse, and large monitors. Then when I have to attempt to do my work using just a laptop with no accessories.
I am impressed with the people who are highly productive with a tiny laptop screen. I have seen them in action. Unfortunately that isn't me :(
[+] [-] odonnellryan|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kelnos|5 years ago|reply
About the only thing I use a second screen for is videoconferencing.
But, to each their own. Everyone's work style is different.
[+] [-] geoah|5 years ago|reply
I've also got an ipad with sidecar as a second monitor for always on things like spotify or the occasional zoom.
[+] [-] abeppu|5 years ago|reply
He may be right that the second screen helps. But maybe it's worth saying it in a way that isn't tied in with a level of wealth that signals that his problems are often unlike most people's problems.
[+] [-] TechBro8615|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mabbo|5 years ago|reply
I can't fathom being a professional in the tech world and not having two monitors.
[+] [-] jodrellblank|5 years ago|reply
Windows' mouse properties control panel has "Display pointer trails" and "Show location of pointer when I press the Ctrl key" options to make the pomouse pointer more findable.
[+] [-] JBiserkov|5 years ago|reply
On Windows I recommend using the Inverted (Extra large) scheme for the mouse cursor. It’s dynamic - becomes black on a white background and white on a black background; works with other colors too, even with complex textures. It’s a life saver.
[+] [-] dmos62|5 years ago|reply
I was confused for a long time as to why people seem to need larger and larger screens (not want, but need, it would seem). That changed when recently I had to use a GUI static analysis toolkit on my 1440 screen. It was too small. The GUI wasn't customizable and its usage on my screen was very awkward. Its single window was split into a number of panes, all of which were too small to use comfortably without constant horizontal and vertical panning.
The mentioned GUI's devs created it for big screens. I'd guess that this happens with popular IDEs as well, right? In a way it's about modifying hardware to adhere to software. Sounds backwards.
The reason why a 1440 laptop screen is enough for me is that I use vim and cli for pretty much everything except browsing. That makes my workspace relatively space efficient.
[+] [-] dustingetz|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] localhost|5 years ago|reply
This works for both Zoom and Teams - I haven't tried other meeting solutions.
[+] [-] credit_guy|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mbreese|5 years ago|reply
Also, when I’m the one presenting (from the big screen), I can see what everyone else sees on my phone. This helps a lot. You then know when slides actually changed, how big things are, etc.
[+] [-] nmstoker|5 years ago|reply
Coupled with FancyZones from PowerToys (https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys ) it's even better.
You might think, well if you're just using FancyZones to split the screen up again doesn't that take you back to close to a two monitor setup, but the key is the flexible sizing. I have a main pane centrally for core focus and then I have really small side windows for scripts, upcoming reminders, and a bigger side section for calendar and chat, which are both handy to glance at (eg to confirm things during calls)
I honestly think it'll be a struggle to compete with "home me" when I go back to the office, as it's just so much better. A certain amount may be a placebo effect but I sense the effect all the same!
[+] [-] geocrasher|5 years ago|reply
The first screen is 27" away from my eyes with the top of the screen bezel being level with my eyes. This works great.
The second screen is the 23" above the first and is generally used in terminal sessions or when I'm presenting something in a meeting.
The screen on the right is portrait mode. It's only 20" or so, but that doesn't matter. Slack works SO WELL in portrait mode.
The 4th screen on the left is 22" and is 1680x1050. It works fine for email, stuff I need but not immediately.
My total investment in monitors? About $50. I do need two video cards though, but since it's for work, not gaming, that was cheap too.
The monitor on the right is no longer there, it was for my ham radio shack computer, which I now just teamviewer into.
https://imgur.com/lJFITgX
[+] [-] lr|5 years ago|reply
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html
As a maker (and permanent remote worker, even before COVID-19), I am constantly struggling to convince people to have fewer meetings, and having a second screen for the meetings I do have, isn't the answer: the answer is fewer meetings!
I know this whole "remote-work" thing is somehow new to people, but, in a word: evolve!
I am so not into a second screen that I have embarked on using a cellular-capable tablet as my sole device, so that I can do work anywhere, anytime. The "home office" with multiple monitors is not the answer to remote-work, doing your job with simple tools, is. But, of course, this is just my opinion.
[+] [-] Bishonen88|5 years ago|reply
At the same time, if I’d lose my second screen, I’d lose more productivity than I gained from all the won time. I think most dev related jobs benefit greatly from a 2nd monitor. I couldn’t imagine working on a website, having an IDE open, browser dev tools etc. and constantly alt-tabbing between all of those.
[+] [-] yummypaint|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] edw|5 years ago|reply
An iPad screen is much closer in size to the MacBook display, and I find I make better use of this more balanced setup than I did my very lopsided previous big monitor and small laptop display configuration. Less can be more.
NB: Sidecar sometimes flakes out on wakeup, so it’s not a total win.
[+] [-] oftenwrong|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gumby|5 years ago|reply
Another trick that works well is to use my phone as the Zoom camera. There are a bunch of apps you can use (why? Quicktime can just connect to the phone) but I simply connect in multiple times.
[+] [-] TurplePurtle|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JBiserkov|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 11235813213455|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway888abc|5 years ago|reply
When I'm on meeting, I'm on meeting.
Actually, like the couch setup from article a lot.
Is this new Slack hell ?
[+] [-] zitterbewegung|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xtiansimon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|5 years ago|reply
[1] http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html