|
Right, 2 is enough. What can a person do with 6 screens in a programming environment? Visual Studio can handle debugging and all in one screen. 
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote: What can a person do with 6 screens in a programming environment?
1. IDE (Back End)
2. Database interface (e.g. SSMS)
3. IDE (UI)
4. email / IM etc.
5. The Googs
6. Whatever else - news/ CP / etc
Easy
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
I think you mean:
1) IDE
2) Google
3) Cat pictures
4) Cat videos
5) Cat pictures again
6) More cat pictures (and Pr0n)
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
For you it'll be cp, Google and 4 'special interest' sheep pictures
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
Google Glass is better for screen 6 ...
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
I develop (amongst other things) web-based responsive apps: So on my 5 screens:
Netbeans IDE for editing debugging
Web browser showing running app
portrait screen for documentation / program notes. todo and bug lists
one screen holds mail client/internet browser/OS taksbar/menu etc
last screen displays live connection to the service the app is interacting with so I can see that it has behaved correctly.
I used to use multiple screens etc, but the contect switch interferes with looking at one thing to see the result of another's actions etc, or reading documentation whilst editing.
Before I was able to have multiple screens, then I just had many printouts/books etc strewn across the desk, so all that has happened really is that the screens have replaced the paper.
Having said that, I do also work quite often on my single screen laptop, and just context switch, but it's nothing like as productive. Sometimes I use the laptop as a sixth screen though if I'm testing things like VPN connections between sites and need to have a separate route to each end to view behaviour...
8)
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Winiberg wrote: Having said that, I do also work quite often on my single screen laptop, and just context switch, but it's nothing like as productive.
Look up Sliden'Joy, funded Kickstarter project. I am eagerly awaiting my Giftmas present to myself. 
|
|
|
|
|
6 is too much for programming, but applications use them regularly.
6 is mostly used in medical applications.
An application for 4 is an aircraft simulator, where:
2 - front windshields,
1 - each for the side screens.
Addendum: I like the concept of spaces on Macs, where you just navigate from screen to screen, looking at one screen all the while.
|
|
|
|
|
Medical applications, eh? They save lives, programming on other end, destroys sole existence of life. 6 screens of programming, total waste!  You can get your life destroyed with one screen too. 
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 one screen with multiple personalities.
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
Perfect! 
One screen is enough, for anyone. Unless they need to make their lives complex.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote: One screen is enough, for anyone. Unless they need to make their lives complex.
No, it is not. I definitely find a dual monitor setup eases my daily development tasks. I often have a second computer running with a single monitor that I use mostly for "administrative tasks" (I typically spend +10 hours a week on conference calls), but I don't think I would go higher than three monitors.
Besides, some of us develop those medical applications and have to make them work in multiple monitor setups.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Once you've tried three you'll never be free.
I have three 24" monitors at work. One for SSMS, one for VS, and one for whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
I will go for "whatever" only.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
