
Ask HN: Is a multiple monitor setup significant to you when writing code? - crudx
It seems like everywhere I read people keep mentioning how important it is for them to work on multiple monitors (usually it's two or three) or one very big monitor (such as a 27" or 30"), and often I hear them saying "the bigger the better". 
I'm working on a notebook (15.4" display at 1440x900 screen resolution) and I'm pretty happy (or so I think). Alt+Tab doesn't bother me and I don't feel the need to have two or three or one gigantic monitor. Are there any of you who agree with me? How big of a productivity boost does your big setup give you (try being objective please) ?
======
robflynn
It is preferred for me if I am performing certain tasks. If I am rapidly
editing html/css then I like to be able to see my markup and a preview in a
browser at the same time. Whether this be accomplished by two monitors or one
monitor with sufficient resolution does not matter.

Reading API documentation while I code is another good use case for multiple
displays. It gives me a quick at-a-glance ability that I can't achieve with
alt tabbing on a single monitor. (I can, it just feels a lot slower because I
am constantly having to visually relocate where I was within the document)

I refrain from saying that it is a "MUST" or is "REQUIRED", because I can by
just fine on my little 15 laptop, but I prefer working on my dual screen
setup.

If I'm going to go with just one larger monitor, a nice tiling window manager
is nice. Otherwise, I can just alt-tab to the other screen.

------
smtlaissezfaire
I guess it probably depends what you are planning on doing with the extra
monitor.

I've been happy with one monitor and alt-tab (CMD-tab on OS X) for a long
time, but recently I've realized that the extra monitor comes in really handy
for certain things. For me, that's having chrome open in one window and the
chrome inspector in the other (this allows me to concurrently see + play with
the DOM/css/js without it crowding the display).

When I have two monitors and I'm doing this sort of work, I never say to
myself: "Oh man, I'm being so productive". But when I'm without the second
one, I certainly miss it and feel _less_ productive.

------
metachris
I personally find multiple monitors distracting if I don't need to follow lots
of log output simultaneously. The 27" Dell U2711 [1] with 2560x1440 works
perfectly for me, and is pretty much the only monitor with this resolution in
an acceptable price range (~$800). On this screen there is enough space for
Eclipse, two Android emulators, and part of a terminal showing the logs, for
instance.

A 17" display with about 1920x1200 also just works for me. I find lower
resolutions very hard to work with.

[1] <http://www.anandtech.com/show/2922>

------
asher_
It makes a huge difference in my experience. I use a 30" most of the time with
side-by side, but occasionally use one (sometimes two) of my side monitors
(20" in portrait) if the need arises. It is rare for me to use more than just
the 30", but if you think about what you'd like to be visible it could be as
much as; code, browser, specs/reqs sheet and api/library documentation.

I am getting a laptop for coding soon and plan to get an external USB display
to complement it for this reason.

To the OP; just try using two displays for a couple of hours. You'll never go
back.

------
j45
It is absolutely critical. The 30-40% productivity gain per monitor is
absolutely true.

My setups have included:

Three 19" screens at 1280x1024. This was uber productive.
Reference/communication on the left screen, code in the middle screen, test on
the right screen.

Now I'm running a 23" Samsung and a 27" Asus. I use the 27" to code and the
23" to read/test on. The 27" has a 1920x1080 resolution but larger type causes
less strain on my eyes.

Where do I think I'm going to end up? Buying a 27" iMac and using it as a
Target Display Mode for my next Macbook Air. I think I could do it all on one
27".

~~~
katem
30-40% productivity gain per monitor? Can you cite that?

------
caw
At my previous job I had 2x 19", and that worked great because I could run my
VM in one screen and everything else on the other. When I developed, I just
switched to another virtual desktop and ran eclipse and a browser.

At my current job I have a 24" and a 19". I'm not sure about the extra 19" and
how much that gains me, but I'm stuck in VNC all day so I can't alt-tab like
normal folks.

My 22" 1680x1050 monitor at home is a bit lacking sometimes for pixel space,
but I manage to get stuff done with it.

------
bartonfink
I don't particularly care about having multiple monitors or even a large
monitor. I use virtual desktops with keyboard shortcuts I've configured to
facilitate easy switching, and I find that suits my workflow best. If I had a
larger monitor, I might use fewer virtual desktops, but the virtual desktop is
free whereas the larger monitor isn't. I just don't see the return.

------
warren_s
There was a study done on this a while ago:
[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8914028...](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89140287)

I agree with the premise that there are diminishing returns after the 2nd
screen, but I personally always use my 13" Macbook screen alongside the cinema
display when I'm at my desk.

------
frou_dh
All I like is a good amount of pixels and easy keyboard shortcuts for moving
and tiling windows. Those pixels can either be on multiple physical screens,
or just one with a good (say 1920x1200) resolution.

Being able to have 2, 3 or 4 editor/browser/shell/whatever windows tiled and
visible isn't essential, but it's a way of working you miss once you've gotten
used to it.

------
rshm
I feel small screen quite suffocating.

i currently have two 22". (Samsung PX2370). Thinking of switching to one 27"
apple cinema. If any one have done same or other way around, please share your
experience.

------
mlarratt
Multi monitor? No.

2 million pixels or more? Yes.

More importantly IMHO: Bind as much window management to your keyboard as
possible.

