… if you know how to use virtual desktops and shortcuts. You can’t look at two screens at a time, anyways.

One use case I can understand is having a 2nd monitor for checking stock prices or checking for a certain event. Other than that, I don’t see how it contributes to “productivity” while working or coding for example.

P.S: Tiling WM users may understand this post more

  • Hangglide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Should I upvote because it is an unpopular opinion or down vote because he is wrong? I know it’s the former but I really don’t want to!

  • DrMango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Funny how you seem to believe that “checking stock prices” is a good use of a whole monitor but don’t seem to see how literally any other task could benefit from having reference material up on a second monitor.

    • metarmask@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think they mean anything where changes happen without your input, because you might see it in your corner of your eye, whereas reference material can be switched to almost as fast as you can look to the side. Typing as you’re reading though…

  • vimzim@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It kinda makes me disturbed to have something bright in the corner of my eye when I concentrate to read text. And even though I use tiling WM, most of the time I only have one window at once, rarely two windows split horizontally, but no more.

  • Hedup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If 1 is more than “enough”, how many screens are enough then? Technically, if you never need any visual feedback from what you’re doing with keyboard and mouse, then zero screens would be enough.

  • NoTagBacks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wait, if one monitor is “more than enough”, then wouldn’t that imply that ‘enough’ is <1? Is my mans out here running a desktop without a screen?

  • PatFusty@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Imagine you have to cross examine 3 papers on your computer, you have to take notes and you have to input information on an excel document for your research paper thats on another word document. Try doing this on 1 screen.

  • TheSmartDude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve always changed tabs, or at the very most, copy-pasted. I don’t use split-screen though, as I find it too overwhelming and cramped for me. I’ve never found a reason to have 2 monitors.

  • nyternic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Once I went double monitor, I can’t see myself falling back to a single monitor. I’ve used a single monitor for a good decade and a half before toying with double monitors. I just like being able to have things on one monitor and other things on another. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a programmer-specific thing. I now reflect back and hated the idea of having to manage and check so many things while under one monitor. Things would be blinking, but oh wait, I’m gaming, oh wait, I’m browsing too and it’s just too much.