Is one giant monitor better than three smaller monitors for productivity?Assuming resolution, density, specs are similar.
tranny
>>107493170I'd always pick multiple monitors because it makes window management a lot easier
with a tiling window manager probablyor even just fancyzonesfullscreen applications are just gonna be a pain in the ass though if you don't have something to deal with that
>>107493170You only need two monitors, one to actually work and another to put the group zoom calls on so you can pretend you're listening while you do actual work/browser 4chan
>>107493254>fullscreen applicationsLike what? Microsoft Teams meetings?
>>107493170>one giantIn front of you 32" is best, bigger is too much. After it really depends what you are doing. But 32" 4k display 16:9 (too bad 4:3 is dead) is the sweet spot. Extra screens are best for shit content you tv show or youtube.
>>107493473>bigger is too muchDebatable
One big is an issue simply because they're usually flat so the viewing angle on the top and sides tend to be awkward. Ideally a massive 8k monitor that's curved in both directions would be Ideal but I think those are just impossible to make.
resolution and specs literally don't matterwhat's the point of high res when you're going to scale up your ui because text is too fucking small and unreadable?all you need is a generic 1080p60 ips shitcan as a secondary
>>107493330exactly. I love having an empty monitor for a meeting where I can just share the whole screen and drag in stuff I want to show others. With a huge single monitor, this isn't possible, so I have to share single application windows, and those don't show hover-popups, sometimes don't show the cursor etc. Having a dedicated monitor is much better there
Maybe im bad at multitasking on a PC - but 90% of the time alt tabbing on a single monitor has been more comfortable for me so I'd go with an ultrawide rather than 2/3 monitors or a huge TV.
>>107496273>Maybe im bad at multitasking on a PCActual multi tasking on two screen is a pain if they are not very close and of the same size. For stuff like sap + a pdf having both on a single display is better because it's just quicker to have everything on the same display.
>>107493249A tiling window manager makes it even easier
>>107493170one big is better theoretically but all current UI is implicitly designed for a single relatively small monitor setup so it practically ends up being better to run 2.this is for example why many ultrawide monitors have a '2 monitor mode' where they basically splitt it down the middle and act as separate monitors
>>107496921rearranging a bunch of tiled windows in-place gets awkward, if you have multiple screens it adds a level of indirection ("send this to screen N") that makes it simpler. If you have a non-tiling manager it makes maximizing things much more useful, which it mostly isn't on a single ginormo-display.
>>107493170>Is one giant monitor better than three smaller monitors for productivity?
>>107497195This. I have three 27 inch monitors with one oriented vertically. Instead of increasing productivity, I am more distracted than ever and when I seek to be more productive, I get my laptop.
>>107497996please don't remind me that my dad is slowly going blind
>>107493170>>107493473>32" is bestindeed>32" 4k primary as a work display, 24" 1440 as a vertical sidecar for distracting stuff like emails and messaging
