… 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

  • DrMango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years 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
      2 years 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…

  • Hangglide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years 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!

    • Finnbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Is it an unpopular opinion though or just a really stupid fucking take?

      “Useful for checking stock prices” - I mean come on.

  • macrocephalic@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Because lots of productivity tasks, including coding, involve looking at a reference material while creating the output. I’m frequently looking at a database structure on one window, an API document on another, and coding in an IDE.

    You don’t necessarily need two screens, but it helps to have enough real estate to view two or more applications at once. Personally I use a 50" 4k TV and tile things in halves or quarters - which is the equivalent of having four 1080 monitors.

  • sigmatankworld@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    As someone who has 4 screens at work and 3 at home, you’ve done a great job picking a truly unpopular opinion, as I had a gutteral negative reaction when I saw this.

  • ShunkW@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lol an actual unpopular opinion. I use 4 monitors. Sometimes I’m looking at reference documents on a second monitor to determine how to implement the function. Sometimes I have my dbms app up on the third screen so I can look at the data structure as I’m implementing it. And the 4th monitor is usually for YouTube so I have a background noise/video to keep me focused

  • devious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    You can’t look at two screens at a time, anyways.

    Unless you are sitting right in front of a single 50inch+ screen, your field of view can definitely accommodate more than one screen!

  • waterbogan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I have two 40 in 4K monitors and a little 28 in 2K, my job involves network monitoring and diagnostics. No way could I work efficiently on just one screen unless it was ginormously bigly huge. I actually wouldnt mind another 4K but work machine hasnt the outputs

  • PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years 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.

  • Hedup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years 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.

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

  • TheSmartDude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years 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
    ·
    2 years 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.

  • NoTagBacks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years 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?