This from Bill (Madaboutdana):

It would be interesting to hear - purely for amusement value - how many of us knowledge workers on this forum work with multiple monitors, and how many prefer just one (albeit maybe an enormous one…).

Thought I'd start a new topic to provide my answer. I use two monitors on my Windows PC at work, and I love it. In fact, I don't know how I worked with just one (okay, I do really know, since I work on a MacBook at home). There are at least two reasons this setup works so well for me:

1. I have multipe responsibilities at the office, from designing catalogs and writing copy, to taking phone orders and doing customer service. I can keep the customer service application open on one monitor, while working on a project on the other.

2. It is so convenient to be able to reference a web page or other documens on one monitor while working on another (for example, I keep our customer database open in FileMaker, while researching contacts on the web browser in the other.

Steve Z.

Aha! That suggests you have a twin-head graphics card? I wonder how many people get round to installing those. I always find it amusing that laptops/notebooks have them as a matter of course, but desktops very rarely (if ever) do.

I use a dual-monitor setup (20" and 23") on my workplace: On the higher-res monitor (1600x1200px) I run the application I am working in - LibreOffice, Word, Scrivener (depends on the job to be done), on the other I have reference material (documents, notes, ...), dictionaries and/or browser windows. I also have Outlook on the second display (usually invisible in the background while I am writing - unless I am writing an article or book on Outlook).

Franz

Count me as a member of the dual-monitor club.

Research goes on one monitor, word processor on the other.

As for the graphics card, well, I'm a bit of a gamer, so I needed a decent one for that anyway.

I have two monitors (19in + 22in). In monitor 1 I do the focused activity (writing, outlining, browsing, analysis etc.). Monitor 2 is for reference and is only turned on when necessary (to reduce distraction). During writing, in monitor 2 I'd usually have ConnectedText open, as my database, Dopus for dealing with files, Freeplane with a mind map and/or VUE with a concept map. All of the latter benefit from the large screen.

I used to have a quad card and 4 screens (desk looked like NASA) .... impressive, but over the top!.

Dropped down to three which I really liked.....however wanted to experiment with a touch screen, and latest PC (Win7) has only a dual card with two, one 21 inch (touch) and other 23 inch.

I now think more than 2 is/are probably excessive, unless you like to work on two and have YouTube/Email/Other running constantly on one.

Certainly no less than two screens for me.

I use 3 monitors (external 22 and 24, 12 built into laptop). Great productivity enhancement, espec when needing to draw on multiple sources, e.g., creating PowerPoint and incorporating a spreadsheet and/or web graphics; researching writing in Scrivener, pulling in info from Evernote, PowerPoint, web, etc.

MadaboutDana wrote:

Aha! That suggests you have a twin-head graphics card? I wonder how many
people get round to installing those. I always find it amusing that
laptops/notebooks have them as a matter of course, but desktops very
rarely (if ever) do.

I guess I must, but the truth is our computer consultant installed the computer and asked me at the time if I wanted to use two monitors since we had a couple of extra ones. Glad I said, "yes."

SZ

Company Office: I have an HP desktop with two identical 17" monitors. My desktop was purchased in 2007 and has since been upgraded only in terms of memory; the dual monitor card was part of the original setup. The PC still runs Windows XP and I'm actually quite happy with it. Uses:

- Teleconferences (very useful): I can share one of my screens and keep the other opened for notes, etc.
- Writing/reviewing: reference material on one screen, edited document on the other.
- General communication: full list of emails on one screen, draft emails on the other.

Home Office: I am currently using a cheap 32-bit Acer 14" notebook running Windows 7 (I also have a larger 64-bit machine which has some issues). It is driving a 19" Asus monitor via this http://www.fujitsu.com/fts/products/computing/pc/accessories/notebook/port-replicators/usb-port-replicator-prR07.html which is remarkably light on the processor.

I can do most of the twin monitor tricks in my 19" one by splitting the screen. I don't really miss additional screens, because at home I try to focus on one task at a time. For teleconferencing, I cheat by keeping a 12" Linux notebook on the side.

Running dual monitors on my desktop, a 24" optiquest running at 1920x1200, and a 23" acer at 1920x1080. I think it's hard to find 16x10 anymore, right? My display adapter is a cheapie - has DVI, VGA, and HDMI connectors. I am using the DVI and HDMI connectors for my two displays, and the VGA is free ... never tried connecting a third display to that one.

It's a lot easier to move a window to the alternate display than to resize and move windows so that they will be both visible on a single display.

I suspect my next displays will have touch capabilities. I've been using an 9.7" HP touchpad for a year and a half now, with Android installed, and I very much like using the touch display. I suspect we'll be using big touch displays that are oriented parallel to the floor (or at a steep angle) rather than perpendicular to the floor.

Jeez, am I the only poor s*d on this forum with a single, rather small, monitor!? I must admit, it wouldn't cross my mind to install a second one.

Mind you, I have three computers running side by side ... ;-)

What an interesting range of hardware - some big brutes on the monitor side, too!

What fascinates me, however, is that no Mac users have responded. And yet the iMac is one of the few desktops (apart from some of the more expensive AIOs produced by e.g. Samsung) that comes with a second monitor port as a matter of course.

Any Mac users out there? Do any of you use multiple monitors? On notebook or desktop?

My desktop is a 2011 Mac Mini. Currently I use only one monitor - a 22-inch Acer. It suits me for most of what I do. But the 2011 Mac Mini also has two monitor ports - HDMI and Thunderbolt, if I remember correctly - so a second monitor would be a possibility.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Here's a Mac user, albeit a MacBook Pro, not an iMac with its giant screen.

I was, for a short while, also a multi-monitor user. At my last job I had a very large desk with lots of space for a multi-monitor setup the company provided Lenovo laptops running XP . I had a 24 inch main monitor and a 19 inch monitor as a secondary. I found that I didn’t use the 19 inch monitor for much. During the day I kept Outlook up all the time(bad habit). I also usually had a browser up. Then in my main window I would have Word, Excel or Powerpoint or all three up in which I would be working.

I loved that 24 inch monitor. I could keep a spreadsheet with lots of columns up on that screen and see all of them. Or if I was working in Word or Excel, I could set them up so that they were showing the view at 200-400%, and give my tired old eyes a rest. I found that with modern operating systems it is easy to switch from one program to another as your primary focus, and this seemed to work better for me than having more than one monitor.

I gave the 19 inch monitor away.

I am now using a MacBook Pro. At home, where I have lots of desk space, I have a 24 inch monitor as my external monitor. In a sense, I have two monitors because I also have the MacBook Pro laptop monitor. However, I run the two monitors mirrored, so both of them have the same information. At work, I have a fairly restricted amount of space on my desk, so I just use the laptop screen.

Jim

I have used a MacMini with multiple monitors--one via HDMI and one via Display Port. IMO the experience is inferior to Windows. OS X lacks Aero snap, the fixed menu bar makes for long mouse travel from the second screen, and--most galling--the new full screen app mode only uses a single monitor--any additional screens are just covered with the grey linen pattern Apple seems so fond of.

I've recently switched to a MacBook Air which brings it's own problem: there's but one Thunderbolt port which forces me to choose between an ethernet connection and a monitor out. Technically Thunderbolt can drive multiple devices but the only Apple products to have additional Thunderbolt ports are monitors. I already have a monitor and Apple's products don't fit my budget. A few companies have released Thunderbolt hubs and I'm reviewing them for purchase.

On the positive side, I have felt less of a need for multiple monitors since discovering the four-finger swipe shortcut that switches full-screen applications. For much of my work the ability to easily switch from application to application eliminates the need for side-by-side display.

Ben - if you face the menu-bar issue again, it may be worth looking at this round-up: http://mac.appstorm.net/roundups/utilities-roundups/30-apps-for-your-multiple-monitor-setup/

Thanks for the tip, Hugh. I played with SecondBar when I was using the Mini. It has some issues with screen locking--something required by my organization--and while it appears similar to the native menu bar there are a few visual differences that bothered me--it was a sort of UI uncanny valley.

Ben wrote:

...it was a sort of UI
uncanny valley.

:)

I'm using an HP laptop with a second (emachines) monitor big enough to display two full pages of a Word document side by side.

I've been using double monitors for years now. They're an absolute necessity if you ask me. Getting a second monitor is perhaps THE best thing you can do to boost your productivity.

I'd like to have more monitors--a lot more--but I don't have the hardware for it right now.

Wow, interesting to hear from Mac users on the issues involved - I did wonder how well the latest versions of OS X handled multiple monitors. That's deffo a bit of a turn-off.

What about Linux? I've been contemplating my various Linux machines (mainly elderly netbooks/notebooks) and realise I've never actually experimented with multiple monitors. Dunno why not. Maybe because it's so easy to switch from one desktop configuration to another in Xubuntu (far and away my fave Linux distro).

My observations are based on 10.7. I can't speak to 10.8 (yet).

BTW, my understanding is that one of the (few) plusses of Win 8 for desktop users is multiple monitor support. I use 3 monitors on my Win 7/laptop setup, but that requires using an external dock (I use Toshiba Dynadock) + substantial setup time fiddling to make it work. Well worth the effort, though.

jimspoon wrote:

It's a lot easier to move a window to the alternate display than to
resize and move windows so that they will be both visible on a single
display.

Well, if you are on Windows 7 (and above, I think) try the following key combinations:
[Windows Key] + [Left Arrow] / [Right Arrow] / [Up Arrow] / [Down Arrow]

I don't think it gets any faster or more convenient than that.

That said, I find screen splitting incredibly useful, no matter how many monitors I have. There are several cases when I want my reference material and editing window very close to each other. On my Windows XP I do the same (and more) fast splitting with the WindowSpace utility.

P.S. If you want to drive a co-worker nuts, press Ctrl+Alt+Left Arrow (or even Ctrl+Alt+Down Arrow). Use Ctrl+Alt+Up Arrow to restore his/her sanity. I believe it only works in laptop native screens.

MadaboutDana wrote:

What about Linux? I've been contemplating my various Linux machines
(mainly elderly netbooks/notebooks) and realise I've never actually
experimented with multiple monitors. Dunno why not. Maybe because it's
so easy to switch from one desktop configuration to another in Xubuntu
(far and away my fave Linux distro).

I am in a similar position, even though my main Linux machine is actually a quite modern 12" notebook (64-bit 4Gb); my other is an Asus Eee with an 8.9" monitor. The reason for not using them with external monitors is simple: my Linux machines are intended for conveniently carrying around and using just about anywhere. The 12" becomes my main PC at home during the week-ends, when I mainly want to write texts in the sitting room.

I did experiment a bit with 'docking' the 12" to a monitor and the results where rather mixed. Apparently the monitor output had not been properly recognised by Linux (Mint) during installation. So, switching monitors did not work as intended and was not very convenient. Perhaps if I had the monitor attached during installation the results would have been different. In any case, I did not have a strong incentive to re-install the system. I may get back on this when I install the next version.

I thought I'd mention WinSplit Revolution in this context, as I use it daily to position my application windows on the two monitors. I found out about it on this forum. It's free and it's a fab utility, saves a lot of time and mouse movement:
http://winsplit-revolution.com/home