What's your ideal multiple-monitor setup? [closed]

Question

Jeff Atwood is often speaking about the benefits of triple monitor setups for developers, and I have to say I agree with him.

I was wondering, if given the opportunity, what you sysadmins would think of as the perfect setup - one, two, three, or maybe more monitors? How do sysadmin work patterns benefit from screen space - I mean, more, smaller monitors or fewer, larger monitors?

Answer 1

I find that for programming related activities dual 30" vertically oriented (portrait) mode monitors provide the most screen real estate. More lines of code visible at any given time, makes for easier scanning. This is also true to a certain extent for (nix systems administrators), nice full process listing, larger system traces, etc, etc.

Second best scenario is dual 30" landscape. Most of the information I deal with is vertical though, but for monitoring situations and certain layouts landscape is more appropriate.

I think at this point two large monitors versus 3 or more smaller models is the sweet spot in terms of uninterrupted screen real estate, cost, setup etc..

Answer 2

Three large identical monitors would be the most ideal (IMHO).
Next best would be two identical with a 3rd that had the same width as the other two have height (so it's the same size when vertically oriented). Next would be just two identical; I'm sure you're catching on to the pattern.

Unless you've got at least three, more is better. Having the same size is very convenient (meaning less stress => more productive). If you're still stuck on just one, I pity you.

Answer 3

Sysadmin here....

In principle, I would like to have every window for every application that I need to use on a daily/frequent basis visible at all times at an appropriate size... whether that means one giant high-res monitor or several smaller ones or whatever - what works best depends on OS and tools used.

What I want to avoid is any window switching - I want the same tools in the same place visible at the same time, always. (That's my ideal, anyway...)

Answer 4

It depends entirely on what you do as to whether you would benefit from multiple monitors. I have a 2 monitor setup (both 17"), which is incredibly useful - but I'd happily take a third.

Most of the time I have our helpdesk on 2 minute refresh on my second screen - that way I can quickly glance at it every now and then to see if I've got any new tickets that need my attention, but I don't have to switch windows and distract myself from what I'm doing to check.

I also tend to put all my remote desktop sessions/user assistance sessions on my second screen, so I can either refer to the web, documents or our internal Knowledgebase without switching from the remote assistance window.

If you work in a NOC of some description, I can also see 3 (maybe even more) monitors being useful - for example having several monitoring systems on each monitor and also a terminal session on another screen.

Answer 5

At home, I've got two 24" widescreens on articulating arms; I've ordered a third, so we'll see how that goes. At work, I've got two (nicer) 24"ers; having two monitors was literally a precondition of employment for me, as I'm just not productive otherwise. I've also got a little 7" USB monitor where I keep my IM windows, so even when I've got a browser on one screen and a full-screen app running on the other, I can still see urgent messages like,

BigBossMan: "Wait! The customer doesn't want (thing you were about to do) done!"

For those without the practical ability to do three monitors given the constraints of their budgets/video card(s)/desk space/corporate policy, the USB option is actually remarkably powerful. It'll even run 3D stuff. You can find larger ones, as well, but the 7" worked quite nicely for me since it fits in a nice, cozy little spot underneath the main monitors.

Here's a picture of my setup at work, slightly edited for your viewing pleasure: http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/4761/anonythree.png . Quality was already crappy enough, so yes, I used a PNG where a JPEG might otherwise have been more appropriate. You'll live.

Answer 6

I've found that with 16x9 monitors, I have no difficulty whatsoever displaying two windows side-by side. Dual monitors, then, gives me the room for four working windows, and I rarely need more than three. I debug with source code in one window, variable watches in a second, and the running program in the third. The fourth varies. Most often it's the database query tool.

Answer 7

I have two 22" monitors (both the same Samsungs). It works well because my eyes don't have to strain to reach from left to right. I also keep them angled so that each is pointing at the center of my face (pointing in towards each other a little). This works so well. Unless you have a reason to need humongous space I would recommend exactly this setup. I had two 19" monitors before and they felt small and disappointing, one 24" felt useless (can only maximize one application at a time, without special software), and two 24" monitors felt too big to track easily.