Should I swap a single 22" Wide for 2 x 17" 4:3 monitors?
-
i'd swap for sure. 2 monitors will give you more flexibility in your work environment and the dedicated graphics card is a good bonus too.... although if you watch movies on the 22" might want to think about the compromise
-
UserNameless wrote:
you watch movies on the 22"
Movies at work, WTF? Where do you get those perks? :)
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))movies at work u ask? video editing :laugh: although I don't get those kind of perks no, although wouldn't mind getting internet access rather than relying on google cached pages...
-
Why do you have to swap? Can't you keep the 22" and get an extra 17"? If not I'd probably go for the dual 17" I'm used to having at least 2 screens and have to say I couldn't imagine myself working with only 1 anymore.
leppie wrote:
As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one.
If your not doing any graphical work that wont make much difference besides the fact that the sloppy on board one can't handle 2 screens (I think ;P )
Tom Deketelaere wrote:
have to say I couldn't imagine myself working with only 1 anymore.
I have a 24" at home. I dont really need more than that, even though I have a secondary 19" I hardly use it.
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x))) -
Tom Deketelaere wrote:
have to say I couldn't imagine myself working with only 1 anymore.
I have a 24" at home. I dont really need more than that, even though I have a secondary 19" I hardly use it.
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))Hmmmm must be me then. I got 2x 24" and 1 17" at home, k the 17" I don't use that much (more for communication stuff (skype / msn / ...) and monitoring stuff (graphical card monitoring / cpu / ...)) But the 2x 24" I use a lot.
-
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x))) -
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))I prefer two separate monitors together with UltraMon, simply because I am used to maximizing my windows, and I can move them around. A wide screen is much better for watching movies, though. A wide screen has a little advantage in Visual Studio: you CAN move the class view etc. to the separate monitor, but they get in the foreground (and cover everything else) whenever Visual Studio gets focus. I usually have MSDN and the applicaiton on the second monitor, but they get covered by the tool windows, which a little sucks. That said, if you are ok with one stripe of toolbars, the 1280x1024 is ok. So ideally - as I have at home - you'd get a wide screen and a 4:3 :) Separate graphics card with two DVI outs is IMO a must.
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be equally well explained by buerocracy.
My latest article | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))SWAP! It's wonderful working with two monitors, I've been using two 17" monitors for some years now and I won't go back. Probably I would go for two 20" or 22" 4:3 monitors; but always two of them. Modification --> I've also thought on getting four of them, as it would give me a bonus on the job I'm doing, but I've never tried that.
-
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))I would swap one 19 for two 17s, but I'd prefer a single 22 over two 17s. Your really need one good first monitor. Perhaps add a 2nd 17 later (it's only 100 bucks now).
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
I prefer two separate monitors together with UltraMon, simply because I am used to maximizing my windows, and I can move them around. A wide screen is much better for watching movies, though. A wide screen has a little advantage in Visual Studio: you CAN move the class view etc. to the separate monitor, but they get in the foreground (and cover everything else) whenever Visual Studio gets focus. I usually have MSDN and the applicaiton on the second monitor, but they get covered by the tool windows, which a little sucks. That said, if you are ok with one stripe of toolbars, the 1280x1024 is ok. So ideally - as I have at home - you'd get a wide screen and a 4:3 :) Separate graphics card with two DVI outs is IMO a must.
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be equally well explained by buerocracy.
My latest article | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
Separate graphics card with two DVI outs is IMO a must.
For non gaming purposes a single non rubbish card is more than capable of running 2 monitors at once.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
-
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))I'm with Nish on this one. I currently have 1 22" and 1 17", and working on the 17" is a royal pain in the arse eyeball. Very useful, for things like debugging etc, but eye-bleeding if I have to load a second instance of VS or Word (or whatever) on it. So, if you can wangle to keep your current monitor and get a 17" in addition, OK, but two 17s X| X| X|
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
-
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))I'll be the dissenting voice; I've tried multiple monitor setups and don't like them. Don't know why, I just don't. The only time I've really used them is when debugging certain types of UI code where the app has to stay in the foreground.
-
peterchen wrote:
Separate graphics card with two DVI outs is IMO a must.
For non gaming purposes a single non rubbish card is more than capable of running 2 monitors at once.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
Separate from the mainboard i meant :rolleyes:
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be equally well explained by buerocracy.
My latest article | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
The 22" is 1680 x 1050. The 17" is 1280 x 1024 (x2). As a bonus, I will get a dedicated graphics card instead of the sloppy onboard one. What would YOU do?
xacc.ide
IronScheme - 1.0 beta 4 - out now!
((λ (x) `(,x ',x)) '(λ (x) `(,x ',x)))Imho, no. But you should get a slightly larger monitor. I use a Dell 24" 1920x1200 at home and work. At work I was offered dual monitors but chose to stay with a single large panel and absolutely love it. I also prefer to use VS2008 in MDI mode (typically 2 vertically tiled source code windows) and fear that VS2010 may put an end to that by forcing me to use the (one and only) tabbed interface. /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com