Hacker News Reader

Comment by throw10920 | Hacker News Reader

> Using two or more monitors made it so easy for me to get distracted.

I have a desktop with three monitors and a laptop with one, and I don't notice any difference in distractibility. It's a discipline problem, not a technical one, and so you should solve it on a personal level and not a technical one.

I mean, think about it. If you "unlock" the ability to use multiple monitors at once without getting distracted, "it's free real estate" - you have more space to work with, and there's empirical evidence to suggest that that results in increased productivity. Programming involves a lot of consulting documentation and using multiple tools at once - it's very amenable to multiple monitors (as opposed to, say, writing a novel).

View on HN

> I mean, think about it. If you “unlock” the ability to use multiple monitors at once without getting distracted, “it’s free real estate”

If the distraction problem isn’t from size but strictly—as was described—from multiple monitors, this isn’t true; multiple monitors are cheaper than single monitors for a given total area and pixel density, but its possible to get one large (ideally curved) monitor that has the real estate of multiple lesser monitors. I found going going from twin 23” 16:9 monitors FHD monitors to a single curved 34” 3440x1440 monitor a reduction in distraction, as well as increase in real estate.

Multiple monitors are a distraction, IME, because of discontinuities (all of gaps between them, discontinuity in viewing angle, and, if they aren’t identical devices in pristine condition with identical settings, differences in display quality, whether its color/brightness/contrast/etc.)

> It's a discipline problem, not a technical one,

Sure, agreed.

> and so you should solve it on a personal level and not a technical one.

Why, when a technical one suffices?

I've not personally seen much of a productivity increase over two 24"-ish screens and a single 32" 4K screen myself. I don't have the physical desk space for two of those (nor do I think it would be particularly useful for me)

> Why, when a technical one suffices?

Because if you're programming then the imposed limitation forcing you to constantly switch between windows almost certainly reduces your productivity. Do you never find yourself jumping back and forth between two or three documentation pages (library API, manpage, language spec, whatever), one or more pieces of example code, and one or more files with code that you're editing? Plus a window for build tooling? I find having that all visible at once in dedicated locations to be incredibly convenient, much more like working on a physical bench top.

> I find having that all visible at once in dedicated locations to be incredibly convenient

That’s a reason for seeking out a solution with large enough display area and sufficient resolution. That doesn’t necessarily require multiple monitors.

I wasn't meaning to differentiate between those two approaches. The original complaint seemed to be that having too many windows visible was leading to distraction. Honestly I found that claim perplexing. If it was only when they were spread across multiple physical monitors (as opposed to a single very large one) that would be even stranger to me.

At the end of the day though I admit that it comes down to whatever works for the individual to maximize their effectiveness.

> there's empirical evidence to suggest that that results in increased productivity

Can you share this evidence?

The thing is that one can only focus on a single monitor at a time. So productivity IME really depends on your windows manager. If I can quickly jump from code to documentation while looking at the same pixels without moving my neck or eyes, that seems like it would be more productive than changing focus to another screen and back.

I've been working on a single 1080p laptop display for years now, running Linux with bspwm. I've tried hooking up external displays to this setup, but I haven't found it increased my productivity. Sure, the extra real estate was nice, but shifting focus between monitors detracted from the experience enough that I always went back to a single screen. The comfort of having a portable setup and being able to work from anywhere is also a plus.

Example of a web developer:

Monitor #1: The page Monitor #2: The code Monitor #3: Mail, chat etc.

You can drop the third one, but at least two is kinda required. You can't just shove #1 and #2 on a single monitor or the page layout won't match the user's.

Or I can put the browser and the code editor on different workspaces and instantly switch between them with the press of a key.

It's not faster than flicking your eyes to the other screen. And you can't type in workspace #1 while looking at workspace #2 :)

Debatable, my sway setup transitions instantly :) Everyone has their preferred workflow. I personally switched back from two monitors to a 15" laptop screen

You assume that there are no scenarios where you want two windows up at the same time; e.g. for comparison or quick reference.

I have a custom setup where I can quickly switch between windows and applications using keyboard shortcuts and save e.g. cursor positions.

I still prefer having the relevant material on-screen rather than switching between them. And it's due to the reason previously mentioned: for me it's faster to reference material that is on-screen at the same time rather than switching between them.

Perhaps this has something to do with the type of code bases one works with? I work quite a bit on legacy apps, where one has to reference both documentation, tests and git history (when it's of value), as well as a browser window to actually run the code. That'a already a lot of things to be switching between.

I do run into those situations of course, where I want to see two windows side-by-side, but it's very rare and almost always temporary. Most of my windows run full screen, and if I need to focus on something else I just switch to it. It's important that this switch happens very quickly, so my window manager configuration has no delays, and every window is a quick keyboard shortcut away (either on a different workspace, "alt-tabbed" on the same workspace, or quickly accessible via rofi).

This workflow completely removes the need for a separate screen. A larger screen and higher resolution would be nice to have, but not for productivity reasons. I've found a 15.6" 1080p display to be sufficient with this setup, even though I have other screens I could use at the same time. It boils down to personal preference, but I doubt there's some "empirical evidence" that using more than one screen objectively leads to higher productivity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com