

Ask HN: Is a 27" Screen Worth It? - mahyarm

Is the 27" 2560x1440 worth it when doing dev work, especially with the $700 premium compared to 1080p for ~175% more screen space?  At my work people mostly use 2 1080p screens at once + laptop.  I mostly do iphone dev work with a MacBook Pro + an extra 1080p screen and another 1080p screen with a linux box.
======
Jarred
This doesn't directly answer your question, but I'd assume the larger question
is "Will adding more or bigger monitors make me more productive?"

The answer is yes. I can guarantee it. I wouldn't recommend spending a bunch
of money on a single monitor though. Buy two ~22" monitors off of NewEgg. It
won't feel the same as a 27" monitor, but you'll have considerably more space,
pay at least half the price, and have some explicit compartmentalization
going. The downside is that it's not all the same monitor, and you need hte
deskspace. As well as having to buy a cable for having multiple external
monitors with a Macbook Pro.

I say give it a try, and return it if isn't as comfortable as you want it to
be. You'll still be able to get your money back (assuming you return the stuff
in the same condition you bought it), and you can go and try the 27" monitor
too.

~~~
calebhicks
Which cable do you use for dual external monitors on the MBP?

~~~
astrodust
You need to get a Dualhead2Go from Matrox which splits a single DVI signal
into two screens by emulating a double-sized display.

<http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/dh2go/>

Newer Thunderbolt MacBooks can do this by chaining displays.

------
ericd
Compared to a single 1080p, yes. I got a 30" and it's been a great
improvement. The ability to put 2 full size windows next to each other is
fantastic (a utility like SizeUp helps). Having the freedom to have a bunch
scattered around while seeing bits of each is great too. The productivity
boost is almost certainly worth the money.

------
kelleyk
I'd suggest 2x24", which you can do for ~$180/each straight off of Newegg or
~$140-150 if you wait for a sale.

I recently had pretty much the same debate about upgrading my pair of 24"
monitors, and wound up moving to 4x24" side-by-side in portrait mode. The
extra real estate is totally worth it, but you get the added advantage of
having that real estate divided up into screens, where you can maximize/tile
windows more easily than on one huge display.

The cost is nice, too; the 4x24" monitors were only ~$700, so even with the
extra $120 or so for a pair of decent stands off of Amazon, the damage isn't
too bad.

(Just realized you're talking about an extra for a laptop, which makes the
situation a bit different. Leaving this up anyhow in the hopes of provoking
discussion---I'm curious what people do for multi-monitor setups.)

------
allenc
Hm, it's not really an Apples-to-Apples comparison, b/c all the 27" 2560px
displays I can think of are IPS, while 1080p's in the sub-$300 range are TN's.
You'd be paying for the added display quality on top of the bigger screen +
resolution.

For dev work, I'd say the nicest thing about the 27"s is the ability to put
two full pages side-by-side, either a browser window + IDE, or vert. split IDE
code panes. 1920px isn't _quite_ there for two panes of code.

And personally, I've had 2+ 24"s, and I've actually found it too cumbersome:
having emails/IM's on a second window actually becomes distracting, and moving
your mouse cursor across so many pixels was less precise than either alt-
tabbing to the right program or switching spaces/virtual desktops w/ a
keyboard shortcut. For me anyway, 27" is the sweet spot.

~~~
mahyarm
A Dell U2211H is under 300 and is a 1080p IPS monitor with all of the standard
goodies:

[http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&#...</a>

------
enobrev
I don't think resolution is quite as important as context, or rather the ease
that lies within multiple monitors for switching context.

I recently switched from three 19" monitors to two 27" monitors (I'm a php /
javascript / python developer). I assumed that having the same horizontal
resolution with extra vertical resolution would add to my productivity.

With three monitors I had three contexts in which I merely needed to glance in
a direction. Almost like doing an "alt+tab" in my mind. If I wanted to check
my current code in or run unit tests, look at my left monitor and type. If I
wanted to read or write code, look at my center monitor and type. If I wanted
to test output or find a reference, look at right monitor and type. *

With two monitors (regardless of resolution), I have one less context. I
actually have to think about window placement. Those seconds add up. More
importantly the cost of switching context adds up as I get deeper into what
I'm working on. If something was important, I maximized it to a screen and
that's all that screen was. That is what it _meant_ to look in that direction.
Now I maximize a window and... well a 27" window is pretty ridiculous unless
your work involves graphics. There's less permanence and hence more to
remember.

Save money on the resolution and get yourself as many decent-sized monitors as
your desk / system can handle. I assume it's possible to have too many
monitors, but I feel I would have done better with three slightly larger
monitors (or just a fourth monitor) than I am with two that can hold more
pixels than the three. I plan to find out very soon.

* By "look and type", I mean tap my mouse in that direction and click to activate the window and then type.

~~~
askar
To me screen resolution matters...with a higher resolution you can accommodate
more into the screen real estate and don't have to switch things around. I
used a super high resolution 15.4" laptop at work once and even having 2 dual
24" monitors didn't come closer to the productive experience that I had with
that laptop...maybe it's just me but I would prefer super high screen
resolutions.

~~~
enobrev
More screens also means less switching things around - at least it did for me.
With three screens, I almost never switched windows around. With two larger
screens, I find myself moving, resizing, and alt+tabbing all the time (or
expose'ing which is "cooler" but not much better).

Regardless I think it's a matter of taking time to get used to the pros and
cons of a monitor layout, and figuring out what works best for you.
Personally, after about 6 months with the 2 big monitors, I still miss my 3
smaller ones and will likely switch back soon.

------
Vitaly
My Apple 27" Display was one of the best hw purchases I made lately.

The display is simply gorgeous and its the first time that I don't frequently
wish it was bigger. I used a 24" DELL before and apart from it being extremely
ugly compared to apple's, many times it was insufficiently big for my needs.

For example, when programming in vi, I have _lots_ of splits (sometimes more
then 10) open in the same window. I find it more effective to see various
related parts at once then to switch b/w buffers all the time.

Other times I have a vi, browser and a terminal with autotest each occupying a
third of the screen (vertically).

------
martinp
I recently picked a 27" Dell U2711 (2560x1440) over 2x24" Samsung (1920x1200)
at work. The better display panel (IPS vs. TN), better resolution, better
contrast and so on made it a logical choice. Can't say that I regreted it.

With the recent window tiling options in both Ubuntu and Windows it's as easy
to organize windows on a single large monitor as it is with two.

------
GregularExp
I don't think you can ever have _too much_ screen space. Your workflow adjusts
to make use of it.

I've currently got a 27" iMac with two 20" Dell monitors turned portrait
either side. I keep things like IM, Twitter, Email etc in the two portrait
screens and keep what I'm working on in the middle.

------
cpswan
27" models at 2560x1440 are becoming more affordable. My brother pointed me at
Hazro, which he's using in his iPhone dev shop. I've also seen a substantial
fall in price for the Dell U2711.

I've been looking at this a lot recently as I consider moving away from the 2
screen setup I've had for years. My main motivation is that my laptop docking
stations only have one digital output. VGA just doesn't cut it for a clear
screen.

The drop in price on the 27" models has me hoping that the 30" 2560x1600 ones
will also come down. I've wanted one of those for ages, though when I once
used an Apple cinema screen at that size/resolution it felt kind of weird.

------
ajpatel
I have a 27" 1920x1200 Dell and what I wouldn't give to have a higher
resolution on it...

------
dedicated
It's hard to determine without knowing how you would actually use at 27"
monitor compared to the 1080p. Is it possible to "rent" one for a week from a
local retailer to test drive your use case?

My thought is that I'm staring at a monitor more than 14 hours a day. It's
like the tires on a car, where the rubber meets the road. It's such an
important connecting between physical and the computer, that it's worth the
additional investment.

That said, I can't make these judgments for you. I still recommend trying it
out for a week if you can, and then decide if you're more productive with
larger screen space. Good luck!

------
mvanveen
We only have the new 27"'s at work. We're almost exclusively a mac shop, so
sticking with just one configuration works really well with these displays.

It doesn't matter where you're sitting. Just plug in power and the display
port wherever you go and that's it! I don't have to bring more than a FedEx
letter-sized envelope to work every day (it conceals my macbook air).

I can't compare it to dual lcd monitors, but as other people have mentioned I
find it perfect for full screen vi or tmux sessions with a lots of splits, and
wouldn't want to go back to a smaller form factor. :-)

------
paulofisch
Splitting a 30" display (2560x1600) in half vertically (editor|browser) for
web-dev feels natural. It's 2x1280 displays, no bezel, effectively.

It does require an optimal seating position though.

I also have a cheap 1080p next to it for testing and for secondary boxes/iPad
dev or dashboards. Splitting a 1920 horizontal into 2x960 displays feels
cramped.

There are displays that use the same 27" panel as Apple for less dough. The
economics work out a lot better there.

------
thomasb
My 27" Imac has been a real pleasure to use. I program 80% of the time, and
that much screen real estate can really help you keep everything you need for
a certain development task visible at a glance. I have a larger 30" 2560x1600
screen on my linux box, and the more the merrier. It is worth it.

Also, I bought mine through apple's refurb program, and it's been running
perfectly. I would suggest that as a good way to save some money.

------
gorog
I have a 17'' (1920*1080) laptop at home and a 27'' iMac at work.

For displaying the likes of Netbeans, both are comfortable. I don't display
the browser in full screen on the iMac because it's ridiculously large. For
watching videos however, the 27'' are impressive. I would say programmers
don't need huge screens nor multiple ones but I suppose it depends on one's
preferences and habits.

------
bwsd
From a highly buzzed stupor - which I will regret later - no. A dual or triple
monitor setup makes more sense. Being able to maximize separate applications
on individual scteens makes more sense to me.

