Turning your head ~90 degrees to the left just to be able to see Slack(or any other windows) is for me an productivity nerf, not a boost. What's wrong with Alt/Option - Tab instead?
In my life I experimented with 3 monitors, 2 monitors, one monitor, ultra widescreens, square aspect ratio displays, and a mix of several of those, etc. and I find the best productivity setup is when I have everything centered in my narrow/focused field of view, regardless of how many displays there are or what their aspect ratio is.
If I have too many or too wide displays, needing me to turn my head/neck to the side to see what's on them, it's just useless real estate and extra shit I have to manage and organize, wasting my brain power and concentration on managing the multi-monitor setup instead of on work.
FWIW, currently I have a single 32 inch(27 would work too) 4k display straight in front of me, and switching workspaces via Meta Key + Scroll wheel is way more desk-real-estate, monetarily and energy eficient and more ergonomic than moving my neck to another display on the side that's just sitting there displaying a picture that nobody's looking at 90% of the time.
But in a past job 12+ years ago, I loved having the two work-provided Philips 20 inch 4:3 1600x1200 IPS displays right in front of me. One of those in landscape with the IDE, the other rotated in portrait for the browser/documentation. That was peak DPI, windowing and ergonomics before 16:9 "HD" displays ruined vertical real estate and productivity with their "cinema" TV aspect ratio. Shame you can't get cheap monitors like those anymore in good condition(their CCFL lamps dimmed over time by now). Also, R.I.P. Philips display panels.
Anyway, back on topic, this video feels like justifying the purchase with flashy multi window gimmicks instead of showing actual ergonomic improvements. The proof will be in the pudding. Will the author stick to that sprawling neck twisting setup long term, or will he switch back to a more conventional setup once the novelty of his new toy wears off and his video got enough views?
FWIW 2, I have a Quest 3 for gaming, and could never use that for work due to the limited narrow FoV(~110°) that make it more like "binoculars vision" than actual virtual/augumented "reality". And according to the experience of MKBHD(Marques Brownlee) on YT, the Apple VP has an even narrower FoV than that. Ouch! That does not sound optimistic for productivity at all. IMHO 130°+ should be the norm for FoV going forward. Anything narrower and I feel like I'm wearing horse blinkers.
Totally agree. I have tried multiple monitors so many times over the years but always come back to a single display, usually 24-27”.
Turning your head is a hassle. I also find turning my eyes fatiguing if the angle of movement is too great. So I tend to prefer smaller, higher PPD displays over larger displays with the same resolution. I want a lot of pixels in a compact FOV.
For me, 4K 24” has been the sweet spot for desktop monitors. I currently have a 27” due to so few good 24” 4K monitors being made these days, and at the viewing distance allowed by my setup, even that is just slightly too big, such that looking to the corners can get annoying.
The PPD on these headsets still just isn’t anywhere close to the point where it can match a single high density desktop monitor, and making the virtual screen bigger or adding side screens just doesn’t work for me ergonomically.
I don't understand. I don't even have to technically turn head with 3 screens. It's just eyes I have to move, and even if I turned head, it's barely 20 degrees?
I have 3 screens, but honestly would prefer more.
I find it more uncomfortable to eyes to switch screens on the same window, especially if one is light and the other is dark. The blinking is disorientating and can be eye hurting, because eye is not prepared for the color switch/ doesn't know what to expect.
I have 22 inchers around 32 inches away from my eyes.
When looking at the video in the OP, the issue is more like the screen seems so close and plastered to the FOV. When you could have more screens further away.
In real life all 3 screens are in my FOV, I would feel massively overwhelmed if it appeared as it did in his video, not sure if it is giving a correct perception.
* Your 22" screen at a distance of 32" has a horizontal FOV of 33°. Moving your eyes from the middle of one screen to the adjacent screen is a 33° movement. Assuming 1080p it would have a PPD of 58, which is roughly retina PPD.
* My 27" screen at a distance of 20" (I measured it [update: originally measured at 14", remeasured in a more relaxed posture]) has a horizontal FOV of 60°, almost twice as wide. Moving my eyes to an adjacent screen would be physically impossible and I'd have to turn my head since the maximum adduction angle for human eyes is ~45° (each side). At 4K it has a PPD of 32, not even retina.
Although you can move your eyes from the center of the left screen to the center of the right (33 * 2 = 66°), you can't see the edges of your outer screens without turning your head slightly (33 * 3 = 99°, greater than human adduction of 45 * 2 = 90°).
Your three screens have a combined FOV of 99°, which is 50% bigger than my single 27" at 60°. That's definitely more, but it's 1.5x, not 3x, more. So our setups are not that different, it's just that you are using three monitors to cover a little more horizontal FOV than I get sitting closer to just one.
> I find it more uncomfortable to eyes to switch screens on the same window, especially if one is light and the other is dark. The blinking is disorientating and can be eye hurting, because eye is not prepared for the color switch/ doesn't know what to expect.
I use dark theme for everything so don't have this issue and am constantly switching between tabs and windows.
Note there was an error in my math here which I can no longer correct. My 27" 4K at a distance of 20" has a PPD of 63, which is also considered retina. Compare this to the Vision Pro PPD of ~34.
To get true 4K res (3840x2160) at a PPD of 34 would require a screen that is 3840 / 34 = 113 degrees wide, way in excess of what is accessible by adduction of the human eye. A 60° wide screen would have a resolution of 60*34 = 2,040 pixels wide, or roughly 1080p.
I also use dark theme for everything, and I also have a browser extension for that, but I keep disabling/enabling it because sometimes things bug on dark mode.
How is to be 14 inches from the screen? I wouldn't feel good being this near to the screen.
I was going to comment that all the ergonomics things I've read suggest arm-length (touch with tip of finger) as the optimal monitor distance, but if you're nearsighted enough that doing so would require glasses, I can completely understand wanting to have the screen much closer. That makes a lot more sense.
> Turning your head ~90 degrees to the left just to see Slack(or any other windows) is for me an productivity nerf, not a boost.
I wouldn't put slack there because I look at it all day long, but I could see leaving open something like Datadog that I look at infrequently, but it'd be nice if it was just _there_ and I didn't have to go tab-hunting to find it
> I could see leaving open something like Datadog that I look at infrequently, but it'd be nice if it was just _there_ and I didn't have to go tab-hunting to find it
Exactly! I use a 50" TV as my main display, but I stick chat, email, and music on separate monitors. If I use chat/email extensively, I move it closer. Otherwise, it's just something that's on all the time that I don't need to dig for.
I have it on a stand that I screwed into a beam of wood that goes between two very heavy speakers that I built myself. If I move my setup I might mount it on a wall.
Needless to say, I'm eagerly awaiting something like an Apple Vision Pro to be "mainstream" for desktop displays. I can't use a Mac for my 9-5 job.
I "install" high usage chrome tabs as apps so I can pin them to my taskbar and bring them up with a shortcut, e.g. Win+9. I actually do this more more than programs, so I use AutoHotKey to get more shortcuts, e.g. CapsLock+F1 may bring up something less common like Authy.
Tab/Window hunting via CtrlTab/AltShiftA is... not great. A goal of mine is to never AltTab.
Exactly. My regular setup is two 27" monitors both at home and at work, but I noticed that most if the time I focus on one monitor, while the other monitor is secondary with Teams, Outlook etc and only "supports" my workflow.
I am sure a setup as shown in the video could help someone like a stock trader as they are used to getting large amount of input from multiple sources. But I think for most people, to actually get things done, they only have this much attention and can do limited amount of multitasking. Having to arrange windows is also a real hassle. And for me, I already use workspace features for different projects, which is a bit burdening, and having infinite amount of windows around is not going to help.
Which is why I never bothered to add a third monitor when I could easily do so. I tried it out a few times with my tablet but found that display mostly unused.
> Anyway, back on topic, this video feels like justifying the purchase with flashy multi window gimmicks instead of showing actual ergonomic improvements. The proof will be in the pudding. Will the author stick to that sprawling neck twisting setup long term, or will he switch back to a more conventional setup once the novelty of his new toy wears off and his video got enough views?
I feel like this is the 2024 equivalent of Compiz[0] first showing up some 20 years ago.
So many people were blinging out their desktops with these wild effects. Windows burn away when you close them! When you change desktops, there's some huge rotating cube!
But the novelty of this stuff just wears off. For a couple of months you can impress people with the "gee whiz" factor, but at the end of the day it doesn't do anything to actually make your work easier.
If I want something for "real work," low latency is a killer feature. Having to rummage through some virtual junk drawer to do the equivalent of alt-tab or meta-scrollwheel is always going to be weirdly indirect and slower for me.
There do exist practical, non-gaming use cases for VR/AR goggles (e.g. simulators and training software), but these are niche. I certainly don't buy the idea that "desktop computing" writ large is somehow going to be enhanced by this experience.
Exactly. You can only focus your attention on a limited area regardless of number of screens. A head-turn is a worse interface for switching information than a shortcut key.
Everyone works differently. I use several monitors at work and definitely have to turn my head a few degrees to focus on my secondary. I use an ultrawide at home.
I'm way more productive with more display area than a single display using virtual workspaces and shortcut keys.
Similarly I do better with multiple monitors and infrequent app/workspace switching than I do with one monitor switching apps/workspaces constantly.
In fact one of the reasons my gaming PC doesn’t often do double duty as a Linux workstation is because it only has a single monitor and no matter how I configure shortcuts for switching apps and workspaces, I always find myself irritated to the point of distraction trying to get work done. All my real work happens on my dual monitor Mac setup.
You can place and size the screens wherever you want. If this guy wants place an additional 2 screens to his left so he has to turn his head, so be it. The fact that tech allows you to experiment with any screen config/layout is pretty amazing.
Totally agree. 32 inch display, 3 desktops mapped to Meta+left arrow, meta+up arrow, meta+right arrow. I don't even have to think about it to get to the desktop that is the up arrow.
I do have a 24 inch monitor that sits vertically to the side of this monitor but I haven't turned it on in at least a year. Even having to move my eyes is a waste of time. Screen space is simply not an issue for me.
Hope these people enjoy their videos because you aren't getting a whole lot more. It is like when I bought the sega saturn for like $800 adjusted for inflation as a kid. It was so cool for one New Years eve party and that was about it.
I’m a very happy single screen + spaces user. I’d love this kind of setup in VR, where there’s an easy way to rotate around the spaces for longer work in a given area, but still be able to quickly glance.
100% agree with this. I've tried dual and triple screens over the years but what's stuck for me is a 43inch 4k monitor, its about the biggest I can go without having to move my head too much
Center screen is the focus screen for sure. I cmd+tab between my code editor, terminal, and browser there.
Laptop screen on the left is for Slack and music player.
Right screen is in portrait mode and it’s for docs or design comps.
I have had issues with neck pain and stiffness and I find that having a wider FOV for my workspace balanced between left and right sides actually helps a lot…so that’s a huge part of why I like the triple monitor setup.
I ended up settling on a ~27" landscape and bit smaller portrait monitor for my desktop. I tried a third for a while as basically chat/communications but it was a bit much. I'd probably be fine with a single large screen but I like having reference material on a separate monitor. Having a separate laptop is sometimes useful.
Yeah. Is turning your head more taxing than an app switch? Yes. That’s my experience. Moving your eyes 20-30 degrees is less taxing than app switching.
Most times you don’t have a use case for 2 monitors and you are then forced to find a problem for your sunk cost as it’s already in front of you with an empty space. You want to fill it with something and make yourself think you are working faster
Context: I spend a lot of time in VR (gaming), have used VR as a productivity tool, and have ordered an AVP.
> Turning your head ~90 degrees to the left just to be able to see Slack(or any other windows) is for me an productivity nerf, not a boost.
I agree, or at least _mostly_ agree.
I definitely wouldn't have a window that I regularly use that far away from my "resting" position. I might put something like Discord or IRC over there, but that's a place for something that is a mild distraction - something you'd like to look at every once in a while, but not at the expense of changing your primary workspace and fully breaking context.
> In my life I experimented with 3 monitors, 2 monitors, one monitor, ultra widescreens, square aspect ratio displays, and a mix of several of those, etc. and I find the best productivity setup is when I have everything centered in my narrow/focused field of view, regardless of how many displays there are or what their aspect ratio is.
> If I have too many or too wide displays, needing me to turn my head/neck to the side to see what's on them, it's just useless real estate and extra shit I have to manage and organize, wasting my brain power and concentration on managing the multi-monitor setup instead of on work.
I like multiple displays, but like you, I quickly reached a point where it created more effort than it prevented. Learning to use macOS's built-in virtual desktops was a huge deal for me. I use them extensively.
> FWIW, currently I have a single 32 inch(27 would work too) 4k display straight in front of me, and switching workspaces via Meta Key + Scroll wheel is way more desk-real-estate, monetarily and energy eficient and more ergonomic than moving my neck to another display on the side that's just sitting there displaying a picture that nobody's looking at 90% of the time.
This seems similar to me.
I have a 32" 4K display at eye level. My 16" MBP acts as a secondary display, centered below it. I use the MBP's keyboard and trackpad, but what I'm working on is on the upper monitor. The laptop display is relegated to "secondary/communications" usage.
For example
Right now, I have three virtual desktops on my monitor:
* blank - where new apps and windows open by default
* browser - for me that's Arc. I have five "spaces" open in Arc, including one for "personal" and one for "killing time" (that's where HN lives)
* terminal - this is a full-screen Kitty instance. I'm running fish+tmux, use neovim for my editor/IDE, and all of my projects are running in Docker. I currently have three tmux windows, with two, two, and four panes open respectively.
My laptop screen has a ton of other, less-often-used stuff:
* default - lots of random windows that I'm not actively referencing. I don't always bother to close them, as I don't use this desktop often enough to care
* Slack
* Calendar
* Discord
* Notion
* Messages
I use a lot of full-screen apps, and doing it this way lets me focus on one thing at a time. I can use keyboard commands (Ctrl+arrows) or gestures (three-finger swipe) to move between desktops on either monitor, or Ctrl+up to display them all at once if I'm looking for something.
> Anyway, back on topic, this video feels like justifying the purchase with flashy multi window gimmicks instead of showing actual ergonomic improvements. The proof will be in the pudding. Will the author stick to that sprawling neck twisting setup long term, or will he switch back to a more conventional setup once the novelty of his new toy wears off and his video got enough views?
My hope is that I'll be able to use my existing workflow - or one very similar to it - even when I'm not at my desk. Initially that will be by setting a single large macOS screen directly in front of me, and one or more native visionOS/iPadOS apps below and above it. Most of the things I'm using my laptop screen for today are available as native apps, so I think that will work.
Longer term, I hope either Apple's virtual desktop solution matures or Immersed's release on visionOS will solve my issues. I'd used Immersed in the part to work in VR, and it works very, very well. The only headset I have that supports it is a Quest 2, and its resolution is too low to consistently work in a terminal in VR for me. I have a Pimax Crystal QLED as well (which I use for gaming), but haven't been able to find a good virtual desktop solution for it on Mac.
> FWIW 2, I have a Quest 3 for gaming, and could never use that for work due to the limited narrow FoV(~110°) that make it more like "binoculars vision" than actual virtual/augumented "reality". And according to the experience of MKBHD(Marques Brownlee) on YT, the Apple VP has an even narrower FoV than that. Ouch! That does not sound optimistic for productivity at all. IMHO 130°+ should be the norm for FoV going forward. Anything narrower and I feel like I'm wearing horse blinkers.
My Quest 2's FOV feel about like the minimum for being productive for me, and it's 97º horizontal. My Crystal is 110ºh x 96ºv (it can do up to 125ºh with difference lenses), and that's more than sufficient for flying a jet fighter in War Thunder. I've not laid hands on an AVP yet, but I'm already hearing about optical issues at the edges of the FOV. That's consistent with what I see from the other headsets I've owned or used - your peripheral vision is mostly important for context; you really only need about 30º that's crystal clear to be effective. That's doubly true with foveated rendering and eye tracking; anything outside that cone isn't something your eyes are going to resolve in detail anyhow.
In my life I experimented with 3 monitors, 2 monitors, one monitor, ultra widescreens, square aspect ratio displays, and a mix of several of those, etc. and I find the best productivity setup is when I have everything centered in my narrow/focused field of view, regardless of how many displays there are or what their aspect ratio is.
If I have too many or too wide displays, needing me to turn my head/neck to the side to see what's on them, it's just useless real estate and extra shit I have to manage and organize, wasting my brain power and concentration on managing the multi-monitor setup instead of on work.
FWIW, currently I have a single 32 inch(27 would work too) 4k display straight in front of me, and switching workspaces via Meta Key + Scroll wheel is way more desk-real-estate, monetarily and energy eficient and more ergonomic than moving my neck to another display on the side that's just sitting there displaying a picture that nobody's looking at 90% of the time.
But in a past job 12+ years ago, I loved having the two work-provided Philips 20 inch 4:3 1600x1200 IPS displays right in front of me. One of those in landscape with the IDE, the other rotated in portrait for the browser/documentation. That was peak DPI, windowing and ergonomics before 16:9 "HD" displays ruined vertical real estate and productivity with their "cinema" TV aspect ratio. Shame you can't get cheap monitors like those anymore in good condition(their CCFL lamps dimmed over time by now). Also, R.I.P. Philips display panels.
Anyway, back on topic, this video feels like justifying the purchase with flashy multi window gimmicks instead of showing actual ergonomic improvements. The proof will be in the pudding. Will the author stick to that sprawling neck twisting setup long term, or will he switch back to a more conventional setup once the novelty of his new toy wears off and his video got enough views?
FWIW 2, I have a Quest 3 for gaming, and could never use that for work due to the limited narrow FoV(~110°) that make it more like "binoculars vision" than actual virtual/augumented "reality". And according to the experience of MKBHD(Marques Brownlee) on YT, the Apple VP has an even narrower FoV than that. Ouch! That does not sound optimistic for productivity at all. IMHO 130°+ should be the norm for FoV going forward. Anything narrower and I feel like I'm wearing horse blinkers.