The Free Talk Live BBS

Free Talk Live => The Polling Pit => Topic started by: Alex Libman on April 22, 2009, 11:14:53 AM

Title: Multiple monitors
Post by: Alex Libman on April 22, 2009, 11:14:53 AM

We're only talking about computer monitors here, having a TV in the room doesn't count.

I only use laptops nowadays, but I'm thinking of getting an overhead display.  I never liked the idea before, but I saw someone using my app on a 40" monitor (I think it was WQXGA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QXGA#WQXGA), not sure) and, wow...  It just looked so much more epic!  :lol:

Are there any interesting habits that you have pertaining to separating your FTL / forum related activities onto several monitors?

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: slave_3646 on April 22, 2009, 11:21:37 AM

Just as in the real world, in the virtual world more real estate is better.

All our workstations use dual monitors. We're an AutoCAD/Bentley Comms shop, and to do what I do on a single 4:3 monitor would be painful.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: freeAgent on April 22, 2009, 08:10:35 PM

I used to use two monitors while I was in school.  It was great for doing research, problem sets, etc.  I use a laptop with no external monitor at work now.  At home I've downsized to a single monitor (not counting my TV).  I might go back to dual monitors some day, but for now there's no need.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: rabidfurby on April 22, 2009, 08:53:17 PM

If you do any real work on a computer, they're worth every fucking penny. Skimp on the machine itself to buy more screen space; it's worth it.

At home, I have two 22" widescreens.

At work, I have two 20" widescreens attached to my main machine, a laptop to the left of that, and a 20" 4:3 to the right that's attached to my secondary machine. All 3 are controlled through a single keyboard & mouse using Synergy (http://synergy2.sourceforge.net/). Maybe I'm a little spoiled, but I couldn't work nearly as effectively with only one monitor. It'd be like trying to read a book through a toilet paper tube.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: hellbilly on April 22, 2009, 09:09:09 PM

Yup- always while working (at home).

Photoshop & Lightroom tools stay on the laptop screen while the big screen is used to see the image, zooming in and out, etc.

I also rarely use a mouse having become used to using a graphics tablet.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on April 22, 2009, 10:37:12 PM

I MUST have 2x (minimum) monitors personally.  My main screen is a 24" wide 1080p ASUSTek and my secondary screen is a 19" 4:3 Benq  I love having the extra screen space and I feel cramped working on single monitor systems.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

Actually, I was gonna open a thread about this very subject just this morning.


I use two 22's at work, and I like it a lot.  We have a redundant style workstation that has dual systems on opposite ends of a work area.  In other words, two screens here, and over there, two more.  Each system running on a separate tower, networked. 

I don't recall the name of the program that allows it, but I'd just have to click around to find it.  We started doing it about ten years ago with these big fuckin' 21" CRTs.  Those fuckers are heavy.  I have one that I donated to my parents rig, now that I'm on a laptop. 

Anyhow, the reason I was gonna inquire about this is because I plan on setting up another monitor.  My laptop doesn't suck so the idea was to have another screen on my desk, and I'd just unplug from it when I go somewhere. 

Eventually I want to set up another home system, then I'll just swap all my stuff around.  I was checking out some towers at BestBuy, gathering some ideas for this loose plan, and the Geek was pointing out which were loaded with 64bit OS's.  M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Opinions?  (sorry, slightly off topic.  but all roads lead to Rome)

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:54:52 PM

Also.   This thing makes me hard. 

I might get this for the aforementioned tower, just to satisfy my lust, then turn it into a jukebox after the novelty wears off.  This would be the bomb in a home theater, to flip through albums and movies like a giant iPod Touch. 

(http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/hp_touchsmart_pc.jpg)


http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/touchsmart/alt/tsalt.html

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Harry Tuttle on April 23, 2009, 01:01:43 AM

I have two PCs and two monitors at work. My main PC has dual monitors and the second PC is shares the left monitor through KVM. This way I can have my right screen available with important reference info even if I have to go to my other PC.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on April 23, 2009, 02:59:13 AM

Quote from: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

Actually, I was gonna open a thread about this very subject just this morning.


I use two 22's at work, and I like it a lot.  We have a redundant style workstation that has dual systems on opposite ends of a work area.  In other words, two screens here, and over there, two more.  Each system running on a separate tower, networked. 

I don't recall the name of the program that allows it, but I'd just have to click around to find it.  We started doing it about ten years ago with these big fuckin' 21" CRTs.  Those fuckers are heavy.  I have one that I donated to my parents rig, now that I'm on a laptop. 

Anyhow, the reason I was gonna inquire about this is because I plan on setting up another monitor.  My laptop doesn't suck so the idea was to have another screen on my desk, and I'd just unplug from it when I go somewhere. 

Eventually I want to set up another home system, then I'll just swap all my stuff around.  I was checking out some towers at BestBuy, gathering some ideas for this loose plan, and the Geek was pointing out which were loaded with 64bit OS's.  M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Opinions?  (sorry, slightly off topic.  but all roads lead to Rome)

If you want a decent tower for cheap I can build you one or sell you this one I've got already built right here.  I'll beat prices on any midrange tower from Best Buy, with a warrantee.  System I have here for sale currently is a 2.8ghz dual core Athlon64 with an X800GTO PCI-E graphics card on an ASUS motherboard.  I'll Sell it with 4 gigs RAM for 300 bucks shipped with a keyboard and mouse.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Osborne on April 23, 2009, 03:49:45 AM

I get really irritable if I have to work with fewer than three.

http://www.digitaltigers.com/zenview-arenaultraelite.asp
(http://www.digitaltigers.com/images/product/gallery%5Czvarenaultraelite-wid1260.jpg)

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: davann on April 23, 2009, 12:58:36 PM

Quote from: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

and the Geek was pointing out which were loaded with 64bit OS's.  M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Opinions?  (sorry, slightly off topic.  but all roads lead to Rome)

I love my Windows XP 64 bit. If you are into video editing, 3D graphic creation, photo manipulation it is smok'n. Not sure about the quad, but my dual works great.

I have just the one monitor but am also hooked into my living room tv for movie watching off the PC. I have not turned on regular tv for over a year with the help of Pirate Bay and purchased DVDs. Not sure why a tv would not be counted.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 23, 2009, 01:21:45 PM

Quote from: Demosthenes on April 23, 2009, 02:59:13 AM

Quote from: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

Actually, I was gonna open a thread about this very subject just this morning.


I use two 22's at work, and I like it a lot.  We have a redundant style workstation that has dual systems on opposite ends of a work area.  In other words, two screens here, and over there, two more.  Each system running on a separate tower, networked. 

I don't recall the name of the program that allows it, but I'd just have to click around to find it.  We started doing it about ten years ago with these big fuckin' 21" CRTs.  Those fuckers are heavy.  I have one that I donated to my parents rig, now that I'm on a laptop. 

Anyhow, the reason I was gonna inquire about this is because I plan on setting up another monitor.  My laptop doesn't suck so the idea was to have another screen on my desk, and I'd just unplug from it when I go somewhere. 

Eventually I want to set up another home system, then I'll just swap all my stuff around.  I was checking out some towers at BestBuy, gathering some ideas for this loose plan, and the Geek was pointing out which were loaded with 64bit OS's.  M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Opinions?  (sorry, slightly off topic.  but all roads lead to Rome)

If you want a decent tower for cheap I can build you one or sell you this one I've got already built right here.  I'll beat prices on any midrange tower from Best Buy, with a warrantee.  System I have here for sale currently is a 2.8ghz dual core Athlon64 with an X800GTO PCI-E graphics card on an ASUS motherboard.  I'll Sell it with 4 gigs RAM for 300 bucks shipped with a keyboard and mouse.

Let me think a while on it, my plans for this system are late-summer.  

The thing thats attractive about major manufacturers is they come with all sorts of little programming features.  In their overabundance, theres a handful of stuff thats actually useful.  It comes loaded with a legal copy of Vista, and all the models I was leaning towards had every port they make, so its forward compatible for anything a normal guy would buy for a long time.  Bluetooth, antivirus teasers, and a whole bunch of stuff I probably forgot.  

This next one is gonna be my Mothership, Joel.  I wouldn't mind having a secondary system networked into it, though.  That way, the Mothership could stay in hibernation if I'm just fuckin' around.  

I'll get back to you on that.  

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 23, 2009, 01:24:10 PM

Quote from: davann on April 23, 2009, 12:58:36 PM

I love my Windows XP 64 bit. If you are into video editing, 3D graphic creation, photo manipulation it is smok'n. Not sure about the quad, but my dual works great.

I do a lot of charts and live data rolling in.  I have no shoop skillz. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on April 23, 2009, 03:12:21 PM

Quote from: Bill Brasky on April 23, 2009, 01:21:45 PM

Quote from: Demosthenes on April 23, 2009, 02:59:13 AM

Quote from: Bill Brasky on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

Actually, I was gonna open a thread about this very subject just this morning.


I use two 22's at work, and I like it a lot.  We have a redundant style workstation that has dual systems on opposite ends of a work area.  In other words, two screens here, and over there, two more.  Each system running on a separate tower, networked. 

I don't recall the name of the program that allows it, but I'd just have to click around to find it.  We started doing it about ten years ago with these big fuckin' 21" CRTs.  Those fuckers are heavy.  I have one that I donated to my parents rig, now that I'm on a laptop. 

Anyhow, the reason I was gonna inquire about this is because I plan on setting up another monitor.  My laptop doesn't suck so the idea was to have another screen on my desk, and I'd just unplug from it when I go somewhere. 

Eventually I want to set up another home system, then I'll just swap all my stuff around.  I was checking out some towers at BestBuy, gathering some ideas for this loose plan, and the Geek was pointing out which were loaded with 64bit OS's.  M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Opinions?  (sorry, slightly off topic.  but all roads lead to Rome)

If you want a decent tower for cheap I can build you one or sell you this one I've got already built right here.  I'll beat prices on any midrange tower from Best Buy, with a warrantee.  System I have here for sale currently is a 2.8ghz dual core Athlon64 with an X800GTO PCI-E graphics card on an ASUS motherboard.  I'll Sell it with 4 gigs RAM for 300 bucks shipped with a keyboard and mouse.

Let me think a while on it, my plans for this system are late-summer.  

The thing thats attractive about major manufacturers is they come with all sorts of little programming features.  In their overabundance, theres a handful of stuff thats actually useful.  It comes loaded with a legal copy of Vista, and all the models I was leaning towards had every port they make, so its forward compatible for anything a normal guy would buy for a long time.  Bluetooth, antivirus teasers, and a whole bunch of stuff I probably forgot.  

This next one is gonna be my Mothership, Joel.  I wouldn't mind having a secondary system networked into it, though.  That way, the Mothership could stay in hibernation if I'm just fuckin' around.  

I'll get back to you on that.  

Of course I'd put a legal operating system on it too.  I'm not that shady.  :lol:

But if you come up with a list of features you want I could build you a pretty slick desktop and probably still beat the major manufacturers price while offering my own warrantee packaged with it.

For me my desktop is my Mothership too.  I use  my laptop only as a portable system, so that's how I build my desktops.

Anyways take your time, no rush here.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 23, 2009, 10:49:29 PM

Arite.  Thanks for the offer, by the way.

When I'm ready to be serious I'll c/p a list of specs from a model I find suitable and see what we can arrive at. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Alex Libman on April 24, 2009, 09:19:00 AM

How many monitors do you think they'll let me have in prison when they take me for tax resistance?  :cry:

Everything is a matter of habit.  In some situations, it's better not to elevate yours...

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: rabidfurby on April 25, 2009, 07:30:32 PM

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Dual-core vs. quad is pretty irrelevant for average desktop use. The increase in cores only boosts performance for a narrow set of problems, and the CPU is very rarely the bottleneck anyway. If any of the Best Buy drones tried to sell you on it being twice as fast, you should have punched them in the face. Your best bet would be a fast dual-core, or one of AMD's nifty triple-cores. Anything more and you're paying extra that could be better spent on a different component.

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 23, 2009, 01:21:45 PM

The thing thats attractive about major manufacturers is they come with all sorts of little programming features.  In their overabundance, theres a handful of stuff thats actually useful.  It comes loaded with a legal copy of Vista, and all the models I was leaning towards had every port they make, so its forward compatible for anything a normal guy would buy for a long time.  Bluetooth, antivirus teasers, and a whole bunch of stuff I probably forgot. 

Most of that stuff is gimmicks, just there to pad the manufacturer's feature list. Bluetooth, for example, can be a $15 plug-in (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833242001). Antivirus and all the other software that comes bundled with new PCs are crap. If I were to get a prebuilt machine, the first thing I'd do is a completely clean OS install from scratch. (except most manufacturers don't give you a real re-install disk, just a "recovery disk" that reloads all their bullshit)

Having one built custom is definitely the best way to go. You'll get a better machine, faster and more reliable, for less money. And you can get some things that you'd never see on a mid-range desktop model, like a 10K RPM drive, that'll make it absolutely screaming fast.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on April 25, 2009, 07:53:42 PM

Quote from: rabidfurby on April 25, 2009, 07:30:32 PM

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 22, 2009, 11:43:22 PM

M$, on Intel dual-dual, or one Quad.  It seems HP and Dell are fuckin around with both, stacking their chips and what-not.  I probably won't be serious for a few months, but is one much better, or should one be avoided?  To me, it sounds like dual-dual would be better, because quad is not perfect yet. 

Dual-core vs. quad is pretty irrelevant for average desktop use. The increase in cores only boosts performance for a narrow set of problems, and the CPU is very rarely the bottleneck anyway. If any of the Best Buy drones tried to sell you on it being twice as fast, you should have punched them in the face. Your best bet would be a fast dual-core, or one of AMD's nifty triple-cores. Anything more and you're paying extra that could be better spent on a different component.

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 23, 2009, 01:21:45 PM

The thing thats attractive about major manufacturers is they come with all sorts of little programming features.  In their overabundance, theres a handful of stuff thats actually useful.  It comes loaded with a legal copy of Vista, and all the models I was leaning towards had every port they make, so its forward compatible for anything a normal guy would buy for a long time.  Bluetooth, antivirus teasers, and a whole bunch of stuff I probably forgot. 

Most of that stuff is gimmicks, just there to pad the manufacturer's feature list. Bluetooth, for example, can be a $15 plug-in (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833242001). Antivirus and all the other software that comes bundled with new PCs are crap. If I were to get a prebuilt machine, the first thing I'd do is a completely clean OS install from scratch. (except most manufacturers don't give you a real re-install disk, just a "recovery disk" that reloads all their bullshit)

Having one built custom is definitely the best way to go. You'll get a better machine, faster and more reliable, for less money. And you can get some things that you'd never see on a mid-range desktop model, like a 10K RPM drive, that'll make it absolutely screaming fast.

I agree completely!  Thats why I've been building custom systems for the past 10 years.  My current box is better than ANY Best Buy box yet the cost of it was miniscule in comparison to what it would have cost if it came from Alienware or a similar company.

On the X2 vs. X4 debate, I think it really depends on what you're doing.  I saw a noticeable difference when I swapped out my 2.8ghz X2 for a 3.0 X4, but I'm typically running a minimum of 85 processes at any given moment including ftp serving and whatnot.  Although I agree the average bloke will not notice any difference between the two.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 25, 2009, 10:40:13 PM

It doesn't bother me to admit theres a fuck-ton of stuff I don't know about these things, thats why I bring it here instead of taking my overinflated head into Best-Buy and think I know what's what.

I don't have a problem with a custom box.  Weighing the pro's and con's is the only sensible way I have of deciding what product (and its reliability) better suits my needs.

My thing isn't for high-end gaming.  But I'd like to use it during down-time for watching some hi-def (or just very good quality) movies on a flat 22", and maybe plug it into a big screen.  So it should be able to handle basic media issues like a good frame rate without strobing.

But this thing is primarily gonna be for business, so think high-end consumer model with some bells and whistles.  Lots of ports, dual CD/DVD rom, some convenience plugs in the front, Bluetooth would be cool. 

When you shop for that stuff and do the add/subtract game on the product website, you normally end up in the $1200 range, or higher.  But theres a lot of stuff I don't need, also.  Like Quicken, Photoshop, and god knows what else is crammed in that box. 

I want a good, bare bones, solid machine with lots of horsepower that'll still be running five years from now, that can power a minimum of two panels.  With Vista.  Any other software (unless someone recommends a must-have) I will install prog-by-prog as I see fit.  I'd also like the drive partitioned so I can experiment with Ubuntu, I don't know how to go about doing that. 

I even don't mind scrimping on internal memory, because I use a lot of external drives and swap them here and there for different reasons.   250GB would be plenty. 

On the bright side, there would be no passive spyware by the manufacturer surripitously installed, and all the product registration and trial bullshit they try to cram up your ass.  Those are excellent benefits of a custom box. 

If all goes well with my plans, I'm all for having a sit-down and doing a design.  And I understand making it worth your while.  Think it over, decide what the proper components would be, and hit me with an estimate.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: hellbilly on April 25, 2009, 11:23:06 PM

I'm building a new PC now actually..

The finished piece will come in under a thousand (after rebates). After doing a lot of price comparisons, newegg.com had the most deals, and shipping was fast & free. Here's a breakdown of components to give you and idea of the price..

case - 66.00
motherboard - 169.00
processor (core i7 920) - 280.00
6gb memory - 80.00
power supply - 75.00
video card - 185.00
2 500mb drives to configure as RAID - 120.00

The motherboard is "Tri-Sli" ready, which means I can install 3 video cards to be used simultaneously.. which I think is pretty neat. This PC will be used for a lot of Photoshopping and should be double the speed of my Mac laptop which is a 2ghz core 2 duo... a lot of gibberish sounding shit I know, I don't even really know half this shit. But I built my last PC 7 years ago and did fine so I thought I'd do it again.

You mentioned memory above but I think you meant disc space right? memory counts when you have a bunch of stuff going on, or running memory hog programs like Photoshop.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 25, 2009, 11:56:27 PM

Yeah, storage space, disc.

Thats pretty much the stuff I'm looking for.  Those i7's get top reviews.  Sounds like a good rig. 

I like the RAID idea.  I saw HP doing that.  Thats probably where I can skimp, I don't need it.  And I don't really care about the case, as long as it breathes. 

That machine would probably fetch about $1700 if it came from a brand name.


Maybe I should think about doing it myself.   It'd be a good exercise. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:04:51 AM

The case I got is really snazzy.. in an 80's kinda way :)

You should DIY. Research to make sure the parts are compatible (motherboard & processor mostly)- then build one while you have your current rig online so you can google shit if you run into a problem.

It's pretty much just assembling the stuff.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 01:09:25 AM

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 25, 2009, 11:56:27 PM

Yeah, storage space, disc.

Thats pretty much the stuff I'm looking for.  Those i7's get top reviews.  Sounds like a good rig. 

For what you want to do, an i7 would be complete overkill. So would $1200 worth of parts - you can build a very capable machine for a lot less. Since you're thinking of a home-theaterish setup, you could spend the money you save on some really nice surround sound speakers, bigger/more monitors, etc.

If I was building a new desktop right now, it'd be something like this (http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=8534514). $600, plus monitor & peripherals, and it'll run circles around anything comparably priced from Worst Buy.

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 25, 2009, 11:56:27 PM

I like the RAID idea.  I saw HP doing that.  Thats probably where I can skimp, I don't need it.  And I don't really care about the case, as long as it breathes. 

RAID 0 on a boot drive is a bad idea anyway. It does boost performance, but the price you pay is lower reliability. It halves your mean time-to-failure - if either of the two drives dies, the entire array is unusable, and your machine is fucked. Plus, if you ever need to upgrade or replace your motherboard, the array can be unreadable unless your new motherboard has a compatible RAID controller - unlikely.

A small 10k RPM boot drive with a bigger drive for storage is only a little more expensive, and works much, much better. That's what I have in this system and it runs beautifully.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:16:40 AM

What about a partition on one drive of the RAID? ..a RAID 1 specifically.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on April 26, 2009, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 01:09:25 AM

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 25, 2009, 11:56:27 PM

Yeah, storage space, disc.

Thats pretty much the stuff I'm looking for.  Those i7's get top reviews.  Sounds like a good rig. 

For what you want to do, an i7 would be complete overkill. So would $1200 worth of parts - you can build a very capable machine for a lot less. Since you're thinking of a home-theaterish setup, you could spend the money you save on some really nice surround sound speakers, bigger/more monitors, etc.

If I was building a new desktop right now, it'd be something like this (http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=8534514). $600, plus monitor & peripherals, and it'll run circles around anything comparably priced from Worst Buy.

Quote from: Emperor Braskimojo on April 25, 2009, 11:56:27 PM

I like the RAID idea.  I saw HP doing that.  Thats probably where I can skimp, I don't need it.  And I don't really care about the case, as long as it breathes. 

RAID 0 on a boot drive is a bad idea anyway. It does boost performance, but the price you pay is lower reliability. It halves your mean time-to-failure - if either of the two drives dies, the entire array is unusable, and your machine is fucked. Plus, if you ever need to upgrade or replace your motherboard, the array can be unreadable unless your new motherboard has a compatible RAID controller - unlikely.

A small 10k RPM boot drive with a bigger drive for storage is only a little more expensive, and works much, much better. That's what I have in this system and it runs beautifully.

Cool.  I'll match them specs against some stuff I'm looking at.  Thanks, furb. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 02:14:40 AM

Quote from: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:16:40 AM

What about a partition on one drive of the RAID? ..a RAID 1 specifically.

RAID 1 is the opposite - better reliability, but you don't gain any performance. For RAID to be effective, you really want RAID 5. You get a performance boost and improved reliability.

And personally, I would never trust the RAID controller built into a motherboard - only software RAID done by the OS, or a full-fledged standalone RAID controller if I was building a serious monster of a server. On all but the most high-end mobos, the RAID controller is actually purely in software. This means it has no real performance advantage over OS-based RAID, and it's not as reliable, because the implementation and disk format varies from chipset to chipset, vs. having stable, well-tested RAID implementations in both Windows and Linux.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on April 26, 2009, 05:17:51 AM

Quote from: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 02:14:40 AM

Quote from: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:16:40 AM

What about a partition on one drive of the RAID? ..a RAID 1 specifically.

RAID 1 is the opposite - better reliability, but you don't gain any performance. For RAID to be effective, you really want RAID 5. You get a performance boost and improved reliability.

And personally, I would never trust the RAID controller built into a motherboard - only software RAID done by the OS, or a full-fledged standalone RAID controller if I was building a serious monster of a server. On all but the most high-end mobos, the RAID controller is actually purely in software. This means it has no real performance advantage over OS-based RAID, and it's not as reliable, because the implementation and disk format varies from chipset to chipset, vs. having stable, well-tested RAID implementations in both Windows and Linux.

True.  If I was going to build a sever dedicated system I would go wtih RAID 1 too.  If it wasn't sensitive info dedicated I would go with either 1 hard drive or 2 in RAID 0.  My brother went with RAID 0 and is having a blast with it so far. 1 year with no problems.  I'm running RAID 0 and have a couple extra drives as well and I haven't had an issue.  Of couse I'm running Seagate 32 mb "RAID 0" brand drives whch are allegedly designed to eliminate RAID issues, but I don't think that's the reason I haven't had any problems so far (3 years).  I noticed a small difference when upgrading to RAID 0 and for me, it was nice, but I don't think the average person is going to notice any difference.  Honestly, I just did it for the "numismatic" value. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: freeAgent on April 26, 2009, 10:55:36 AM

Quote from: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 02:14:40 AM

Quote from: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:16:40 AM

What about a partition on one drive of the RAID? ..a RAID 1 specifically.

RAID 1 is the opposite - better reliability, but you don't gain any performance. For RAID to be effective, you really want RAID 5. You get a performance boost and improved reliability.

And personally, I would never trust the RAID controller built into a motherboard - only software RAID done by the OS, or a full-fledged standalone RAID controller if I was building a serious monster of a server. On all but the most high-end mobos, the RAID controller is actually purely in software. This means it has no real performance advantage over OS-based RAID, and it's not as reliable, because the implementation and disk format varies from chipset to chipset, vs. having stable, well-tested RAID implementations in both Windows and Linux.

I've heard that RAID 5 can actually decrease performance on systems that use a software-based RAID controller.  That may not be true anymore though, especially with quad core processors, etc.

I've used RAID 0 before and it's not worth it IMO.  Just get a lot of RAM and a fast disk and you're fine.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: pete1061 on April 28, 2009, 08:28:10 AM

How did a topic about multiple monitors turn into a RAID discussion?

I used to have a dual monitor setup a few years ago, but I abandoned it.
I've found dual monitors (or more) is great for productivity applications.
But it is sometimes quirky for general purpose or gaming use.
A lot of games get buggy with more than monitor active.
I got tired of disabling the 2nd monitor every time I played a game.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: NHArticleTen on April 28, 2009, 08:53:08 AM

Multiple Monitors=More Porn On Deck

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Ghost of Alex Libman on April 28, 2009, 10:06:06 AM

Next step, multiple projectors - cover every square inch of walls, floor, and ceiling with porn!

If porn fiends don't push technology forward, who will?

Then - holographs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_generated_holography)!

Enjoy!  :lol:



Oh, and ...

Quote from: the ghost of Alex Libman on April 28, 2009, 12:30:07 AM ... here's what you append to all your forum posts if you want every person viewing them to hammer maqs.com for ~8MB of bandwidth:  (http://www.maqs.com/images/about_questions.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/about_vision.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/favicon.ico)(http://www.maqs.com/images/flags/Denmark.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/flags/Estonia.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/flags/Sweden.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/maqs_logo.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/menu_separator.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/denmark_outside.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/poland_outside.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/rotermanni_021.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/sweden_gothenburg_outside.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/sweden_malmoe_outside.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/office/sweden_stockholm_outside.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/103_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/105_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/106_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/107_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/109_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/110_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/111_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/113_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/114_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/115_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/116_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/117_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/118_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/119_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/11_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/121_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/122_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/123_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/127_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/128_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/129_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/12_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/132_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/133_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/13_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/14_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/150_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/153_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/156_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/159_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/163_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/164_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/167_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/172_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/175_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/176_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/183_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/18_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/195_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/197_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/205_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/206_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/207_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/20_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/212_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/213_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/21_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/223_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/225_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/226_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/233_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/235_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/23_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/246_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/249_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/24_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/256_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/257_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/258_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/25_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/264_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/267_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/268_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/269_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/26_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/270_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/271_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/277_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/279_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/27_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/280_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/281_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/284_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/285_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/28_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/291_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/292_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/293_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/295_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/297_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/298_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/304_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/305_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/30_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/311_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/312_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/314_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/315_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/316_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/31_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/322_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/323_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/325_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/327_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/328_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/329_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/330_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/333_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/343_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/348_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/349_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/34_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/350_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/351_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/352_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/353_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/354_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/355_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/356_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/36_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/375_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/376_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/37_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/384_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/386_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/388_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/389_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/391_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/393_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/395_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/396_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/397_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/401_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/403_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/413_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/414_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/415_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/416_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/419_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/421_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/422_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/423_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/424_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/425_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/42_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/430_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/432_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/434_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/436_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/437_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/44_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/45_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/46_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/48_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/49_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/54_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/55_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/56_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/57_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/58_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/59_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/60_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/61_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/62_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/64_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/65_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/67_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/69_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/70_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/73_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/74_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/76_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/77_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/78_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/79_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/80_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/81_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/82_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/83_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/84_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/85_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/87_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/88_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/90_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/91_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/95_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/96_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/persons/98_1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/redfade_left.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/startpage_enter.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/startpage_person.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/startpage_text.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/subpage_menutop.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/about_maqs_denmark.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/about_maqs_estonia.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/about_maqs_poland.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/about_maqs_sweden.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/archive.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/breaking_the_laws_styled.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/business_sectors.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/contact.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/Copenhagen.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/disclaimer.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/events.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/events_estonia.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/events_local.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/Gothenburg.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/legal_areas.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/local_news_denmark.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/local_news_estonia.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/local_news_sweden.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/Malmoe.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/maqs_denmark.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/maqs_estonia.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/maqs_poland.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/maqs_sverige.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/news.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/pictures_logos.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/press_service.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/publications.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/Stockholm.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/Tallinn.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/warsaw.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/what_differentiates.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/work_at_maqs.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/work_at_maqs_associates.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/work_at_maqs_students.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/titles/work_at_maqs_support_staff.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage1.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_business_sectors.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_different.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_downloads.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_legal_areas.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_news.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_questions.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_vision.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/topimage_work_at_maqs.jpg)(http://www.maqs.com/images/what_differentiates_1.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/what_differentiates_2.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/what_differentiates_3.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/what_differentiates_4.gif)(http://www.maqs.com/images/what_differentiates_5.gif)

:twisted:

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: blackie on April 28, 2009, 11:58:37 AM

Quote from: rabidfurby on April 26, 2009, 02:14:40 AM

Quote from: hellbilly on April 26, 2009, 01:16:40 AM

What about a partition on one drive of the RAID? ..a RAID 1 specifically.

RAID 1 is the opposite - better reliability, but you don't gain any performance. For RAID to be effective, you really want RAID 5. You get a performance boost and improved reliability.

Not really. At least not in the higher end servers/workstations using decent drives (SCSI or SAS) and an array controller.

RAID 1(disk mirroring)  and RAID 1+0 (disk mirroring and striping) typically have better random read performance than RAID 5, if you are comparing the same number of spindles. The read is issued to both disks in the RAID 1 set, and which ever disk responds first "wins", but for a write, both disks need to do the write before the operation is complete. On a good hardware based array controller with a decent write cache some of the write performance hit can be mitigated.

For hellbilly-
As far as partitions go, you should get better performance out of HDs with data that on the outer tracks of the HD cylinders. The RPMs of an HD are constant, and you can pack more blocks on the outer tracks of the cylinders. The heads of the HD can read more data from the outer tracks of the HD in one rotation than they can from one rotation of the inner tracks. From what I have seen, HDs start filling the HD from the outermost tracks to the inner most tracks, so the first partitions you create typically has better performance, and the last partitions you create will have slightly less performance. But if the heads are thrashing around from the inner and outer tracks, you lose any performance gain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylinder-head-sector

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: blackie on April 28, 2009, 01:59:21 PM

I was looking at getting a new desktop system around christmas time, comparing the price of building something, and the pre-build ones from major manufactures. At the low - mid end, it seemed like it was almost a wash as far as price goes. If I wasn't going to reuse things like the case and power supply and OS, the custom system would have cost me more.

Margins are razor thin in the desktop market, and there should be a bunch of deals as companies try to get people to buy in the bad economy. They have the whole economy of scale thing going on when they buy their parts. Most of the profits come from the add-on stuff for the OEMs. I am still trying to figure out how to get the most bang for my buck, but there isn't a clear answer right now.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: NHArticleTen on April 29, 2009, 11:53:07 AM

Quote from: blackie on April 28, 2009, 01:59:21 PM

I was looking at getting a new desktop system around christmas time, comparing the price of building something, and the pre-build ones from major manufactures. At the low - mid end, it seemed like it was almost a wash as far as price goes. If I wasn't going to reuse things like the case and power supply and OS, the custom system would have cost me more.

Margins are razor thin in the desktop market, and there should be a bunch of deals as companies try to get people to buy in the bad economy. They have the whole economy of scale thing going on when they buy their parts. Most of the profits come from the add-on stuff for the OEMs. I am still trying to figure out how to get the most bang for my buck, but there isn't a clear answer right now.

From other people's trash...

I have a complete desktop system that works quite nicely...2.8GhzP4, 2GB RAM, DVD burner, 2-80GB HDs, other assorted goodies/niceties...

oh, and the 42 inch plasma 1080HD built in 2007 was free from the trash also...

I love recycling!

enjoy!

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Alex Libman 14 on May 23, 2009, 10:52:56 PM

Wow...  Are you sure the proper word for that is "trash" and not "charity"?  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-sad006.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org)

Or were there sexual favors involved?  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-sex020.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org)

(Not that there's anything wrong with that.)  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-laughing019.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org)

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on August 25, 2009, 03:03:27 AM

Bought a 20'' LG screen today. 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9274572&type=product&id=1218072891412

VGA cable included.

50000:1   2ms response time, I'm kinda interested in seeing this fucker plugged in.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Alex Libman 15 on August 25, 2009, 04:02:53 AM

I got me a cheap 30" WUXGA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WUXGA) (1920x1200) for my desktop - awesome!  Everything looks better on a big screen!

Still only one screen though.  (Not counting a separate laptop I sometimes use as a Linux box.)

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on August 25, 2009, 06:26:13 AM

I would DIE without my 19" + 24" screens.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Harry Tuttle on August 25, 2009, 03:21:59 PM

Quote from: Alex Libman 2012 on August 25, 2009, 04:02:53 AM

  Everything looks better on a big screen!

FTW!

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=25507.0 (http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=25507.0)

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Kevin Freeheart on August 25, 2009, 07:50:00 PM

I don't have dual monitors. I did at one point, but proper workspace handling + high quality large monitors are a better used of the money, I think.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on August 25, 2009, 10:59:12 PM

Quote from: Kevin Dean on August 25, 2009, 07:50:00 PM

I don't have dual monitors. I did at one point, but proper workspace handling + high quality large monitors are a better used of the money, I think.

I needed the second one to spread multiple charts out and watch them all at the same time.

--

This thing is so bright and vivid, words fail me.  It plugged right in without even a reboot.  The computer's handling it perfectly, I thought maybe it would drag down the performance a little, but it didn't, not even a little bit.  The graphics card must be pretty decent in this thing, I expected to hear the fan running more often.  I ran a DVD quality porn clip earlier, it was all I had saved in true DVD quality.  AMAZING clarity.  The black is intense, ink black, and it renders web and programming graphics sharper than I've ever seen.  

The reviews at Best Buy were five stars all the way, and now I know why.  Does not disappoint.  My only criticism is the base is non-adjustable.  I personally don't care, but many pivot, so that could be a sticking point for some.  The quality far outweighs that minor detail, and the VGA cable included was a nice touch.

Also, the power button is a red glow inside the glass, bottom right corner - not a push-button, a sensor.  Very slick design.   

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Coconut on August 25, 2009, 11:02:35 PM

My two monitors are my only two windows to the outside world...

... I don't get out much.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: digitalfour on August 25, 2009, 11:09:18 PM

Quote from: Drifter on August 25, 2009, 10:59:12 PM

This thing is so bright and vivid, words fail me.  It plugged right in without even a reboot.  The computer's handling it perfectly, I thought maybe it would drag down the performance a little, but it didn't, not even a little bit.  The graphics card must be pretty decent in this thing, I expected to hear the fan running more often.  I ran a DVD quality porn clip earlier, it was all I had saved in true DVD quality.  AMAZING clarity.  The black is intense, ink black, and it renders web and programming graphics sharper than I've ever seen.  

The reviews at Best Buy were five stars all the way, and now I know why.  Does not disappoint.  My only criticism is the base is non-adjustable.  I personally don't care, but many pivot, so that could be a sticking point for some.  The quality far outweighs that minor detail, and the VGA cable included was a nice touch.

Also, the power button is a red glow inside the glass, bottom right corner - not a push-button, a sensor.  Very slick design.   

I have the same one, it is pretty slick. Awesome display. I would rather the button was push, sometimes it doesn't seem to work.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Russell Griswold on August 25, 2009, 11:16:07 PM

Quote from: Drifter on August 25, 2009, 03:03:27 AM

Bought a 20'' LG screen today. 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9274572&type=product&id=1218072891412

VGA cable included.

50000:1   2ms response time, I'm kinda interested in seeing this fucker plugged in.

That's a pretty nice monitor.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Alex Libman 15 on August 25, 2009, 11:34:32 PM

Quote from: Coconut on August 25, 2009, 11:02:35 PM My two monitors are my only two windows to the outside world... ... I don't get out much.

You say that as if it's a bad thing...  :?

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on August 26, 2009, 12:17:29 AM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 25, 2009, 11:09:18 PM

I would rather the button was push, sometimes it doesn't seem to work.

Yea, I been trying it a few times.  I was wondering if I don't completely understand where I'm supposed to touch it.  Its a little weird.  I found that if I give it a gentle, firm touch with the whole thumb pad, like giving a thumb-fingerprint, it works. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on August 26, 2009, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: Mr. Lindsey on August 25, 2009, 11:16:07 PM

Quote from: Drifter on August 25, 2009, 03:03:27 AM

Bought a 20'' LG screen today. 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9274572&type=product&id=1218072891412

VGA cable included.

50000:1   2ms response time, I'm kinda interested in seeing this fucker plugged in.

That's a pretty nice monitor.

I'm diggin it! 

New stuff is fun.  In fact, it has a button on the side labeled "fun".  I'm afraid to push it. 

Its probably a game setting.  But what if it shows me real fun, and I sit here drooling forever?

It could be a trap.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: hellbilly on August 26, 2009, 12:46:06 AM

I recently switched form Mac back to PC and kinda missed having different backgrounds on my monitors.. so for anyone who might wanna do so, I used this:

http://www.binaryfortress.com/displayfusion/

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: DogCow on November 12, 2009, 09:57:30 AM

I run a 37" HDTV from my MacBook Pro 17" to watch internet content there.  I've made my own OnDemand by downloading TV episodes and runing Hulu and Netflix to the television.  I can use my MBP while watching the large TV with internet content.  I also watch video podcasts and itunes content.  YouTube doesn't look all that good though 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: AL the Inconspicuous on November 12, 2009, 12:38:19 PM

Quote from: DogCow on November 12, 2009, 09:57:30 AM

I run a 37" HDTV from my MacBook Pro 17" to watch internet content there.  I've made my own OnDemand by downloading TV episodes and runing Hulu and Netflix to the television.  I can use my MBP while watching the large TV with internet content.  I also watch video podcasts and itunes content.  YouTube doesn't look all that good though

You get best quality (and no ads) via P2P, and by using it you're empowering a technology & community that's outside government's control.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on November 12, 2009, 05:11:02 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Vista just recognized my extra monitor, no third-party software.  Plug, go. 

With three monitors, maybe it would be different.  But maybe theres a recognition thingy in there that would see a splitter plug doodad and the two external monitors would be recognized.  Dunno.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on November 12, 2009, 06:18:22 PM

Quote from: Drifter on November 12, 2009, 05:11:02 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Vista just recognized my extra monitor, no third-party software.  Plug, go. 

With three monitors, maybe it would be different.  But maybe theres a recognition thingy in there that would see a splitter plug doodad and the two external monitors would be recognized.  Dunno.

Exactly.  Same with XP and even 98 back in the day...

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Osborne on November 12, 2009, 06:39:34 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 06:18:22 PM

Quote from: Drifter on November 12, 2009, 05:11:02 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Vista just recognized my extra monitor, no third-party software.  Plug, go. 

With three monitors, maybe it would be different.  But maybe theres a recognition thingy in there that would see a splitter plug doodad and the two external monitors would be recognized.  Dunno.

Exactly.  Same with XP and even 98 back in the day...

Don't know about this Ultramon, but the software I use provides hot keys for bouncing windows to different screens and has screen-specific task bars and wallpapers. Worth having, I feel.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on November 12, 2009, 06:46:07 PM

Quote from: Lizard Joo on November 12, 2009, 06:39:34 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 06:18:22 PM

Quote from: Drifter on November 12, 2009, 05:11:02 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Vista just recognized my extra monitor, no third-party software.  Plug, go. 

With three monitors, maybe it would be different.  But maybe theres a recognition thingy in there that would see a splitter plug doodad and the two external monitors would be recognized.  Dunno.

Exactly.  Same with XP and even 98 back in the day...

Don't know about this Ultramon, but the software I use provides hot keys for bouncing windows to different screens and has screen-specific task bars and wallpapers. Worth having, I feel.

What do you use?

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Osborne on November 12, 2009, 10:03:57 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 06:46:07 PM

Quote from: Lizard Joo on November 12, 2009, 06:39:34 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 06:18:22 PM

Quote from: Drifter on November 12, 2009, 05:11:02 PM

Quote from: Admiral Naismith on November 12, 2009, 09:58:44 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on August 30, 2009, 10:39:18 PM

Quote from: digitalfour on August 30, 2009, 07:07:04 PM

Alex, what software do you use on Windows 7 for multi-monitor taskbars?

Whenever I run multiple monitors, I use Ultramon (http://www.realtimesoft.com/ultramon/).  It's great.

Why do you bother?

Vista just recognized my extra monitor, no third-party software.  Plug, go. 

With three monitors, maybe it would be different.  But maybe theres a recognition thingy in there that would see a splitter plug doodad and the two external monitors would be recognized.  Dunno.

Exactly.  Same with XP and even 98 back in the day...

Don't know about this Ultramon, but the software I use provides hot keys for bouncing windows to different screens and has screen-specific task bars and wallpapers. Worth having, I feel.

What do you use?

Zenview Manager. Came with my monitors. www.digitaltigers.com

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Bill Brasky on November 12, 2009, 10:20:39 PM

Thats pretty slick.  The only thing I dislike about my dual monitor setup in Vista is it replicates the desktop image on both. I tried putting  panorama across it, but it failed.  Or I failed.  Something failed.  But I shall carry on with my redundant failscreens. 

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: freeAgent on November 13, 2009, 07:48:51 AM

Ultramon provides a lot of extra functionality that Windows doesn't have.  My favorite feature is that it can add a taskbar to the secondary screen and windows will automatically get added/removed to it based on which monitor they're being used on.

Title: Re: Multiple monitors
Post by: Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith) on November 13, 2009, 08:05:29 AM

Quote from: freeAgent on November 13, 2009, 07:48:51 AM

Ultramon provides a lot of extra functionality that Windows doesn't have.  My favorite feature is that it can add a taskbar to the secondary screen and windows will automatically get added/removed to it based on which monitor they're being used on.

Ah, that sounds useful.