It’s that time again, isn’t it? When we’re all supposed to take stock of the year that’s just wound down, and figure out how we’re going to make the upcoming year even better? Three hundred and sixty-five days ago, I wouldn’t have even considered it -- 2010 is a top contender for Worst Year of My Life -- but 2011 has been considerably better in a lot of ways. So, even though I’m not normally one for publicly doing this sort of thing, just this once I’ll bite.
My New Year’s resolution for 2012 is: 5,760 by 1,080.
No, I’m quite serious. I’ve had it with pitiful, small, and (heaven forbid) one-monitor display setups. In this day and age, they’re as antiquated as the Commodore 128, and I plan on making my computing life as full of spacious triple-monitor arrays as I can. That means dumping my lone home monitor (which has been acting up the last couple of months anyway) in favor of three that will expand my desktop horizons in more ways than one.
I haven’t come to this decision lightly, either. That monitor I have at home has served me well for more than four years, and as with clothes I'm loath to discard anything that still fulfills its basic function. Besides, that 1920x1200 rotatable display indoctrinated me into the shimmering pleasures and bracing usefulness of widescreen, a then-innovation I cannot imagine living without whether playing games or (sigh) doing work. Ever since I lost myself in the monitor's endless side-to-side expanse of pixels, I’ve been unable to look at (or cope with) traditional 4:3 monitors with much but disdain.
Alas, first loves don't always endure. I’ve grown during the last four years, and so have my computing needs. I do a lot more with spreadsheets now than I used to, I edit a lot more images, I watch a lot more online videos while I'm doing something else. A single widescreen panel helps with these things, but I still have to make a lot of compromises in terms of window size and arrangement. And if I want to play a game in a window rather than on the full screen (which I also do now more than I once did), I still have to cover up a lot of other stuff or play at an eye-rollingly small resolution -- neither of which I love.
It was only around the middle of 2011 that I realized what I'd been missing. I borrowed some hardware we had sitting around, unused and unloved, to set up a three-monitor system at work. Almost instantly it proved so ideal for my business environment that I wondered how I'd ever lived without it. Outlook I relegated to the right monitor and Photoshop I placed on the left one, leaving the center screen free for whatever the program of the moment was (usually a web browser, Word, or Excel). But I could also have my Twitter client, our intra-office messaging program, and our content management system also all open at the same time and never feel claustrophobic. It is, for me, the ultimate in convenience, something that I just can’t do at home, which is a shame given how much work I do from there these days.
Now my path is clear. True, achieving my 2012 resolution means getting three monitors of the 1920x1080 variety, even though I’ve never cared for that style as much as 1920x1200 (what can I say, I love vertical space), but that’s a small price to pay for all the other benefits I get. Plus, there’s also a lot more selection: As of this writing, there are ten times more 1920x1080 monitors available on Newegg than there are 1920x1200 monitors (183 versus 18), which drastically improves my odds of finding one of the style and features I want. The smaller monitors are even disproportionately less expensive -- the lowest-priced one (from Acer) costs $109.99, whereas the lowest-priced 1920x1200 monitor (from Hanns-G) runs $279.99. Yes, I could theoretically outfit my computer with three of the narrower monitors for only slightly more than it would cost me to buy a taller one. Somehow, I’m okay with that.
Something else that’s changed for the better in the last four years is the video card. It’s a lot easier now to find one, even a budget model, that supports multiple display outputs. Not every card is going to enable five or six (though some, including AMD's recently released Radeon HD 7970 certainly do), but the proliferation of HDMI and Mini DisplayPort connectors, in addition to (and in some cases supplanting) DVI, have greatly simplified the process of driving displays. And because both AMD and Nvidia have developed special technologies for use with three or more monitors (Eyefinity(Opens in a new window) for AMD, Surround(Opens in a new window) for Nvidia), getting everything working is no longer a throbbing pain in the real panel.
Next page: Gaming on multiple displays is still rough around the edges
Only one area still troubles me, and that’s gaming. Whether I’m playing something like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim or Batman: Arkham City for work or merely for pleasure, I want my computer to show them off to their utmost. And so far I’ve struggled to have a good FPS experience across three monitors. When the image arcs around my head for almost seven feet, I don’t always see the value in it. I’m always focused on what’s directly in front of me, but very few games are designed such that I miss much of import from the ultra-extreme sides. Usually the image just seems to get off-kilter that far out (pictured below), when I can even convince myself to look all the way over there at it. Strategy games like Civilization V are ideal for the format because you see more of the "board" but all on a single plane, but there’s a prevailing sense of overkill even with those. I prefer playing at 2560x1600, frankly. (Oops, the cheapest of those monitors costs $1,199.99 on Newegg. Never mind.)
Some statistics show I'm not alone in my apprehension here. In the most recent (November) edition of the Steam Hardware & Software Survey(Opens in a new window), the most popular overall display resolution is 1920x1080 (used by 24.12 percent of the survey sample). The most popular multi-monitor resolution, for about 10 percent of reporting users, is 3840x1080 -- two monitors. Most of the larger options have barely any support at all; for example, the intriguing 5120x2880 is used by just 0.71% -- and my longed-for 5760x1080 isn't even on the list.
But if Nvidia and AMD are still having trouble moving multi-monitor into the mainstream, some enterprising people are still finding exciting things to do with it. One blogger looked at his displays as an important part of a larger artistic and aesthetic statement(Opens in a new window). In a home office, a five-display configuration(Opens in a new window) brings much-needed order to an otherwise chaotic workspace. One guy even went a lot further than I've ever dreamed of, optimizing his house with fold-out stations for LAN parties(Opens in a new window). Even just a few years ago, these projects wouldn't have been practical (and they would have been just barely possible).
I don't have the desire to be that kind of trailblazer; I just want to do everything on my computer better than I do it today. For now, three monitors are the next logical step. I can't imagine I'll ever need more than that. (Though, come to think of it, I remember thinking something similar when I unpacked my 1920x1200 display in 2007...) Do you use multiple monitors? If so, how many and in what configuration? Or have you done anything really interesting with them, as in the examples above? I'd really like to know what your resolution is, and whether you plan on going bigger sometime soon.
As for me, I need to get shopping. Then I'll face what will undoubtedly be the biggest challenge of 2012 for me: clearing off my desk to make room for all three displays. But somehow I have a feeling all those extra pixels will be more than worth the trouble.
[Image credit(Opens in a new window)]
