Ultra Wide Screen Vs. Multiple Monitors

I have taken notice of the Ultra Wide screen monitors, not sure of what the resolution is, but it's about twice the horizontal resolution of a normal 16:9 monitor. If i had one of these I could have twice as much stuff open. I could have a text editor on one side and a terminal on the other side of the screen.

The other option is to have multiple monitors. The advantage of this is that you can have more than 2 monitors. For example, if i had three monitors, I could have a full screen terminal on one monitor, full screen text editor in another monitor, and full screen web browser in the third monitor, or the third monitor could be used to say, have a full screen instance of VMware running another guest OS.

Of course, these monitors couldi be further divided so long as the window tiles are large enough to be usable. I sometimes divide my screen into 4 or 5 different segments running different things that way I can interact with all of them without having to close and reopen things. Of course with the ultra wide, the same thing applies as you have more usable pixels in which to have programs open in.

Which would be preferred, if I were going to upgrade my monitor situation. I probably won't soon, I will have plenty of time to ponder this, but if I were going to which would you do? The ultra wide screen monitors are pretty expensive, of course three regular monitors is expensive too. I suppose you could have 2 ultra wide also, that would be like having four monitors. I'm not sure my graphics card could run 4 monitors tho, I think it can handle three tho. I've only tried 2 so far tho.

 

Multiple monitors.... 3 screens and Eyefinity.

 

thinking something that looks kinda like this ... i saw a cool setup the other day. 4 would be even better but would take a lot of desktop space.

 

That's a neat stand... Mine are all on their own stand. I overlap the bezels so they seem smaller.

 

I think there'll be a set maximum total definition allowable. Whether its super-wide monitors or more standard ones.

I've got 5 running at once, but ONLY if some monitors are a partic type.

I'd recommend you contact your GPU manufacturer and pc manuf and check what you can run before you buy anything.
There's GPU upgrades and special adapter things available. But it can be a lot of hassle if you are setting it up for the 1st time.

 

I used to run 4 standard small cheap monitors... the type that are like 8 bucks at the thrift shop.

worked great, but at that number, I'd start neglecting at least one, and not even use it as a window dumping ground, but just start using one or two heavily like I didn't have that other.

.....then ubuntu fucked everything up on an update, and it never ran right again, and then I got debian, and that never worked with monitors on both gfx cards, so I went to two, and then that computer blew up in about ten different ways, and is currently awaiting the knife and possible resuscitation.

I found that being too panoramic, like with 4 monitors, can start to eat your productivity and flow, you start working around it instead of with it. I'm sure a different setup could work differently, but in my experience space is just used less effectively as I get more of it. I really like having three, with one centered. The exception was taking online tests, where I wanted a google window, two reference (ie. already googled) windows, and the test window, all open and visible simultaneously. I aced a few spanish tests that I probably should have failed, having a bunch of conjugators and translators and lists open all at once so I could keep up with people who like.... knew spanish.

 

Have you seen this ultra wide LG 34"?