How many megapixels of screen real estate do you have?

[MichaelCorfman]

Over the years the price/performance characteristics of computer monitors has improved, just like everything electronic. At one time I had a single monitor. Then I jumped up to a couple, and the size and resolution of the monitors I've used has improved over time. I've thought about this recently because just last week we put in the final order in the process of upgrading computer systems and monitors in our office over the past year.

So, I thought it would be interesting to ask folks how much screen real estate they have in their work environment. In my case I have a pair of Dell UltraSharp 24 Monitors (U2412M), with resolutions of 1920 x 1200 pixels. With volume discounts, that set of monitors cost a total of $516 ($258 each).

In terms of total screen real estate, that gives me 1920 x 1200 x 2 = 4,608,000 pixels, or 4.6 megapixels in total. Nearly four times the single 1280 x 1024 (1.3 megapixel) monitor I had not so many years ago.

Besides sharing your total screen real estate in the poll, be sure to share the details of your current configuration, your thoughts about how it might evolve in the future, and why you settled on your current configuration.

In my case, I feel the cost is inexpensive enough and the productivity gains from more screen real estate large enough, that my configuration is now standard for everyone in our office. And in a couple cases, for technical folks doing complex work with lots of windows, I think even more screen real estate makes sense. So a couple folks in the office have four monitors rather than two.

Michael

[Roulette Zeitung]

Still using my granny VGA from last century. It makes a loud noise when the monitor is switched on. I am not sure if there are any megapixels at all, but it's sufficient to read what is worth reading and sufficient to write what is necessary to write.

If the monitor is switched off, things in real life still exist with trillions of "nature megapixels".

But ... If all would switch off their monitors, they would recognize, that the virtual shadow world simply disappear, that virtual shadow world is only a fragile fabric and can collapse within the blink of an eye, a Fata Morgana that can't be touched with fingers, simply an illusion for a certain time. and in the long run the Big Rip of this virtual universe is more likely a major success than a big loss.

Your great-grandchildren, who will live for sure in an Orwellian world with 1000-megapixel cameras everywhere, will confirm that.

Leopold

[eenzoo]

There are a MB Pro Retina with 2880 x 1800px and as a "Main Screen" an 27" Thunderbolt Display with 2560 x 1440px ...
But i use a second MiniMac with a 24" LG Monitor with normal HD Res to check our websites with that "common" equipment.

[DanHorvat]

I personally have no need for a dual screen as I don't need access to some resource while doing something else. Dual computers, dual offices, dual companies - by all means. Dual monitors - no.

That being said, Samsung 22" monitor at 1360x768 is my workhorse. I'm also using a 40" TV at 1920x1080 and a 17" monitor at 1280x1024.

Michael, don't all websites look shrunken when you open them on a 24" monitor at 1920x1200?

A website designed for max width of 1280px will cover exactly 2/3 of the screen width, which would be around 345mm or 13.6".
A 17" monitor at 1280x1024 with a 4:3 aspect ratio (such as my old Belinea) is about 340mm wide.

Ergo it's the same thing. Both of us see a website that is about 340mm wide despite you viewing the website on a monitor that has almost exactly double surface area.

In fact, that same website is around 447mm (17.6") wide on my 22" Samsung, or 30% wider than in the two examples above.

Choosing the proper screen size, aspect ratio and resolution is sweet science...or more precisely, a pain in the butt.

[TheGooner]

My desktop has a pair of monitors at 1920 x 1080.
My 19" laptop is 1280x1024.
My 10" tablet is the same but non-responsive layouts can appear small and need pinch/expanding.
My mobile phone is just 320x480 although it can display big fixed layouts - it's a bit useless.

For work I think that the multi-screen layout with high resolution will remain.
Browsers are often popped into smaller sizes spaces and still display well - so I can have 4-5 elements over two screens.
Usually typing onto one - monitoring sports events / odds / music / podcasts or social media on the others.

For non-business surfing then I think smaller screens will be the norm.
I am surprised just how many of my non-affiliate friends only have a laptop, tablet, or mobile as their main internet interface.

I think that the IT/ web world is bifurcating into two groups - creators and users - and they have VERY different tech set-ups.

[MichaelCorfman]

Michael, don't all websites look shrunken when you open them on a 24" monitor at 1920x1200?

I almost never have a single browser window occupy an entire 1920 x 1200 screen. I don't honestly remember seeing a website where that is useful. Maybe with the exception of some sites that show financial graphs over time where a wider window allows you to look at a longer time period.

The reason I personally find a pair of larger monitors helpful is because I frequently do work where it is convenient to have multiple windows open and visible at the same time. For example, I might have a report open in quickbooks that has a decent number of columns at the same time I am using a large spreadsheet and am composing an email message as well. Or sometimes I have a single spreadsheet open that spans both monitors. Or I might have an email open together with a web page and a window with an administrative interface I am using to make updates. The work I do almost always requires that I be looking at one or two or more source documents while I am working on another document, and I find it to be a huge productivity help if I can see them all at once.

Michael

[vd752]

Dell XPS 15 laptop (3200 x 1880) connected to a Dell 27" monitor (2560x1440)

[wettFORM.AT]

2560x1440 I work on a 27" but when you use this for a while you want a bigger one I think this would never stop. I can also imagine working on 2x27" double screen

[slotplayer]

Michael, don't all websites look shrunken when you open them on a 24" monitor at 1920x1200?

I wrote a js script a few years back (back when 800x600 was still relevant) that detected screen resolution and dynamically inserted a different style sheet based on res in to the DOM. Basically the style sheet just changed font size and spacing to fill the real eastate a little better. Now we can use media queries.

[gyaloggalopp]

I have 768*1366 in my laptop and now I try to stick to it. I was so used to multitabling when connected with my 1920*1200 monitor, but over time I used the free space to bring in some offtopic (usually some movie or YouTube video), so now I'm feeling more productive with the laptop only. It can also be used anywhere, and if I'm used to multiscreening than a solo screen is a weird work station. I did not count my phone, I don't even know the pixel numbers of it, just bought what my fiancée had.

off

I don't honestly remember seeing a website where that is useful.

I've recently started a hardcore pic-a-pix puzzle, the big monitor comes in handy
/off

[Christiaan]

I have exactly the same setup as you Michael. 2 x Dell UltraSharp 24" monitors of 1920x1200.

[ocreditor]

I'm on 22'' monitors with 1920x1200