Talk:Multi-monitor

message: How about info on using dual screens in presentations--one view is used by the speaker and displays notes, the other is shown to the audience.  And didn't Apple have multimon support well before Windows? --Jason McHuff 07:34, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes. Apple's had multimon for as long as it's had slots for extra video cards, and OS/2 had it before Windows but the second monitor was text-only - useful for debugging. Actually I've only ever used multiple video card setups - I'd just thought the ones with two kinds of connectors were so you had a choice of which to use. --Jamoche 18:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apple's support for multimon 

message: The apple image is very nice.
But the PC image is very ugly.
Maybe we should remove PC image and only have Apple.
Point is dual monitor, no matter if apple or pc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frap (talk • contribs) 16:30, February 4, 2006
i concur Zvesoulis 18:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that a neutral point of view isn't being followed here.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: So, I'm a "believer" (that more monitors = more productivity); but, I'd like to see some citations on this.  Particularly-impressive would be studies that don't have funding from "vested interests" (e.g. monitor-makers).  I may be cynical, but I don't find the studies of vested interests to be as persuasive... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.201.246.26 (talk • contribs) 19:59, March 28, 2006
:I agree that it makes me more productive, but I don't have any sources on that ^^; --Disavian 20:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll cite Bill for you. Shawnc 23:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Amazing. Do you also need an evidence that 200Hp are stronger than 100hp. Or to that very stupid is nore stupid than less stupid. O Man, you have too much time91.9.242.57 09:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

text: --Is a citation from Microsoft Research sufficient? Slackmaster K 03:28, July 31, 2007 (UTC)
How about this http://www.productivity501.com/large-and-multiple-monitor-study/708/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.30.43.225 (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not very difficult to find references that more or bigger monitors increase the productivity. I have added some, more can be found here. Audriusa (talk) 07:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increased productivity:  Evidence? 

message: I use two seperate computers at my desk, one with moniter's that mirror each other so that my clients can watch me work, if they are there; and the other has side by side so that I can have three different operations going "full screen" at the same time.
I do income taxes and investments, and want more screens up...as many as I can get. Moniters cost $350 each for good 19" jobs. What about cards and other stuff? What is the best setup? As to increased productivity, it is very great. There is no end to benefits...if you are working and have more to do than will get done!
Ken 22:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No original research pleaseJasper Deng (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

text: No original research pleaseJasper Deng (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Experience-does it count? 

message: I use a laptop and spend time in 3 different office locations regularly, taking my laptop to each one. When I get to my central office, I have 3 networked monitors on my desk and available for my laptops use through MaxiVista. (I am typically wirelessly connected to the network, but sometimes plug in the ethernet cable.)  More specifically, I have 2 desktop computers in my office, each powering 2 monitors. I use one computer mostly for video/visual editing, and the other for back up and redundancy purposes, or to crunch numbers when I want to free up my laptop CPU, such as watching streaming videos. By clicking a button on my laptop, 3 of the monitors connected to my desktop computers switch from the output of the computer to extended monitors for my laptop (When I am feeling particularly ambitions, I connect the 4th monitor to my external monitor port on my laptop for a total of 5 monitors, but this is uncommon as 3 19" monitors plus my 15" laptop screen are all I tend to need.)
One advantage of this networked approach to multi-monitors is that I can use my laptop mouse and keyboard to run the computers that are part of the system.  I can toggle back and forth between 1) using each external monitor as an extension of my laptop screen, 2) use the monitor to display the original computer that powers it, but use the mouse/keyboard of my laptop to control it, or 3) use the monitor only for the original computer, but remain connected so I can toggle to #1 or #2 at the click of a button.  I can also cut and paste from one computer to the other, without transferring files, which is helpful, especially when I am doing research using different programs on different computers to distribute the CPU processing load.
Because of the multiple monitor setup, I often have 5-8 programs running and visible at the same time, which helps me 1) see relationships between information 2) compare how the information is presented, 3) cut and paste between documents/computers with greater ease etc.  I am FAR more productive in my multi-monitor office than when I only have my laptop. Teloscientist 19:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No original research pleaseJasper Deng (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: One Users Experience of networked Multiple Monitors

message: The images of the virtual size of dual screens do not seem useful to me, besides their (possibly intentional) extremely low quality.--MarSch 09:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Let's can them. --Disavian 00:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: done --MarSch 08:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  virtual screenshots 

message: This paragraph gives credit to SLi and Crossfire for why people are expanding beyond two monitors, but I don't agree at all to this. If something should get credit its PCIe with its 2-4 graphic-suitable ports over the old fast AGP + slow PCI combo. If SLi is enabled (perhaps this also goes for CF), you can only have enabled one monitor. To enable the other outputs, the cards have to be in independent mode which kills the entire point of buying two high-end graphics cards. You will only be able to use one GPU to run a single game if you have 1< monitor enabled, which in my oppinion probably make SLi-owners more likely to not have multi monitors.
Source : http://www.slizone.com/page/slizone_faq.html#s7 --Brillegeit 00:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its been almost two weeks without comments so I went ahead and updated the article. --Brillegeit 04:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "More than Two Monitors" : SLi and Crossfire? 

message: It may be worth adding notes on Vista limitations with multiple monitors (see http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/multimonVista.mspx). --148.134.37.4 17:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vista Limitations? 

message: The section right now mentions only Windows.  What software options do you have for, say, Mac OS X, Linux, and UNIX?  I have no experience in setting up multi-mon configs with those OSs. — EagleOne\Talk 18:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tools section needs expansion 

message: How should this article be restructured? Captain Zyrain 00:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructuring

message: Check out Wikipedia:Userboxes/Computing#Hardware:
|-
|
|
|
|
|}
Captain Zyrain 05:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Multi-monitor user templates

message: The last paragraph implies that Synergy can be used to extend the desktop of one machine onto the monitor of another, much like ScreenRecycler does. This is not the case.
Q. Can synergy share the display in addition to the mouse and keyboard?
A. No. Synergy is a KM solution not a KVM (keyboard, video, mouse) solution. However, future versions will probably support KVM. Hopefully, this will make synergy suitable for managing large numbers of headless servers. 
Quote taken from the Synergy FAQ.
Can someone amend this?
--scape 20:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: More than two monitors > Using monitors of networked computers 

message: While I don't have cites handy, I belive, that, contrary to what the article claims, the first PC game to support multiple monitors was a modified version of Quake that could display differing camera views to seperate X windows. Combined with multiple X servers or the Xinerama extension, this fully supported multi head gaming.
I'll try to find some citations.
-- Levi "Karatorian" Aho - 69.87.200.43 (talk) 03:38, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy: First Multi-Head Supporting PC Game 

message: As the Multi-monitor articles said, there is much limitation on multi-monitor video playback due to graphics card hardware overlay design, although some software such as MatrixDvD Player (from http://www.xj-spark.com) can do this, it seems that there needs some re-design for the old video card architecture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.234.181.211 (talk) 03:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple monitors video player 

message: "Problems can also arise if the user clicks outside of the full-screen application's display area. Clicking in another display has a similar effect to hitting the Windows key or Alt-Tab, causing the desktop or another application to gain focus. The full-screen application loses focus, and may or may not pause any ongoing events in that application depending on how the software is written."  This is not a problem with multiple monitors.  This same effect will happen to an application on a single monitor when another application is chosen or when "show desktop" is chosen.  64.126.123.98 (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disadvantages 

message: The last sentences of the ==Display Modes== and ==Commercial Systems== sections specify a different maximum number of display outputs supported by Microsoft Operating System(s), although both limits (10 and 64 respectively) claim that Windows 7 is affected (both "current Microsoft operating systems" and "The latest version of Microsoft Windows" include Windows 7).  Some information about this can be found here: , where a Microsoft Moderator stated, "I know a Microsoft guy tested 16 at once, it seems Windows 7 support it." . Redex777 (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. It seems that 10 is what Windows' multi-display manager supports, but 64 is the absolute limit, but there is no citation.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting Facts: maximum supported monitors by Microsoft OS(s) 

message: The article suggests that more than 2 monitors is not possible (or at least not practical) with pre-PCIe systems, due to bandwidth limitations of PCI. Given that a 16 MHz NuBus-based Mac can easily handle 3 monitors, i question this assertion. Surely a 100+ MHz PCI-based motherboard can keep up—even with deeper displays. If it can't, i'm inclined to suspect other reasons (like squanderous resource management), unless PCI is really that poorly designed. I dropped a  tag in the relevant paragraph.—überRegenbogen (talk) 23:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: While at it, you added quite a bit of interesting information. Could you add sources to that too please? --Muhandes (talk) 06:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll leave it for someone else to document this and come up with references, but you're both right: PCI can handle video, but it doesn't have sufficient bandwidth for high-performance video, such as the advanced 3-D graphics common in PC games. It's fine for ordinary desktop applications, Excel wouldn't give you much trouble with it. Don't forget that speed and bandwidth are not the same: the PCI bus might be much faster than NuBus, but you also may be dividing the bus bandwidth between more devices. That same PCI bus is also likely to host soundcards, modems (analog or DSL), ethernet, USB & ATA controllers, etc. You rarely have more than 3 NuBus slots on a Mac, but you frequently had 4-6 PCI slots on a PC, and some devices integrated into the motherboard might be attached to the PCI bus. I'm not clear on whether each NuBus slot had a separate bus, but I know that many NuBus Macs had a dedicated video slot, so one or two of those monitors you speak of may not be riding the NuBus at all. You're right to drop a tag, though; it's a good point that deserves to be cleared up, and will make this a better article. Dementia13 (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are only a few specialty PCI video cards which can run above the 133MBps speed of standard PCI. Having the primary display on AGP and a secondary PCI video card for non high performance graphics works fine. Even if two displays are on the same PCI bus, generally both displays aren't displaying changing graphics at the same time. A 1600x1200 display with 16 bit color is 3.66MB of frame buffer. That's a theoretical maximum of 36 FPS for full screen non hardware accelerated video. The performance impact of the slow PCI bus speed on 3D graphics does not depend on screen resolution and it can vary widely from no negative performance impact to significant impact depending on the game being played and the amount of (or lack of) VRAM on the card. 98.214.160.215 (talk) 04:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCI bandwidth limitations? 

message: Nearly this entire article is written from a IBM PC-compatible hardware running a Microsoft OS POV, hence I've added a POV tag. (And even within that POV it is contradictory but that is covered in other comments.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.29.101 (talk) 04:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that it really matters, but I don't see how this is a matter of POV, it is a matter of expansion. I changed the tag accordingly. --Muhandes (talk) 06:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed.  And since nobody's tried to expand the article in almost two years, I've removed the incorrect POV tag. RossPatterson (talk) 17:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

text: I ran a BBS under VGA/HGC dual under DOS 6 until 2005.  Very handy when doing a configuration on the bigger color screen while following a text on the little yellow one.  A TSR let me paste from one to the other.  The computer is sitting with its two monitors in a stack by my right elbow as I write this.  Umm, which is a general discussion of the topic since there's no reason for my trip dowm memory lane to lead to the article.  Jim.henderson (talk) 01:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of NPOV 

message: This article makes almost no mention of notebooks and laptops with multi (usually dual) monitors. I don't just mean a single portable connected to an external while still using its built in internal (1+1=2), or multiple externals supported with an extender device or though DisplayPort daisy chaining (In time even the lowliest cell phone will be able to drive quad HD displays.), but rather notebooks/laptops with built-in dual displays. A google image search for "dual display laptop" and "dual display notebook" shows tons, and not just dual-touchscreen models, but portables with two LCDs. To my knowledge the first on the market was the Xentex Flip-Pad Voyager, a beast of a machine with a price to match. It was either a great  innovation, totally insanity, ...or maybe both. Since then, there appears to have been some more models of varying practicality and I'd say it's of a level of significance justifying a "portable computing" (or whatever) section to the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.85.110 (talk) 02:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has many problems, including being up to date. Agreed.Jasper Deng (talk) 07:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about notebook & laptops? 

message: Why does nview redirect here? It is a seperate software package including many things, not a general term. I don't know if nview should have it's own page but it shouldn't redirect here, it's just confusing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.233.69.107 (talk) 22:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nview 

message: I've modified the introduction paragraph of the article to reflect the correct usage of the terms "multi-monitor" and "dual-monitor". As "multi-" simply means "any number over one", it is a category rather than a specific number. "Dual-" specifies that a systems has TWO displays, which means that while a dual-monitor is a type of multi-monitor, a multi-monitor is NOT a type of dual-monitor. The two terms are not interchangeable when being used to describe any system other than one with two displays.
The argument could be made that the term "dual-screen" is often used to refer to any multi-monitor, however that does not make it correct. A dual-monitor has a specified number of displays and should not be used to refer to just any multi-monitor system.
ThsTorturedSoul (talk) 08:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct in stating the truth. Yet technically solutions (=special display controllers) supporting more than dual-monitor are technically less feasible, e.g. AMD Eyefinity only can support two monitors, if they are connected over anything else then DisplayPort, i.e. VGA, HDMI or DVI! But in case you have DisplayPor-Monitors, one graphics card can drive six monitors. The actual problem of the article, is that has became "smeared" and to big. The technical stuff is quite quickly explained: if one card should driver multiple monitor, than its display controller needs to support it. Then the connection is important. And the device driver should facilitate an easy set-up, like e.g. AMD Catalyst does. Then you may need additional support by something like Xinerama or RandR, stupid X11 :-( User:ScotXWt@lk 12:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Multi-monitor" vs. "Dual-monitor" 

message: Perhaps state a version number for nVidia drivers that support span mode under Windows XP. I dual boot WinXP/Win7 as I have found a number of games that don't run under Win7 (plus the fact that nVidia refuse to fix their driver & add span mode back in). Maybe even just list them here. I am currently running driver version 190.45 and use span mode with no problems (WinXP or course). Should mention that running an older driver makes it difficult to get support and is generally not recommended (although WinXP isn't supported by Micro$oft anymore either), but I have had no problems running an nVidia 210 video card with this driver.
Just to clear it from the text:
nVidia driver 190.45  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.213.247 (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  nVidia driver that supports span-mode 

message: Why not write something similar to AMD Eyefinity for the Nvidia, Intel, Matrox, etc. "solutions"/"brands"/"products" as well? Available, missing or limited support by operating systems or device drivers for them, e.g. AMD Catalyst or KMS driver or Xinerama/RandR, could also be documented there – in the corresponding articles – instead of clotting and bloating this article. Finally this article could concentrate of uses cases, e.g. uses in offices of Stockbrokers, or for Digital audio workstations, for gaming, etc. Available limitations of certain products could be mentioned. User:ScotXWt@lk 13:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewrite 

message: # Implementation / Realization: the display controllers have to support it, multiple RAMDACs, etc.
## products
### AMD Eyefinity
### Nvidia Surround 
### Matrox: three monitors by graphics cards, additionally product line of Matrox Graphics eXpansion Modules
### Intel?
### etc.
# Adoption
## Office
### Stockbrokers
### Software development, Video game development, programming
## Artists
### Film postprocessing
### Digital image bla
### Digital audio workstations
## Gaming
That would mention products and maybe do some averting, but in a clean way. User:ScotXWt@lk 13:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed structure 

message: Beside the MDA/VGA setup, a PC under DOS could run MDA/VGA/8514A hardware concurrently for a tripple-monitor setup.  DESQview could make use of this - programs could be placed on any of the three monitors.  The programs running on the 8514A couldn't make the assumption they owned the CGA/VGA address space, otherwise, the output would bleed over to the VGA monitor. 24.51.217.118 (talk) 06:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOS Multi-monitor 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Multi-monitor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110515125913/http://au.gamespot.com/features/6166198/index.html to http://au.gamespot.com/features/6166198/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110623150001/http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/Essential_Games_List to http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/Essential_Games_List
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)