Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Two 24" or one 30"?

Mhaddy

Mhaddy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 26, 2005
445
1
Canada
Thinking about upgrading my displays now that Dell (Canada) has some pretty sweet deals on. Looking to pick up one 30" UltraSharp 3007WFP-HC or two 24" UltraSharp U2410 24-inch displays... either package for about $1100. I do a lot of design work, web development, coding, so the dual displays I have in my sig right now work well, I just want more real estate. I know from a resolution perspective, I will be getting more space via the two 24"'s but I've always wanted a 30" and given the price, it is now affordable.

Thoughts?
 
Well I'm not in the same league as you but I do prefer having one gigantic screen as opposed to multiple screens.

With the resolution on that 30" dell you should have plenty of screen real estate. Coupled with expose and spaces, I think you should definitely be alright.
 
I've got 2 x 24" screens and love the setup (unfortunately, my screens are cheap TN panels, but the screen real estate is great). Definately better than one larger screen.
 
I think I'm going to go for the 30" -- I know the two 24"'s have more real estate but I've always wanted a 30" and the price is definitely right :). I'll ultimately make my decision before Friday (when the sale is over) - so I'll let you know what I decide!
 
1 x 30" is better.
think of it this way. would you rather live in 1 big house, or have two smaller houses?

the 30" will give you better value for money.
 
itou said:
1 x 30" is better.
think of it this way. would you rather live in 1 big house, or have two smaller houses?

the 30" will give you better value for money.
Click to expand...

I like your comparison... :D But for example if you are developer it's far better to have two screens. I would use one for FTP, Editor and the other one for preview and mail. Your workspace is far more organized and neater like this. This scheme works the same for video editors who are working with many windows.
 
I always prefer 2 screens I think its much more productive, no matter how big the one screen is it's great to have applications open side by side on two full screens idependently for when you need it.
 
bigjnyc said:
I always prefer 2 screens I think its much more productive, no matter how big the one screen is it's great to have applications open side by side on two full screens idependently for when you need it.
Click to expand...

This is true, I enjoy using two monitors for different purposes. The OP has to consider that the 30" has 70% more pixels than an individual 24", so going with the single would lose him 30% of the space he would have with 2x 24" monitors. The choice all depends on what he does on a regular basis, what is ergonomic, and what his computer can handle :cool:
 
The thing to remember with a 30" is that to use it at the native resolution things will be smaller on screen. I know that makes little sense but just consider it. You can however still use two pages side by side and still read.
Here's a screen shot to show you what I mean on a 30". Readable but zoom is sometimes crucial.
Screen shot 2009-10-26 at 9.16.19 AM.jpg
 
2x24" or 30"

Hi

30". Definitely 30".

Simply for one reason. Future upgrade path.

Buy 30" now, as prices for display continues to drop, you may buy 1 more 30". Then you have 2 x 30".

If you buy 2x24" now, there is no path to upgrade.


:)
 
i would definitely go 1x30 and down the road pick up another 30 .. im currently running a dell 30in monitor that i have had for about 4 years .. love it to death .. even though its on my pc

at what point when i was getting a replacement 30 inch .. i hooked up both 30s on my desk and it was huge ... so much real estate .. even though i only used it for 2 days .. my desk was barely big enough

when i get my mac pro after the next update .. i plan on buying 1x30 and eventually picking up a 2nd one ..
 
jessica. said:
The thing to remember with a 30" is that to use it at the native resolution things will be smaller on screen. I know that makes little sense but just consider it. You can however still use two pages side by side and still read.
Click to expand...
The reason why it makes little sense is quite simply the fact that it's not really true. There is a very very very small difference which you may be able to spot when running the displays side by side. The entire aspect ratio and such will be no different than the 24". If you have trouble reading 24" you'll have trouble reading a 30" and vice versa. Either way you're better off seeing an optician as you might need glasses or moving the display closer to you as you're sitting too far away from it.

I have a 13" MB, a 15,4" MBP and a Mac mini driving a 30" Dell screen. I don't notice a lot of difference between the sizes of characters, pictures, etc. on those screens when there side by side. There are some small differences, the 13" seems to have smaller chars than the 30" and 15,4" displays. The other differences are colour related and are due to some bugs in Snow Leopard which should be fixed in 10.6.2.

If you use a dual screen setup you have 2 separate displays side by side and thus 2 bezels that are in the middle of what you're looking at. Some people don't mind the 2 bezels being in the middle of the "screen", some people hate it so much that they go for a single display setup. So the question really is how much do you mind the bezels being in your view and splitting your OS X desktop? If you can live with it than dual screen will do, if you can't than definitely go for the 30". If you are going to run Windows by using Boot Camp than the dual screen might have the added value of being able to maximize windows to a monitor (maximize the mailclient to monitor 2). OS X does windows management completely different and uses drag & drop functionality. In that regard maximizing windows to the monitor is not useful and mostly not even implemented (pressing the green button zooms to content) so there is no advantage to using a dual screen setup.

Btw: 1x 30" takes up less desk space than 2x 24".
 
I don't have issues with it. I was simply stating an observation. My vision is just fine, thank you.
 
Thank you all for your responses/observations/experiences. In my previous computer setups, I've always had dual displays - usually one good one and another hand-me-down used to house a browser, palettes, utilities, etc. The gap/bezel always bugged me but I've since gotten used to it so I don't think that's a deciding factor for me. Future upgrade path is a good point that I hadn't considered before but makes perfect sense as with my current 20", I had always intended on getting a second 20" but by the time I could afford a second one, I wanted a 22", then a 24", and so forth. I think dual 30" screens might be a bit excessive but I once thought that about the 20" (and my 15"'s back in the day).

For those with a 30", do you find yourself getting lost in the layers of windows switching between apps or are you maximizing use of Spaces or resizing windows as appropriate?
 
Mhaddy said:
Thank you all for your responses/observations/experiences. In my previous computer setups, I've always had dual displays - usually one good one and another hand-me-down used to house a browser, palettes, utilities, etc. The gap/bezel always bugged me but I've since gotten used to it so I don't think that's a deciding factor for me. Future upgrade path is a good point that I hadn't considered before but makes perfect sense as with my current 20", I had always intended on getting a second 20" but by the time I could afford a second one, I wanted a 22", then a 24", and so forth. I think dual 30" screens might be a bit excessive but I once thought that about the 20" (and my 15"'s back in the day).

For those with a 30", do you find yourself getting lost in the layers of windows switching between apps or are you maximizing use of Spaces or resizing windows as appropriate?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you have considered it from what you have said, but you could rotate your 20" and have it on the end of your 30". Some people do this for palettes, or a as a document reader. The 2005 widescreen won't align perfectly (like the non widescreens do), but it isn't unsightly.
 
Mhaddy said:
For those with a 30", do you find yourself getting lost in the layers of windows switching between apps or are you maximizing use of Spaces or resizing windows as appropriate?
Click to expand...

No. I use expose though quite a bit. It has it's purpose with both small screens and large.
 
Mhaddy said:
For those with a 30", do you find yourself getting lost in the layers of windows switching between apps or are you maximizing use of Spaces or resizing windows as appropriate?
Click to expand...
I use spaces and Exposé on both the smaller 15,4" screen as well as the 30" since I'm accustomed to those features. Spaces and Exposé become a lot more powerful when using lots of windows and when using a small screen like the 15,4". Size of the windows is a different things, some windows are great when they are big, some become annoying and overwhelming. It's more about setting windows to a size that is comfortable enough without being too tiny or too overwhelmingly big. It also depends on whether you want to compare stuff side by side, you may have to resize (yes, even on a gigantic 30" display) to get it to fit properly/nicely.

As an example:
On the MacBook Pro I'm using the fullscreen function in VMware Fusion quite a lot because it is nicer than the windowed screen. On the 30" it is overwhelming and not very useful so I use the windowed mode instead. On the 30" display this also adds the bonus of being able to put several vm's side by side. Unfortunately you can't drag and drop between the vm's, you can only do that between vm and OS X :( You can solve it by using a shared folder, networkshare or just drag & drop to OS X and than back to the other vm.
 
Umbongo said:
I'm not sure if you have considered it from what you have said, but you could rotate your 20" and have it on the end of your 30". Some people do this for palettes, or a as a document reader. The 2005 widescreen won't align perfectly (like the non widescreens do), but it isn't unsightly.
Click to expand...
Hadn't considered that but it's not a bad idea. Is Leopard smart enough to recognize the panel is turned 90 degrees?

skye12 said:
How about two 27's?
Click to expand...
From a cost perspective, at least with the Dell panels, it only makes sense for two 24" or one 30".

jessica. said:
No. I use expose though quite a bit. It has it's purpose with both small screens and large.
Click to expand...

dyn said:
I use spaces and Exposé on both the smaller 15,4" screen as well as the 30" since I'm accustomed to those features. Spaces and Exposé become a lot more powerful when using lots of windows and when using a small screen like the 15,4". Size of the windows is a different things, some windows are great when they are big, some become annoying and overwhelming. It's more about setting windows to a size that is comfortable enough without being too tiny or too overwhelmingly big. It also depends on whether you want to compare stuff side by side, you may have to resize (yes, even on a gigantic 30" display) to get it to fit properly/nicely.
Click to expand...
And hopefully most apps remember their position and size, right? ;) Ever since I picked up my Logitech MX wonder mouse, I've been relying on Expose more heavily, so I think it would be a smooth adjustment on the one screen.
 
Mhaddy said:
And hopefully most apps remember their position and size, right? ;)
Click to expand...
Yup, most do but some (like TextWrangler) don't. For me that's not much of a problem as I'm moving the different windows around as I see fit at that time. Windows are not always the same size and position when I use them :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back