Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Using dual monitors versus one  (Read 19471 times)
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2008, 05:52:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock

Jerry there is a huge difference between "windows not being able to do it" and "some people experience a problem which can be fixed".

Your very first link explains how to deal with the problem *if* you experience it.  Personally, my machine doesn't go into sleep mode so that aspect is never a problem and the first issue (GPU related software being loaded that isn't needed) is simply resolved *if* it's causing you a problem.

The bottom line is that Vista can run separate calibration on multiple monitors.  It's accurate to say that some people have problems, but it's completely wrong to say that it can't be done.
Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2008, 11:27:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Both your "logic" and your link are flawed. As a graphic professional I often use keyboard shortcuts which negate your argument for having to move the mouse cursor waaaaay over to the other monitor. Most graphic applications allow you to position your tool panels on either monitor. Having one monitor dedicated to the image you are working on is the ideal situation. Photoshop, Lightroom and Aperture are all configured for a dual monitor system for that purpose. The platform you use is irrelevant.
You still do not get it obviously. Windows handles the situation better and far more elegantly with more options.
And your 'solutions' are useless, as firstly I only use menus when I don't know the shortcuts or more likely there aren't any as is very often the case. Secondly some programmes work better across two monitors as opposed to filling one and having tools on other, in fact not all programmes even have tools to place elsewhere. You are the one who ignores any inconvienient facts and uses very iffy logic based on poor understanding of the issue.

Maybe you have limited needs and even more limited experience of using a better way of handling multiple monitors.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 11:37:04 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2008, 11:34:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Good for you!  Now you can explain it to these people who have all experienced the "Vista monitor calibration problem".
<snip links>
I like how you carefully ignore my mentioning above of problems with dual monitor calibration in  OSX.
You come across as an Apple apologist who doesn't know very much about Windows and how it works or OSX works for that matter. Yet you still ignorantly and innacurately slag Windows off.
As flawed as MS stuff can be, they do some things better than Apple. Heresy to Macolytes, but for those with open minds, it's not a problem.

Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2008, 12:23:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Good for you!  Now you can explain it to these people who have all experienced the "Vista monitor calibration problem".

http://www.jpdodelphoto.com/blog/?p=369

This describes a loss of profile with Vista coming out of sleep mode - not specific to dual displays at all.  The article correctly identifies issues with 3rd party display drivers, but also indicates the availability of a patch dated 05/31/2008.

Quote

Both the above links actually refer to the same discussion thread, not separate issues at all.  Issue described is easily resolved by applying the May 21 patch described above.  Also nothing to do with dual displays per se . . .

Quote

This describes someone attempting to install an un-signed driver onto a Vista 64 platform.  After succesfully creating a profile, the OP asks how to automatically load the profile - very easilly done in either Vista (or server 2008) platform:

Control Panel | Display Settings | Avanced Settings... button | Color Managment Tab | Color Mangement Button



A fairly generic machine - in the list of color aware devices, you can clearly see 2 displays, each of which can be assigned any available color profile . . . .

Again the post is not dual display specific.  Other than to point out the fact you don't particularly care for and are quite possibly completely unfamiliar with Vista, what is your point?

I also run dual displays, separately color managed and have been since XP SP2 . . . .
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 12:29:20 PM by Joh.Murray » Logged

jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565



WWW
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2008, 01:52:29 PM »
ReplyReply

This must be gang up on the Mac user day. I made my initial comment in this thread to put aside false information being spewed by an obvious Mac hater.
Both my MacPro and MacBook Pro dual boot with Vista 64bit ultimate (which they run natively). So yes, I do have experience with both systems and find that OSX implements dual monitors flawlessly.

There are known issues with Vista and color management including the failure to retain icc monitor profiles. This is well documented. There is also plenty of documentation about Vista users experiencing difficulty with dual monitors.

http://www.besttechie.net/2007/05/20/dual-...d-your-desktop/
http://www.vistax64.com/graphic-cards/1515...-vista-x64.html
http://www.driverheaven.net/windows-vista-...tors-vista.html
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums.../m/290008994931
http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-...itor-vista.html

Again, my point is that OSX has a better dual monitor implementation than Vista.



Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2008, 02:21:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Again, my point is that OSX has a better dual monitor implementation than Vista.

Then your point is wrong.

Vista implements dual (or more) monitors with calibration without problem.  The fact that some users have issues is a reflection of individual issues those users are having, just as examples of OS X issues are related to individual cases because OS X also handles multiple monitor calibration just fine.

You are wrong, Jerry.  Simple.  It's not about ganging up on you - I'd have corrected anyone who made such a claim.
Logged

jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565



WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 10, 2008, 04:52:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Farmer
Then your point is wrong.

Vista implements dual (or more) monitors with calibration without problem.  The fact that some users have issues is a reflection of individual issues those users are having, just as examples of OS X issues are related to individual cases because OS X also handles multiple monitor calibration just fine.

You are wrong, Jerry.  Simple.  It's not about ganging up on you - I'd have corrected anyone who made such a claim.

Just another case of PC elitism. I have pointed out many instances of problems with Vista and dual monitor setup as well as calibration issues. Not one person has cited any similar examples with the Mac and OSX.

........or should we just take your word for gospel?
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Raw shooter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


« Reply #27 on: December 10, 2008, 06:23:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Just another case of PC elitism. I have pointed out many instances of problems with Vista and dual monitor setup as well as calibration issues. Not one person has cited any similar examples with the Mac and OSX.

........or should we just take your word for gospel?
I don't want to gand up on you (or anyone), but dual monitors, each with its own profile, are flawlessly loaded by Vista 64 or Vista 32.
Each of us on this board have more experience with either Macs or PCs.  Almost never with both.  Sounds like yours is with Mac.
It is kind of a silly discussion as dual monitors is a solved issue behind us all.

I don't know how an operating system can make anyone elite.  The OS should be invisible, unlike our pictures.
It is really a great time for photographers.  The technology is fantastic.

Best of luck to everyone.
Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 10, 2008, 07:17:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
This must be gang up on the Mac user day. I made my initial comment in this thread to put aside false information being spewed by an obvious Mac hater.
Both my MacPro and MacBook Pro dual boot with Vista 64bit ultimate (which they run natively). So yes, I do have experience with both systems and find that OSX implements dual monitors flawlessly.

There are known issues with Vista and color management including the failure to retain icc monitor profiles. This is well documented. There is also plenty of documentation about Vista users experiencing difficulty with dual monitors.

http://www.besttechie.net/2007/05/20/dual-...d-your-desktop/
http://www.vistax64.com/graphic-cards/1515...-vista-x64.html
http://www.driverheaven.net/windows-vista-...tors-vista.html
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums.../m/290008994931
http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-...itor-vista.html

Again, my point is that OSX has a better dual monitor implementation than Vista.

I'm *not* ganging up on Macs, however I am pointing out false, misleading and incorrect information.  You mention in an earlier post that Dual Display support is "something that Windows has yet to figure out" which is simply not true.

In another post you provide a series of links describing the "problems that evryone is having with Vista" . . . . If you had bothered to actually read any of them, you would have found what I did; issues asked and answered.

The first of your new set of links, I suppose is to impress upon all of us, the "uselessness of even attempting dual displays on Vista . . ."   Did you know the first is actually a review of Ultramon?  It's an add-in for Windows XP and now Vista that offer enhancements to dual display support, but actually does nothing in regard to color profiles.  Definately not required.

I'm perfectly willing to agree that it is *your opinion* that Dual display support is "better on  a Mac", however, I would disagree with that assesment and counter with *my* opinion that the two platforms' approach are simply different.  Couching your opinions as "facts" is what I object to, not your chosen platform
Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 10, 2008, 08:14:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
This must be gang up on the Mac user day. I made my initial comment in this thread to put aside false information being spewed by an obvious Mac hater.
I'm a Mac user and Mac realist actually, I am certainly not a brainwashed fawning Macolyte, spouting innacurate and biased misinformation, like you appear to be doing.

I repeat again in the hope you may actually understand. I was not talking about profiling of dual monitors [which other people have already corrected you on], I was commenting on how the two OSs implement the GUI on multiple monitors.


Quote
Both my MacPro and MacBook Pro dual boot with Vista 64bit ultimate (which they run natively). So yes, I do have experience with both systems and find that OSX implements dual monitors flawlessly.
Again, my point is that OSX has a better dual monitor implementation than Vista.
No it has't, XP and presumably Vista can do everthing OSX can and do more on top of that as Windows has more UI options with regard to multiple monitors. Heck, you cannot even fill the full desktop with a single programme in OSX. Not to mention the tedious extra mousing needed to access the single menu bar, which as someone who has suffered from RSI, this is not just poor ergomics, but potentially a literal pain in the wrist.
You have offered zero evidence as to how OSX implements multiple monitors better, other than to say it just is and reference links which you obviously hadn't read/understood.

OSX certainly does some things better than Windows. Very clumsy window [re]sizing and multiple monitors however, is one area where it simply isn't as good.

BTW, Windows in BootCamp is not necessarily the same as Windows on a PC as not everything works flawlessly, particularly on the graphics side.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #30 on: December 10, 2008, 08:22:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Raw shooter
It is kind of a silly discussion as dual monitors is a solved issue behind us all.
Sadly that's not the case. I find multiple monitor implementation on the Mac UI, clumsy and unergonomic.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565



WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 10, 2008, 08:25:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jjj
BTW, Windows in BootCamp is not necessarily the same as Windows on a PC as not everything works flawlessly, particularly on the graphics side.

Windows does not run IN BootCamp and yes it is the same as running it on a PC.  BootCamp is not emulation software, it preps the hard drive for Windows installation on a dual boot system, it is not needed for running Windows. Windows can be installed without Bootcamp on a MacPro.

Stick to the topics you actually know something about.


Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565



WWW
« Reply #32 on: December 10, 2008, 08:43:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Joh.Murray
You mention in an earlier post that Dual Display support is "something that Windows has yet to figure out" which is simply not true.

Here you go Murray:

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forum...read.php?t=6397


Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #33 on: December 10, 2008, 08:56:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock

Yet again, the issue in this thread is addressed by the May 21st patch I referred to above

"Ok, I visited the Photokina in Cologne yesterday and popped by the Microsoft stand to get an answer straight from the horse's mouth  It took some asking around to find a person who knew a person who could give an authoritative answer, but to cut a long story short: yes, it's been solved as part of a post-SP1 patch "
Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #34 on: December 10, 2008, 10:13:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Windows does not run IN BootCamp and yes it is the same as running it on a PC.  BootCamp is not emulation software, it preps the hard drive for Windows installation on a dual boot system, it is not needed for running Windows. Windows can be installed without Bootcamp on a MacPro.

Stick to the topics you actually know something about.
I am, unlike yourself. I know Bootcamp is not emulation, don't assume I don't, it only makes you look foolish. People use in/via/with/using interchangeably when describing Windows running natively on a Mac with BootCamp.
I have installed Windows using Bootcamp on my MacPro and also with Parallels in OSX. Neither work that fully on the graphics side it has to be said and with Bootcamp it has problems simply getting going, so I don't use it as of yet.

Bootcamp is just an easy way of setting up Windows on the Mac, no point in not using it and even if you don't, you still need the BootCamp drivers to get Windows operational. So all you are doing is not running OSX to make the partition and then using Bootcamp Windows drivers.


I see you've still not come out with any reasons as to why OSX is better than Windows for dual monitors.
Other than yet another link which proves nothing.



I notice that

SNAPSHOT OF CAT REMOVED [as trying to make some peace on this this fractious thread was apparently a very bad thing.]

looks very much like one of mine


who is currently curled up next to me, try to suck heat out of me and the laptop.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 10:43:48 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 11, 2008, 01:22:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Just another case of PC elitism. I have pointed out many instances of problems with Vista and dual monitor setup as well as calibration issues. Not one person has cited any similar examples with the Mac and OSX.

........or should we just take your word for gospel?

PC elitism?  Hardly.  Did you know I just made recommendations to my boss to purchase two high-end MacPros?  They will be higher spec than any of the PCs we use at work - yes, we use both.  Half my colleagues have Macbook Pros.

Yes, I'm a PC guy, but I use and support Macs.  I will be the first to tell you that I am not an expert on Macs, but when it comes to PCs I'm pretty solid.  I've been using personal computers since the Z-80 based machines, and used an Apple long before a PC.  Other brands include Atari, Wizard, BBC and Amiga (and probably some I've forgotten).  I use whatever tools are available to me.

The instances of problems you have pointed out have either been resolved through updates or are the result of 3rd party software causing issues or are user induced problems.  That we haven't cited problems with color calibration on Macs with dual monitors has NOTHING to do with whether Vista performs this task correctly or not.

As it happens, a colleague at work (very much a Mac guy - he is our Mac expert) noted that running 3 displays on his MacPro at home across 3 GPUs was a real problem.  For reference, it was 2 x Eizo CG 24" and a Cinteq unit (don't know exact specs).  He found that dropping to 2 GPUs was completely stable.  That he had problems with fairly unusual setup isn't something that I'm going to cite as evidence that Macs can't handle graphics...

So, again, Jerry.  You are wrong.  Windows handles dual monitor display and calibration just fine and no amount of you covering your ears and shouting "no it doesn't" is going to change that fact.
Logged

jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565



WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 11, 2008, 08:47:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jjj
I see you've still not come out with any reasons as to why OSX is better than Windows for dual monitors.
Other than yet another link which proves nothing.

Your stated "main" reason why you feel Windows dual monitor support is superior, is that you can stretch the full screen across both monitors (including the task bar). This essentially makes it a single monitor and defeats the purpose of a dual monitor setup.

You have also posted one of my copyrighted images in this forum without my consent. I respectfully request that you remove it.
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #37 on: December 11, 2008, 09:36:19 AM »
ReplyReply

You guys are a lot of fun.

Do we have an executive summary yet?  I'm guessing you can do this stuff with either system just fine.
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1911



« Reply #38 on: December 11, 2008, 09:36:22 AM »
ReplyReply

It is not a good idea to use someone else's image without attribution or permission - no matter that it is within a thread. Please remove the image and acknowledge.
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3539



WWW
« Reply #39 on: December 11, 2008, 10:35:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jerryrock
Your stated "main" reason why you feel Windows dual monitor support is superior, is that you can stretch the full screen across both monitors (including the task bar). This essentially makes it a single monitor and defeats the purpose of a dual monitor setup.
No it doesn't, it's not stretch across two screens, that's what a Mac does, on a PC it's fill entire desktop with a full or normal screen mode of app, with no wasted gaps. Task bar can go on one monitor or both, I have the choice. Programmes can do full screen on one or across both, I have the choice.  Some programmes work better across a wide desktop - those with timelines for example, some work much better on just one - a web browser for example. By using two or more monitors you get the best of both worlds as you have a choice of how to use things. Choice - an area where PCs excel and Macs fall very short.
I would never use just a single large monitor, as programmes such as web browsers do not work well on say a 30" screen. When I buy a 30", it will go between my current two monitors turned vertically.

Quote
You have also posted one of my copyrighted images in this forum without my consent. I respectfully request that you remove it.
I posted a picture of one of your cats and one of mine which looked quite similar to yours in an attempt to lighten tone of thread. A feline olive branch I guess. You are obviously not interested in that either. I will remove your snapshot, but you are obviously as humourless as you are incapapble of admitting you simply do not understand how PCs deal with dual monitors differently from Macs.
It's not a crime to admit you do not know everything. People won't think less of you, unlike when you insist on a viewpoint regardless of all the facts that contradict your stance.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 11:03:14 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad