Do Two-Screen Laptops Make Sense?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Do Two-Screen Laptops Make Sense?

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @12:12AM from the cornering-the-conjoined-twin-market dept.

An anonymous reader writes "With two 17" HD LED displays, the SpaceBook goes against every trend in laptop design I can think of (well, apart from the Core i7 and Core i5 processors). It's more than 1.7" thick, weighs more than 4.5 kilograms, and apparently has the world's largest laptop screen space. As odd as lugging a 4.5kg laptop around sounds, it can actually make sense in some situations. Sure, there are now plenty of powerful laptops that can replace a desktop PC. But for some of us, it's never the same as sitting in front of a desktop. Especially if you're used to having two screens. Someone must think there's a market for the twin-screen laptop — this isn't the first. Lenovo brought one out a couple of years ago. Given the number of people who prefer a multi-monitor setup, surely someone can come up with a lighter, less cumbersome, and cheaper design?"

10 of 262 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

No. by Lumpy · 2011-07-20 00:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

But I will buy a 21" laptop in a heartbeat. I already have a 18.5 inch and would like bigger. In fact if they made a 21" macbook pro artists and video editing people would be all over it.
I do embedded programming and EE cad design in the field... (think on the floor in an electrical closet while I program a buildings processors) and having that kind of screen real-estate with a higher than 1080p resolution would be a instant purchase from me.
None of this crap of Low res huge pixel screens they have been pulling. if the screen is larger than 15" and not 1080p then it's crap.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
1. Re:No. by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-07-20 00:38 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  +6 Insightful, brother.
  
  Roll on 17" 300+ppi displays. It's pixel density which needs to increase, not screen size.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Re:4.5 kg isn't so much by cowboy76Spain · 2011-07-20 00:26 · Score: 2

If you move it from your home a couple hundred meters to your car and then a couple hundred meters to your office then it is not very important if it weights 4.5.
If you are a road warrior and drag it with you everywhere then 4.5 kgs can be a lot after a couple of hours.

--
Why can't /. have a rich-text editor? Editing your own HTML is so XXth century.
Re:10 pounds by teh+kurisu · 2011-07-20 00:31 · Score: 4, Funny

A NASA commentator recently described the ISS as a "million pound space station". As a British listener, I thought this was an absolute bargain.
No by Zouden · 2011-07-20 00:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

No, they don't make sense, because you can buy a 20" screen for $100.
The market for a dual-screen laptop is basically the intersection of these groups:
1. Those who absolutely need two monitors when travelling,
2. Those who aren't willing to pack a second monitor with them but are will to pack a 4.5kg laptop, and
3. Those who are moving around too much to justify buying a second monitor at their destination.
I think that's a pretty small market for an expensive device.
The article says the designer came up with the idea "when he needed a video editing workstation on a 6 month working holiday in Hawaii."
He then says, "I realized one morning that I did not want to haul my desktop and extra monitors around to every hotel for editing with the Adobe suite."
Well, fair enough, so this laptop would be great for him and anyone else on a 6-month video-editing holiday moving from hotel to hotel. But most people tend to stay in one place when working for 6 months, or if they're moving from hotel to hotel, they probably don't need 2 monitors.
If he finds a market for this laptop design, good on him, but to answer the headline's question: no, it doesn't make sense for the rest of us.

--
"A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
1. Re:No by realityimpaired · 2011-07-20 02:16 · Score: 2
  
  No, they don't make sense, because you can buy a 20" screen for $100.
  Seriously? Does that $100 monitor fit into the not especially huge laptop case? And how much does it weigh?
  Good question. I haven't seen a 20" screen that'd fit comfortably into my laptop bag. That said, another poster did draw my attention to this, which would fit comfortably into my laptop bag, and only weighs 3lbs.
  
  1. Those who absolutely need two monitors when travelling,
  Fair enough. If I was having to frequently write large amounts of code on-site and was travelling by car, I would certainly consider such a laptop.
  I wouldn't. I'd ask them to have a second display waiting for me at my destination. Anybody who can afford to have a consultant drive on site to do some coding for them can afford to provide said consultant with a workstation or a place to work. I can simply commandeer the monitor that's plugged into that workstation to run a dual display with my laptop.
  
  2. Those who aren't willing to pack a second monitor with them but are will to pack a 4.5kg laptop, and
  Well, that doesn't really shrink the set by much. The barrier for packing a second monitor and setting it up is far higher than packing a huge laptop.
  No so much. As said in the link above, there are options out there for a second monitor you can pack with you that will fit in your laptop bag. Between that monitor and my existing 13" laptop, the total weight would be about 2.8kgs for a portable dual screen setup that would fit easily in my laptop bag, and at a total cost about 1/4 what the laptop in TFA is proposed to cost. (not to mention that the 2nd display is a one-time cost that isn't incurred when it comes time to retire/upgrade my old laptop).
  
  3. Those who are moving around too much to justify buying a second monitor at their destination. ..or those whose destination is not so much under their control, or not in a place likely to have a spare monitor.
  I have actually needed a very large screen luggable beast before (dual screens weren't available then) and they make perfect sense given the right condidions.
  They do. I have a multi-display high resolution setup at home on my desk. I also have an ultraportable laptop that I use on the road. The ultraportable laptop is usable for almost everything I do on the main system, thanks to desktop switching. It's not as convenient, but it's certainly workable for a temporary solution such as would be the case on the road with a laptop.
  
  The article says the designer came up with the idea "when he needed a video editing workstation on a 6 month working holiday in Hawaii."
  Yeah, well, that's nutso. Especially the bit about "working holiday".
  But it makes perfect sense for anyone doing enough work off site that this is prefereable to lugging a desktop. Just because you don't need that, doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. After all, you probably don't need a toughbook or a PC/104 machine either...
  No, I don't think it really does. It's a *lot* of money to spend on a laptop when there's alternative solutions available to you that are much less expensive, especially in the long run. My experience is that most people who use multi-display systems don't actually need 2 or 3 or 4+ monitors to do what they want to do, they simply find it more convenient to not have to desktop switch or alt-tab between windows. And I say that as somebody who uses a multi-display system almost daily. but even if you are among the few who actually *need* multiple displays, there's other options out there for you to have multiple displays on the road.
Stupid 16:9 screens by kevinmenzel · 2011-07-20 00:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

If they had kept making 4:3 screens then with today's display technology, there's no reason you couldn't have a 2048x1536 laptop. Not quite 2x1080p, but it'd at least have a hope of being standard, and it'd be a hell of a lot better than the single 1080p displays laptops come with these days.
Re:How about a no-monitor laptop? by royallthefourth · 2011-07-20 00:55 · Score: 2

Maybe you should build a mini-itx computer, or even run an RDP or NX server at home and login to it when you're on the road.
Re:10 pounds by Miamicanes · 2011-07-20 01:16 · Score: 2

Screw cheaper and lighter. I want a real, honest to god Model M-type buckling spring keyboard. Another pound and half-inch is a small price to pay for 30-50wpm of improved typing speed :-)
Re:10 pounds by TCPhotography · 2011-07-20 02:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

You have both. Weight is the acceleration due to gravity times mass. The fact that the station is orbiting the Earth instead of flying off means that is under the effect of Earth's gravity and therefor has weight. The acceleration due to gravity is roughly 8.8 to 8.9 m/(s) at the altitude the station orbits at. The difference is that the station is moving fast enough to fall to the ground, but miss.
This message brought to you by someone who tutors college physics.