I was thinking of a bigger screen for sure. But not touch. Not yet anyway:)

I'm currently running dual 24" and that's worked out well.  But I could imagine something like dual 40" monitors with a third 40" touch screen.   All I'd need is a slightly bigger space and a few $$.   

Or how about the UI on one or two of these ultra wide 21:9 monitors:
 
http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/peripherals/wide-appeal-are-21-9-monitors-perfect-for-business-and-pleasure--1196106
 
I went with 2 touch monitors (a 24 and a 27) but am second thinking that two of these for SONAR might have been the way to go.
 
Jim

My gut reaction to some of the replies in this thread are are:
 
1. The X series GUI predates touch (if I'm not mistaken), but I too suspect they were thinking about making things bigger and wider for touch screens. I'm sure that factored into making things large, but I don't think this was balanced properly against the need of desktop and laptop users (of which there are much more).
 
2. If you're going to make a GUI for touch, you better make an option that works just as well for non-touch screens (see complaints over Windows 8).
 
3. If my DAW wants me to buy a 30+" monitor to work well with it: my DAW has a problem, not me.
 
4. The big concern for me is that wide console strips, long console strips, non-resizable console strips for the multi-dock, only a few effects visible at a time, hard to read effect names (at least we can setup friendly names), only having 1 visible send at a time are all of HUGE importance to me. It can take several hours to polish off a mix, where I'm in the console view the whole time, and I don't want to be scrolling and clicking to see what's important to me and get my mix done. My projects can have a lot of tracks (horizontal width), I might want to have my console docked in the Track view while mixing (vertical height) in case I need to do some light editing, I generally use a lot of effects (larger effects bin), and having 2 or more sends on a track (which should all be visible) isn't at all uncommon. IMO, redesigning the console view to address these points is the single biggest "bang for your buck" new feature Cakewalk could add to Sonar. If they're in there anyway, give me separate pans for stereo tracks while you're at it! I use Channel Tools when I want to narrow or invert a stereo track, but really, the channel strip's pan knobs should do this (see Pro Tools, Cubase, etc.).

Ack, touch screening is MS trying to get one OS to drive everything. Applying this to a desktop goes against ergonomics (e.g., making someone hold their arms horizontal for long periods was used as effective torture in the past) and the precision of touch in significantly less. My monitors are not even within reach!
 
But back on topic... I agree that the X series has done a lot for the GUI, but it definitely more conducive to having multiple monitors. Even then, the X-ray feature was definitely a nice addition to have.

Funkybot
I like the X series GUI paradigm and the improved window management. It's the size of the GUI elements that bother me. I recently opened Sonar 8.5, and thought, "oh wow, yeah, everything's the right size." Then I opened up X3 and it's like someone changed the zoom settings on my display.
 
Examples: look at the console strips in 8.5. Pay attention to width and vertical use of space, how many could you fit on your monitor? No look at X3 and do the same. 8.5 wins big time in the "most efficient use of screen real estate" category. On the subject of the Console view, the console strips are so big that you can't use it when it's in the multidock because you're constantly scrolling. This makes the multidock useless for me. Similar complaints with areas of the GUI like the toolbar. 8.5 and prior had a thin customizable toolbar that I could make as thin or narrow as I want. I kept them thin, and had everything I needed in a single toolbar row. This devoted a lot of space to the Track and Console views where I spend most of my time. Now look at the X series toolbar. It's huge. It takes up a ton of space. Same for the track inspector, much smaller in 8.5, but still had everything I need. In X3, it's much wider, really digging into the track view. 
 
These kind of things end up being workflow killers for me, since I'm constantly closing docks to try and increase my screen real estate. Meanwhile, if X3 had a 75% zoom option, I'd probably love it. I really think Cakewalk is on the right track, but they really need to shrink down the GUI elements, at least for the non-touch screen users. Take a look at how a DAW like Studio One makse much better use of screen real estate. Or how Reaper's dynamically resizable console view makes using it while docked an absolute joy.
 
So...it's a mixed bag for me. Good idea, now shrink everything so I can see more stuff.
 
 

I have 3 monitors and the QU makes it nice. I work in the middle and just move things aside when im done, and ya know I still run out of room and could never see using 1 monitor again.i  would love the zoom idea since im sitting 2 in from the screen anyway picking apart trans and at some point want to see the intire project,but its not a big deal since 90% of my sonar brothers use 1 monitor fine and wouldn't know what to do with all the space of 3 24 in monitors. is a lot or open space,but like a hard drive you never have to much space. +1 on zoom idea for the intire x3

Funkybot
My gut reaction to some of the replies in this thread are are:
 
1. The X series GUI predates touch (if I'm not mistaken), but I too suspect they were thinking about making things bigger and wider for touch screens. I'm sure that factored into making things large, but I don't think this was balanced properly against the need of desktop and laptop users (of which there are much more).
 
2. If you're going to make a GUI for touch, you better make an option that works just as well for non-touch screens (see complaints over Windows 8).
 
3. If my DAW wants me to buy a 30+" monitor to work well with it: my DAW has a problem, not me.
 
4. The big concern for me is that wide console strips, long console strips, non-resizable console strips for the multi-dock, only a few effects visible at a time, hard to read effect names (at least we can setup friendly names), only having 1 visible send at a time are all of HUGE importance to me. It can take several hours to polish off a mix, where I'm in the console view the whole time, and I don't want to be scrolling and clicking to see what's important to me and get my mix done. My projects can have a lot of tracks (horizontal width), I might want to have my console docked in the Track view while mixing (vertical height) in case I need to do some light editing, I generally use a lot of effects (larger effects bin), and having 2 or more sends on a track (which should all be visible) isn't at all uncommon. IMO, redesigning the console view to address these points is the single biggest "bang for your buck" new feature Cakewalk could add to Sonar. If they're in there anyway, give me separate pans for stereo tracks while you're at it! I use Channel Tools when I want to narrow or invert a stereo track, but really, the channel strip's pan knobs should do this (see Pro Tools, Cubase, etc.).

 
Strongly agree. Especially #3.