Slashdot Log In
Multiple Monitors Increase Productivity
Posted by
michael
on Thu Oct 09, 2003 09:01 AM
from the print-out-and-show-your-boss dept.
from the print-out-and-show-your-boss dept.
eggoeater writes "An systematic study conducted by NEC-Mitsubishi, ATI Technologies and the University of Utah has concluded that the use of multiple monitors in the workplace increases productivity. The study is discussed on Tom's Hardware, EE Times, and there's a detailed press release on NEC-Mitsubishi. For those of us who use multi-monitors, this is not shocking. But maybe now that it's official, IT managers will view it as a good investment and not just for gamers."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Gamers? (Score:4, Informative)
And as far as having multiple monitors at work, it rocks. Find a cheapo 15" CRT or something and you'll be amazed at how restricted you feel if you go back to one monitor.
Re:what's the use? (Score:3, Interesting)
On one screen, I don't think I'd manage to keep myself organized in the same way.
Maan
Re:what's the use? (Score:3, Informative)
It gives you two extra buttons in each window that allow you to either move the window to the other monitor proportionally, or maximize the window across all monitors. It also allows you to have different backgrounds on each monitor. However, THIS is the killer app: A taskbar for each monitor. Once you've tried this, you can't go back. The windows on yo
Re:what's the use? (Score:5, Insightful)
You think about it the wrong way. Don't think in terms of "cheaper", think in terms of "on the screen but not in my way". (I'll write the rest of this from a Windows point of view, but all the ideas apply equally well to X)
Consider what you normally use a computer for at work... Perhaps you code, or use Word/Excel, or whatever. But most likely you have some primary app open most of the time, to which you want to give as much screen real-estate as possible.
But, having other programs open at the same time, such as Winamp, task manager, a graphing calculator, perhaps a small notepad window for jotting things down - All of those you would normally need to switch back and forth with your primary screen-sucking app. Personally, I usually have some development environment filling my primary screen, and find it very annoying to keep finding my calculator, plug in some numbers, switch back, repeat 200 times a day.
Well, a second monitor makes all of that a non issue. I have my 21" primary monitor taken up with the dev tools, and the 15" secondary keeps what I mentioned (Winamp, taskman, graphcalc, notepad, and usually one or two other random programs) instantly accessible, without having to minimize anything or go searching on the taskbar.
So try thinking of dual monitors in terms of dual-but-separate desktops, rather than a single large desktop (where yes, the line down the middle would drive most people nuts).
I'd like to see this study conducted with a constant amount of $ invested in either a 2-head or 1-head rig, and see which comes out on top. I'm betting on 1-head.
Given a choice between a 19" and a 15", or a single 21", I'd gladly take the former over the latter, hands down.
Additionally, consider the cost from another angle - Most people working with a computer 8 hours a day will have at least a 19" monitor, frequently even a panel rather than a CRT, often connected to a high-end video card. You can easily blow a grand just on getting a decent primary display for a workstation-class machine (and far more for a high-end graphics oriented system - The CAD guys at my last employer had systems where the display hardware alone cost over ten grand).
So, if for another $100, a tenth the price of the primary display, you can boost productivity by a significant margin, would you skimp on such a small amount?
Parent
Re:what's the use? (Score:4, Interesting)
Because you don't have to press alt-tab? They already have a visible spot on the desktop.
Additionally, if you need to do a series of calculations, it takes a LOT less effort to just run through it all without even changing focus from the calculator, than to go through "get a number from app 1, alt-tab, enter in calc, alt-tab, get another number, alt-tab, enter in calc, alt-tab, get another number...".
And that only deals with interactive tasks such as a calulator. How about something passive but informative, like the task manager (or top, in the *nix world), where you need it visible to make use of it? I can't even count how many times I've avoided a crash because I noticed the CPU use suddenly spike as some app began behaving poorly. If I didn't have that window always visible, I'd never see the usage spike until the machine started to crawl, by which time the opportunity to kill the offending process may have passed (Windows Media Player does that on occasion, just brings the machine to a crawl and leaves no choice but to reboot - But if you catch it within about five seconds, the machine hasn't totally stopped responding and you can kill it).
I don't claim you can't do things almost as well with a single monitor. But once you've used a dual, you'll never go back.
Parent
Re:what's the use? (Score:3, Insightful)
How fast can you move your eyes to glance at the next monitor over? For referring to other windows while working on one, multiple monitors are a big win. Even for switching among windows, I find it easier to flick the mouse into a two-dimensional region on screen that to search through all the apps I have open via alt-tab.
--Phil (Newly converted to the land of dual-head.)
Re:what's the use? (Score:3, Insightful)
With windows the window on top is on top. Imangine (this often happens to me, so it shouldn't be too hard) you need to consult some online documentation to aid your work. With alt-tab you look at the documentation, and have to memorize it before you alt-tab back to your work to apply it. With two monitors you open the documentation on one, and your work on the other, so you can read the manual while you work. Cut-and-paste isn't very useful when you are looking up API docs. foo() takes three arguments
Re:what's the use? (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, no one said you had to have 17" monitors; I've had two 21" monitors on my desk for the last 7 years.
And third, have you actually tried dual monitors? If not, then you couldn't "get it". Every time I have to work with only one monitor, it feels like trying to drive with a windshield that's far too small. I also use 9 workspaces with both of my monitors, which means that i've got 18 workspaces across two monitors, and they're u
What about multiple desktops? (Score:4, Funny)
Although I sometimes lose applications for days on end.
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:3, Funny)
Sometimes these studies seem like a bunch of people getting together to study what the programmers already consider to be common sense. You have to wonder if someone decided that they could get money if they did a study that they already knew the results of.
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:3, Funny)
Duh (Score:4, Funny)
I wish I could have a dual-monitor setup.
Another study (Score:5, Funny)
What about widescreens...? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, two standard displays are far more economical than one widescreen display...
Though the results of the study are undoubtedly true, I find it amusing that this study is put on by a display company, graphics company, and a university that most likely got freebies or kickbacks.
News at 7: "Dell Computer, Intel, and UCLA have found that multiple processors can increase productivity."
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:4, Interesting)
For the same effect on one large monitor you'd have to resize one window to half the screen by using the resize zones on the edges of the window, then resize another to the other half of the screen, it would take longer and thus negate some of the benefit you were trying to get in the first place.
Parent
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think maximising tends to produce the wrong layout anyway, the human eye is better at reading narrow columns (that's why newspapers are layed out as they are). That's why you get all sorts of cruft down the side of webpages. So why are all the brow
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. I use 2 17" monitors at work, and I would vastly prefer this to a single, wide monitor. The reason is simple. Sure, if I had one, 24" wide monitor, I could fit quite a bit of stuff on the screen (almost as much as my pair of 17's). However, I'd have to manually manipulate the window sizes in order to make the most of that space.
With 2 monitors, each monitor is its own desktop. If I have an app on one screen and I maximize it, it instantly and automatically fills that entire, single monitor, leaving the other monitor untouched. I can then do the same thing to another app in the other window with another app, and with two easy clicks, I now have both my apps each making maximum use of my viewing space, without having to carefully drag window borders around manually.
This may sound like a small thing, but the few seconds you waste clicking on window borders and resizing quickly becomes an irritating and unnecessary annoyance.
But the tasks I found benefitted most from dual monitors was when I was learning something new. I could open up the API/User Guide/Tutorial/Examples in one window, while having another entire 17" monitor available to actually run the app I was learning, and follow through the tutorial without having to constantly switch virtual desktops, minimize/maximize, or ALT-TAB around.
I can't imagine going back to a single monitor, regardless of its size.
Parent
Re:WideScreens (Score:3, Interesting)
dear slashdot.... (Score:3, Funny)
(please don't mod this up, don't want the boss to see it
Re:dear slashdot.... (Score:3, Funny)
I am confused. How can this be? Ahhhh, my head is spinning!
I'd have to agree (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'd have to agree (Score:3, Interesting)
My co workers come in my office and look at my dual flat screens and think that I'm just hoarding resources. Little do they know that the money that they save from me not having to click around and precisely resize windows has paid for this other monitor many times over.
A single monitor? (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I hate it when all developers have to share a single monitor. Sucks.
Re:A single monitor? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
This just in... (Score:5, Funny)
MS funded study shows that Linux is bad for you.
Phillip Morris funded study shows that smoking is good for you.
I think I'm beginning to see a pattern...
Separation of tasks (Score:5, Interesting)
I replaced my dual monitor setup with an 20 inch Apple Cinema Display when I got my new G5...but I am finding myself missing the twin screens, even despite the size and aspect ratio of the gorgeous new screen...may have to find a way to get another Cinema...and a bigger desk!
Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
So we each now have our Windows boxes for running Outlook and doing tests with IE and such, and our Linux boxes for actually doing the coding. Since the app is in Java (some server, some client), it doesn't matter much which machine it runs on. I can say that our productivity has definitely gone up quite a bit since we've gone to this setup.
mmmm, EMF (Score:3, Interesting)
(Guess we should ask for the LCDs...)
Use Samsung dual 19"s (Score:3, Informative)
As for gaming, X (nVidia actually) has some issues. I've found that most games don't know what to do with the dual displays (UT2003/Savage/FrozenBubble/etc) and usually just display 'centered' between the two displays. This is VERY annoying and I can't play with a seam (even if it's < 1") where most of the action is supposed to take place. Three monitors would be better since you wouldn't have a seam in the center of your POV.
My fix for this is a shell script that just turns off one display and I restart X to play my game. nVidia should really have a configuration for OpenGL games on dual head so I can "lie" to the games that I only want one display used and what display to draw on.
As for my final gripe, with nVidia drivers, you cannot seem to set which output you want for what display. I've got a GeForce4 Ti4200 with DVI/SVGA outputs. The DVI is **FAR** better quality then the SVGA so I want it to the left (read left-to-right ya know) and my SVGA to the right. However when I do this, the drivers number the displays 1,0 instead of what I'd like 0,1. So I'm left using SVGA/DVI to get 0,1.
Just my $0.00002
Re:Use Samsung dual 19"s (Score:3, Informative)
for example:
Option "TwinViewOrientation" "LeftOf"
Well, duh. (Score:4, Informative)
Damn Straight... (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, it lets me put my editor (JBuilder, in most cases) on one monitor, and have a UML diagram, a specification, or a bug report, etc...on the other. And considering I was able to add the extra monitor for 300, it's totally worth it.
Neck strain? (Score:3, Interesting)
My question relates to neck strain: while I would like to try two monitors, I am concerned that the constant looking to the left or right for the second monitor (or both in the low-angle setup) would increase strain on the neck muscles and/or neck and shoulder joints.
sPh
Re:Neck strain? (Score:5, Informative)
I use two identical 17" Sony E200 monitors at 1280x1024, side by side with about a 10 degree angle between them. Left is Mail, Mozilla, iTunes, and Dock. Right is Menubar, Terminal, and iChat and any other apps. I spend almost all my time looking at Right, with an occasional glance at Mail on Left. Left is AGP Radeon, Right is PCI Radeon.
A few ideas that helped me:
Any difference between the two (size, resolution, color) is grating
Moving horizontally across 2560 pixels takes times
A few problems (likely all Mac specific):
Grr.
Parent
I use two... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, for those of you who have your monitor refresh rate set at 40 hz or something, change it-- if you stare about 6" above the top of your monitor and look for the monitor in your peripheral vision, you can see the refreshing, it's weird-- that throws me off.
Also, big comfy chairs and a raise tend to raise my productivity too
Productivity (Score:3, Interesting)
What did I get out of it? A nasty neck headache. The monitors were setup with all graphics in one, and text commands on the second. Terrible neck strain because of the monitor placement.
Next multi monitor setup was working at an Army satellite network ops center, the telemetry workstation had 5 monitors but the placement was more ergonomic so it was much easier to handle than if all the info was crammed into one huge screen. That pretty much worked.
At my previous job (dot bomb) as we started shutting down branch offices we got an influx of extra equipment and eventually most of the people that had desktops were assigned a second monitor. In almost every case the second monitor translated into increased productivity. These people were doing things like building flash animations, editing videos or doing web programming, so they appreciated the increased screen space. Even our instructional designers were doing great because they could have more documents opened side-by-side.
Of course, it is awesome to have a second monitor if you are a gamer, but for most of us that work with a gazillion windows opened at the same time, having dual monitors (or for the lucky bastards, a huge widescreen monitor like the Apple studio series) is a godsend.
It's about real estate (Score:3, Interesting)
For example, with the same 19" monitor in my house, I can have so many more windows open and viewable with Linux than with Windows. Also, Windows in 1280x1024 resolution or higher gets unreadable whereas I don't tend to have that problem with Linux for some reason.
So I'm not so sure about needing >=2 monitors, but perhaps to enhance the GUI readability of various OS's at higher resolutions.
I find it works really well. (Score:3, Interesting)
I tried four monitors once, this was great, the only drawback was I kept loosing the mouse pointer.
Screen space == short-term memory (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to have a 17" Apple monitor that I ran at 1600x1200 for development, solely to keep as much text as possible in my field of vision while working. My favorite monitor of all time was a Sun 20" monochrome 100 DPI screen - ran at something like 2000x1500.
Screen space is an extension of my short-term memory - it lets me deal with more complex things with less effort.
Hey, this is cheaper than headcount! (Score:4, Funny)
So, instead of hiring 100 employees, I'll just hire one, and get him 495 extra monitors!
Monitor SIZE is important too (Score:3, Interesting)
I have two monitors on my desk (both larger than the laptops preferred by many these days) hooked up to a OSX box. Editing on one with BBEdit, Terminal shell open for the target machine on the other, translucent windows so I can find stuff that is buried. It may seem silly, but I honestly feel that these little details translate into better designs and code.
It' just bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)
Hands using the keyboard & mouse going one way, and eyes watching the monitor going the other way, is a pretty limited interface. (Yeah, I know there are speakers and printers and such, but most of the information channel is keyboard, mouse, monitor.) Not a lot has happened on the keyboard/mouse end to raise input bandwidth since around 1984, but the output bandwith had grown a lot, from hopeless 10" VGA monitors (or TV's) to having things like 2 21" 1600 x 1200 monitors.
Higher monitor resolution (that's total resolution, not just screen density) makes a huge difference in how fast and how well you can obtain and comprehend information from your machine.
The GUI helps with this too- GUI's are just compression algorithms to compress information in order to pump it through the narrow bandwidth of the screen-eye-brain pipeline. It uses more machine resources in order to present things in a manner that lets your brain recognize things faster, because brains are better built for dealing with graphics than text in many ways.
More monitor space also increaeses input by compressing it (or eliminating useless steps)- if you can see more windows at once, you spend less time using your narrow input pipeline to rearrange things, and more time inputing directly where you want.
See Edward Tufte [edwardtufte.com], who is always upset about people tossing out bandwidth in stupid interface design. Notably, he bashes web browsers, which usually use screen space up on
1- the OS's menu bar & other widgets
2- the web browser's menu bar, toolbar, link bar, & other widgets
3- the sites' title bar, ad banner, navigation bar, sidebar, etc.
This often leaves a couple of square inches of screen space to cram in the information on the site you're actually trying to get too, mostly wasting huge portions of your bandwidth, especially on lower resolution monitors, because all the other widgets stay the same size, and it's the content space that shrinks down to the size of a pea.
I use three (Score:3, Interesting)
I use 3 monitors at home Left is API, Centre is IDE, Right is Application (plus Trillian, WinAmp etc). One you've gone double, you never want to go back
On windows 98 & XP it's dead easy. Shove in an old PCI card and away you go. I've never got it working properly with Linux.
T
Re:Any excuse is a good excuse.... (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, I'm not surprised at this result. One monitor simply can't have eight or ten pages usefully viewable at the same time, which is the way I work when I'm deep in the coding and a major reason that I still prefer paper documents for serious creative work. I've often said that what I need is not an ugrade from 17" to 19" and 1024x768 to 1280x1024, but one to 4'x3' at 10240x7680. (Or VR goggles and gloves that can simulate a wall-sized display and the keyboard to drive it....
Parent
Re:Any excuse is a good excuse.... (Score:4, Interesting)
well, you're actually pretty close. not four monitors though, but four vitual desktops.
where i work there are coders with dual monitors and there is me with one monitor and (as the only linux user in the company) 4 desktops. while they maximize all their windows and spend time poking around the taskbar and moving things from monitor to monitor, i race around virtual monitors with the alt-Fx keys.
i have a very simple layout for the four desktops:
code i am working on
remote sessions
email and second remote session if needed
browser if you build for the web, the write/test cycle is as fast as alt-f4 ctrl-r. focus is transfered automaically when you switch desktiops so there's not fritzin' about with the mouse!
less monitors (to a minimum of one, obviously), more virtual desktops.
Parent
Re:Any excuse is a good excuse.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Having multiple desktops is an option that Windows users have with a minimum of hassle. In fact, the video card I bought to facilitate my two-monitor setup came with the software to allow this to happen. What I think you fail to realize that multiple desktops have their place and multiple monitors have their place. The situation you describe is all well and good but when working, I often need to work on multiple files at the same time, or at least have a file open f
Re:Any excuse is a good excuse.... - Link (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Any excuse is a good excuse.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Monitors are so cheap now and you can find them abandoned all over the place (Goodwill, my basement). Since all you need to set up multiple monitors on a PC is an AGP card and a PCI card (for two monitors), it's very easy. PCI video cards are old and cheap. Two PCI cards won't work I think because they both try to be the primary video card.
My PC is set up now with three monitors because I have a dual output AGP card and a PCI c
Re:Nice (Score:3, Insightful)
Though I see your point, I have to disagree that the findings seem excessively biased.
Compare the cost of a pair of 17" monitors to a single 21"... Pricewatch currently lists $69 for the former, and $299 for the latter.
So if the hardware suppliers wanted to make more money by biasing their study, it would seem that they should have found the ex