Multiple Monitors Increase Productivity 539
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."
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:Gamers? (Score:2)
At work though, it's amazing how useful it is to have a reference document open in another monitor. I can glance at database schema or class hierarchies without having to alt-tab or what
Re:Gamers? (Score:2)
what's the use? (Score:2)
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.
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:2)
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:2, Funny)
well, i would certainly hope not. you'd have to be some kind of freak otherwise.
(sorry, couldn't resist an opportunity for tasteless (non)humour).
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?
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.
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
Re:Gamers? (Score:2)
alt-tab doesn't have to switch video modes, and switching over to another app, doing some 'work', and tabbing back is much faster. not to mention the benefits of being able to monitor downloads/network traffic/etc.
and that doesn't even take into account the additional cheating capabilities one could use in online gaming. i'd imagi
Re:Gamers? (Score:2)
Re:Gamers? (Score:2)
It also seems counter intuitive to the "all folks are equal" model of the new game. Under earlier games, bigger screens meant you could see more. Now my 1600x1200 21" monitor shows the same as the guy an a 12" laptop screen.
What about multiple desktops? (Score:4, Funny)
Although I sometimes lose applications for days on end.
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:2)
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:2)
Unless the results are known in advance, funding agencies will reject the proposal.
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:2)
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What about multiple desktops? (Score:2)
Duh (Score:4, Funny)
I wish I could have a dual-monitor setup.
Another study (Score:5, Funny)
Don't forget SCO (Score:2)
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.
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)
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.
Re:WideScreens (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:2)
A really nice setup, a very narrow seam, and the ability to handle twelve different sources - one VGA, DVI, S-Video & Composite per screen. You could have one three-screen, one two-screen, and one single-screen computer, as well as random video feeds. Of course, the pricetag is a bit higher than three of most LCD screens.
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:2)
Re:What about widescreens...? (Score:2)
Not as much as you might think. A processor that is twice as fast is always better than two processors. That's why, so far, graphics cards and PCs have stuck to one chip. Yes, there are exceptions (Vodoo5, Opteron/Xeon/G4/G5), but they never sell as well as the cheaper 1p systems.
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!
Re:dear slashdot.... (Score:2)
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.
Re:I'd have to agree (Score:2)
These days I'm too poor (in both money and free space) for multiple screens, but I can envision having one "productive" screen and one "administrative" screen going on. I could drag a window off the productive screen and maximise it on
Re:I'd have to agree (Score:2)
It also lets you stretch out your music visualization windows. =o)
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)
Re:A single monitor? (Score:2)
Just to stay on-topic, I'll chime in and say that multiple monitors are super, super great for any job that requires a lot of screen real estate, or any situation where you're looking at several apps at once. When you go from dual setup back to a single setup, that's when you realize that you have to spend inordinate amounts of time simply cycling through and rearranging wind
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...
All you need to know... (Score:2, Funny)
That being said, I'll be using this article in a pitch to the wife to let me invest in some more "product
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.
Multiple Desktops? (Score:2)
I realize the value of seeing "more at once", and I realize that virtual "Desktops" take a degree of organization on the part of the user. But I can't help but wonder if a well used virtual desktop system can't rival a multimonitor setup.
Re:Multiple Desktops? (Score:2)
> rival a multimonitor setup.
Absolutely not. I have run multiple-desktops under FVWM 1.24 (that's right, 1.24) since early 1997. My desktop changes are lightning fast and I have shortcuts (ALT-F1 through F8) for switching desktops. And my desktop switching is FAST, about 1/10th of a second for a complete redraw (no KDE/GNOME/CDE bloat with FVWM 1.24!)
I have also run multiple monitors since 2000. There simply is no comparison. While
Multiple monitors or multiple desktops? (Score:2)
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"
Re:Use Samsung dual 19"s (Score:2, Informative)
Here's a snippet from my XF86Config file.
========= Begin Paste =========
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "GF4"
Monitor "Samtron"
DefaultDepth 24
Option "TwinView" "True"
Option "SecondMonitorHorizS
Re:Use Samsung dual 19"s (Score:2)
I'm currently working on a 21 in. Trinitron screen (and I've got other CRTs lying around that I've tried the Matrox TripleHead Desktop on), but my next display jump will be to get a pair of 17 in. or 19 in. TFT panels to put either side of my main display.
With that kind of setup I get the best of
Architecture... (Score:2)
Well, duh. (Score:4, Informative)
I agree (Score:2)
Of course, I can read Slashdot in the Visual Studio
Not a programmer but, (Score:2)
I'm not a programmer but I do work on computers as a tech. All but 3 people in our shop have dual monitors of one sort or another. The only 3 that don't are two administrative staff and one salesman that should be selling used cars, not computers.
Most of us have dual monitors at home as well. I for one can't stand working on a computer with only one monitor for any extended period of time. At work I keep my Outlook in one monitor off to the side and then do everything else in the other monitor. Also wo
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.
I have done this before (Score:2)
Basicly anybody that needs to visualize more than one application to do a job on a consistent b
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:2)
Re:Neck strain? (Score:2)
Plus, I'm almost 100% sure that Windows will allow you to position the extra desktop space above your existing monitor. All it is is a matter of click-n-drag on the new monitor in the 'settings' tab of the Display Preferences, if memory serves me.
On an off-topic note, has anyone had an instance where, from two year-and-a-half
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.
Didn't work for me... (Score:2)
* 2 computers linked with synergy [sf.net] - acts like one computer with two screens, but you can tie one up with heavy cycles and leave the other free for browsing etc. Works cross platform Linux/OSX/Win as well.
** Looks like the bit from the opening credits of Matrix 2 - way
My vision (Score:2)
Some day I hope the monitor will be part of my desk, probably in a form of a flexible transparent overlay taking the *whole* area of the desk (and perhaps working in conjunction with a screen on the wall(s)). It will also be touch sensitive, so it will act as a keyboard (and mouse) as well, an
Back when I t'were a lad (Score:2)
If you could manage to get into the terminal room early you could grab a pair of tvi's next to each other and login twice, and be nearly twice as productive. On some desks you could actually get access to three terminals at once, heaven!
So why does two monitors beat two separate PC's?
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
My work environment (Score:2)
I have a [17"LCD] [21"CRT] [17"LCD] setup.
My CRT is where I run my primary applications, which is usually Eclipse (which unfortunately does not seem to have multi-screen support for breaking off panels to other screens).
My left LCD is where I run web browsers for running, testing code, or surfing slashdot =P
My right LCD is for my tel
I'd love to do this at home and at work (Score:2)
I'd also like to take this time to complain that IBM does not ship dual monitor capable drivers for its ATI Rage Mobility-equipped laptops. ATI claims it's supported, but depends on the laptop manufacturer to provide suitable drivers.
Re:I'd love to do this at home and at work (Score:2)
sPh
Re:I'd love to do this at home and at work (Score:2)
sPh
Nice (Score:2, Insightful)
This is almost as good as one of those "A study conducted by Microsoft and Forrester Research concludes that Windows is Holy and Linux causes lepersy" studies. NEC and ATI think you should buy another monitor and upgrade your video card. Damn, what's next? Shell Oil thinks current fuel efficiency standards are just fine? Logging company thinks spotted owls will adapt to living in underground holes?
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
Technical problems (Score:2)
I'm using a laptop with a 15" UXGA screen, and none of the spare CRT monitors lying around are sharp enough to work at that resolution (1600x1200). If I use a lower resolution on my attached monitor, it becomes just a little bit akward. Also there's the issue of looking up-and-to-the-right since the laptop panel is right on the desk.
My other complaint is also laptop-related. To switch to two monitors, I need to use a different XF86Conf
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.
YES - IT DOES. (Score:2)
I can open a header file on one bottle, the code using that header on another, and be able to quickly code.
I can open a bug report on one bottle, and the responsible code on another.
I can run my debugging telnet sessions on one display, and check the code on another.
For the same amount of money, the amount of usable glass you get with two bottles vs. the amount of glass you get with one big bottle is no comparison - two 17" is better than one 19", two 19" is better than
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.
Woohoo! (Score:2)
2002-10-24 02:53:52 Multi-Monitors and Increased Development Productivity? (askslashdot,programming) (accepted)
(Link [slashdot.org])
I've been looking for a quantitative study so I could get my employer to give me 2 19" LCDs to go along with my 21" Sony CRT. =)
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.
But how many people NEED them? (Score:2)
It seems to me that a few far better ways to increase productivity and reduce desktop clutter are:
- Block all chat, IM, and streaming media
Microsoft got such a study too (link inside) (Score:2)
The first study revealed that the users' productivity increased by 9 percent. Further studies showed even greater increases - at times up to 50 percent for tasks such as cutting and pasting.
Heh.
Re: IT managers will view it as a good investment (Score:2)
If I'd had heard it, I would of laughed - dual (or triple) monitors are usually a pain when it comes to gaming, because most games (for windows) don't handle it very well if you leave the other monitors on and 'attached' via the display settings panel. Thus, yo
Moving from 2 displays to 1 large display (Score:2, Interesting)
Our users are creative folk, working on G4s with Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, etc. Historically, the mindset has been to keep application palettes on the smaller display while the current document is open full-screen on the larger display. Usual resolutions are 1600x1200 on the 21" monitor and 1280x1024 on the 17" display.
Our t
In Other News... (Score:2, Funny)
Keebler and Nabisco have teamed up with the University of Toledo to show that a steady diet of cookies decreases heart disease.
John Ascroft and MIT have determined that electronic tracking collars increase pedestian safety
Nokia strongly insists that the N-Gage doesn't blow
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....
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.
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:It's explained .. (Score:2)
Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, although I can't see how it would increase productivity.