I have to say I don't agree. Depending on where you get them (outside
of Hawaii) you can easily get a 17-19" CRT for under $100. The obvious
problem with desktop switching, or alt-tab switching is that you can
only view one document at a time. There are so many applications for
which there are two related document windows. For instance, a webpage
and a text editor for doing web development. I like to play UO on one
monitor and have the other monitor show the map. In windows, windows
can be spread across multiple desktops, which allows you to save on that
35" monitor. Any sort of switching is a pain, and its very nice for me
to be able to modify an entire electronic circuit without needing to
zoom around. I'm glad I have two monitors at home. At work I always
work on a sun and a pc at the same time. I seriously doubt I'd be more
productive if you gave me a $100 raise over 5 years. But in those 5
years I'd get a lot more done if I could see all my programs at the same
time. Unfortunately the savage driver doesn't work properly with my
cheapo graphics card, so I only get one and a half monitors in linux.
Its great in windows, though. I agree with you that flat panels/LCDs
are uttlerly silly and useless, though.
-Eric Hattemer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or you can cut your chances of getting cancer in half by sticking to your
trusty desktop switcher :) The only employers I know that bust the bling
for dual display are game developers and graphics artists. I always have
less monitors than I do computers because extra monitors are wasteful and
expensive. It's like buying an SUV; my old crt will always look better
than your new dual flat-panel.
Besides, I bet the employee satisfaction from having two monitors alone
probably attributes to the the 10%, yes, only 10% increased productivity.
I can get more productivity by increasing wages, benefits or attending to
cultural and social agendas and needs! I don't need a study to tell me
that either, although i'm sure they've been done many times.
Usually studies that show such a small variation in performance and have
commercial contributors [NEC] are found to be false.
Tom
