Reliable Systems

I’ve been a big fan of multiple screens on any computer I use – going back to my first job where I put an older portrait display on my Macintosh IIcx. In that day (1991) it was one of the most amazing features of the Macintosh – you could just pop in extra cards and connect screens, and boom – have a wildly shaped desktop with different color capabilities and purposes.

Ever since in every shop I visit I push for two screens to be the default configuration of any computer. Large screens are great, but there are real practical limits where a larger screen doesn’t do much for productivity, but a second screen will. The best part is that two modest sized screens are invariably cheaper than the same number of pixels in a large screen due to manufacturing cost.

Bring On the Workspace

The primary advantage of two or more screens is they are a very cost effective way of increasing the amount of information your users can see at one time. For between $200 and $400, you can add a 19″ LCD flat panel to a system. With that, users can do several tasks much easier:

1. Comparisons: When you want to compare two things, say two Word documents or spreadsheets, it’s generally ideal to have twice as much desktop area as you normally use for just one. This allows you to interact with each the way you’re used to without having to adjust to navigation and toolbars being in the wrong place because you’re cramming things into a size you don’t normally use (and the document may not be oriented for.
2. Active and Background tasks: A great use of multiple screens is to have one for your active working task and another for background tasks you are monitoring. For example, put Outlook on a secondary screen and your main task (say development, writing an article, or analyzing a spreadsheet) on your main screen. In this configuration, it’s important that your main screen is directly in front of you and your secondary screen is off to the side where it won’t be distracting.

Why Not Just Bigger?

Why not just get one larger monitor? There are a few advantages to multiple displays.

1. Maximize Behavior: When you maximize a window, it goes to the dimensions of the monitor it’s on. This makes it really easy to move windows from screen to screen quickly because you just need to maximize it then drag it, it will size to the full extent of the target window. Get to love maximize – if you can see the background, you’re not displaying as much information as you could.
2. Too big is too big: You should be able to see the entire extent of your screen without moving your head and really without moving your eyes a lot. The entire screen should be in your peripheral vision. With very large screens, you’ll tend to find that you don’t use all the screen because some is too far to the left or right for comfort. This is particularly an issue with the latest very large widescreen monitors (over 24 inches diagonally). If you find that you just can’t use the entire screen, then that monitor is just too big, you really should have another.
3. Optimize for Purpose: Instead of accepting just one generally good shape and set of capabilities you can optimize different screens for different uses. When using two screens, I like to have my primary be a 24″ widescreen and my secondary be a 20″ normal aspect ratio. This fits well with my normal set of activities where I want some extra width for my primary activities but I find that I like the normal ratio for my background task screen where I leave Outlook and put things like online help windows, web sites I’m monitoring, etc. I worked with a quality assurance manager who had three screens with the center one in portrait orientation which fit her work very well – she would have the application being tested on one screen, the QA tracking application on another, and her email or other background window on a third.

Common Objections

The most common objection, particularly from people that aren’t used to working with multiple screens, is that it’s too expensive. This is usually because the cost is viewed as a percentage of increase to new computer cost. From that standpoint it looks significant – if your shop tries to keep individual computers in the $1500 range (which is very easy in the current market for a typical desktop) this will increase the cost by around $250, closing in on 20%! Why, that would require that you increase your budget for desktop PC purchases by 20%, who’s going to pay for that?

This objection completely ignores both the total cost of ownership of a computer and, more importantly, the value of the computer as a tool to the user. A second screen adds very little to the TCO over one screen (LCD monitors are low support cost items) so if you looked at the entire cost of the PC over its life – say $5000 – this cost is much more reasonable.

A second objection is that users will not use it for productivity gains but to instead couple non-work activities with work time or in general just not be able to make effective use of the space.  While users may become very successful on their own with multiple screens, some quick orientation on how to make the best use multiple screens will pay off with users changing how they work with applications to take advantage of the new capability.  If you don’t do this, many will pick it up on their own as they watch their peers.

At the last company I worked at before eSymmetrix, I finally achieved the goal of everyone – even the receptionist – having two screens.  No more was it a privilege for the elite or the engineers; the benefits apply to any information worker so it was done everywhere.