|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> Well, I guess I only spend 90% of my day job and 70% of my spare time
> sat in front of a computer.
I couldn't live without two monitors at work. The left screen is for
Outlook (which is usually the source of all work I have to do and where
the work goes after I'm done), the right screen is for whatever I'm
currently working on (3D CAD, powerpoint, excel etc).
> So... you put a second monitor there just to fill up the otherwise
> unused space? That seems like a pretty weak justification for something
> so expensive.
The monitors are probably the cheapest part, after the PC box itself,
the laptop, the phone and the furniture it's all sitting on, it really
isn't a cost worth worrying about in comparison with everything else.
Even if it only saves you a couple of minutes each day it's worth it.
> My mind is blown.
>
> 1. What possible use would having 300 windows open actually be?
>
> 2. The human mind can't focus on that many pieces of information at once, so how can
this possibly be useful?
>
> 3. Wouldn't the computer slow to a crawl as a result? (Well, I guess it depends
*what* the windows are...)
Not 300, but 50 games of online Poker at once:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHrGjRO7MFQ
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |