this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
509 points (96.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43948 readers
487 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The old data I have from the industrial engineering work was that going from one to two monitors was a 40% productivity speed up, then from two to three was about a 5% speedup, then three to four was a productivity loss.
Those numbers were on general workloads, not for specialists. It was also with UI design from 20 years ago, and the way interfaces work now the numbers are likely different.
Personally, I immediately try to get a second monitor because having only one means I lose a lot of focus and mental time just swapping the active on screen windows, but a rarely seek out a third, though a third is nice for overflow tools (chat, docs, music) to have a third screen.