Quote:
Originally Posted by felix
I'm not going to argue the people who might as well be sitting on their toilet while using the computer aren't some kind of "majority," but this whole argument of systems designed for real work needing to be dumbed down to the lowest idiot-index is absolute nonsense.
|
Based on your mention of the "debug window" I take it that you fall into my observation of "mostly programmers" not maximizing their windows. Which isn't to invalidate your work, but it's also worth pointing out that programming is not the only "real work" that is performed on a computer.
I used to use dual monitors as my standard setup when I was using Windows as my primary operating system. I stopped with Macs because the software support just wasn't there (although if anyone knows of an UltraMon equivalent, please let me know!). While in research I began to utilize three monitors purely because it sped things up, but all applications were full screen on each monitor. Tiling them wasn't feasible given the type of work I was doing (signal pathway analysis). Or rather, I didn't have a single screen that was large enough to allow me to panel.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to say that touch-based input is inherently superior to keyboard and mouse, or that full-screen applications are inherently superior to windowed applications that don't take up the full space. Certain tasks most definitely benefit from one over another, but a lot of the trashing of touch-based input and full screen applications seems a bit misguided to me. People talk about it as if these really are inherently inferior, but I think it has more to do with the software utilizing them efficiently. The users themselves are another factor: most of us are used to working a certain way, and these newer methods and styles are different. That takes some getting used to, as well as figuring out how best to integrate it into your own workflow.