So anyway, it was like, 22:25 CEST Sep 16 2008, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
JEDIDIAH was all like, "Dude,
[..]
> Looking down at my pager, it reminds me quite a bit of one
> of the sites I perused while looking for the information that the
> pro-multi guys were not posting. It was a 4 panel setup. It seems
> very much like what would happen all 4 of my virtual desktops were
> visible at once.
And right there is the whole point of having multiple monitors, you
can have more desktops visible at the same time. It's something
that's been available since a long time with X11, and certainly not a
microsoft invention.
Having, say, your debugger running on one screen while your program
is running on the other, is a very handy thing. Or if that's not
something you do no a regular basis, just having a browser to the left
and that document you're writing on the right, both visible at the
same time but not crowding single screen, makes it easy to look up
references while writing without switching desktops or windows.
You really seem stuck on arguing against this idea for some reason,
and I just can't understand why. If it's a thing that's useful for
some people, according to them, why would you try to tell them they're
wrong and misguided? If people get larger monitors to fit bigger
windows on-screen, do you argue that they should just set up more
virtual desktops instead?
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
08:46:05 up 15 days, 10:50, 1 user, load average: 3.49, 2.88, 1.74
Linux 2.6.26.2 x86_64 GNU/Linux Registered Linux user #261729
|
|
