| October 2002 | ||||||
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
| Sep Nov | ||||||
This site is no longer maintained.
My current weblog.
The replacement motherboard for my 1.1GHz Gateway and my new 1.3GHz Celeron arrived today. Neither system has any love for the 1.3GHz chip 
Scrounging on eBay for a deal on a motherboard that will work with the chip. I'd wanted to avoid that because I really hate mucking around with PC innards, especially motherboards... but I've spent so much time in there lately that it no longer matters.
Saturday on Ask Slashdot:
I'm looking for some definitive, legitimate studies/research that show that using a multiple-monitor setup yields increased productivity for code development. (or disproves, as the case may be.)" [...] I'd like to submit a proposal to our IT and Process groups recommending a "trial run" on some small project, but am having a difficult time finding enough empirical evidence to crack the budget-clench.
Microsoft's Center for Information Work includes a wrap-around display that is essentially a triple-headed design using 17" LCDs.
I went dual-head at home in Y2K, but could never convince my own manager in Germany of the benefits. My protege from the US came to visit once, however, and got his whole team outfitted with dual-head setups shortly therafter. For anyone who often needs to view two windows at once, the productivity gains are obvious and immediate. Compared to putting a second computer on someone's desk, the cost of adding an additional display is minor.
The worst thing about a multi-monitor setup is that they are addictive. I had to give up my second monitor a few months ago, and it feels like I am trapped in hell. I can't get a meaningful, simultaneous view of two windows a 17" screen. The drain on my productivity while coding is so severe that it's hard to work up the motivation to start...