On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 07:31:04AM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote > Today 1920x1080 on a 23" screen still doesn't look like a large > working environment. Maybe if I'd never had greater resolution on > 17" and 19" CRTs, and come from 1024x768 on a 15" LCD, I'd think > it HUGE. Part of the issue is that I've gotten used to using apps > open fullscreen (sans GKrellM) on this size desktop, so whenever > I put two apps side-by-side something gets lost. I'm sure in time > it would grow on me, just as I've now, in the last year or less, > gotten okay with using a second workspace (first time in 10 years > with Fluxbox). It's exclusively for Teamviewer, though.
I doggedly stuck with one workspace, until the running-programs tabs on the launchpad became ridiculously crowded. Then I went to the opposite extreme, and now have 11 workspaces. Each workspace has related stuff open in it. > As for a 27" 2560x1440 display for $600 ... cold day in Hades comes > to mind. IMO $200 is _very_expensive_ for a computer monitor, > unless you're doing high end graphics work in Adobe products for > commercial printing and need color calibration. But then, you'd not > be using a Linux OS for that. Give it a year or 2, and the price will come down. Back in my more foolish days, in a previous century, I paid over $1,000 (including tax) for a 19" NEC MultiSync 95 CRT monitor and it still works today. See http://www.cueproductions.com/forsale/NECMultiSync.html http://lahore.saintclassified.pk/nec-multisync-95-19-crt-monitor-conditon-good-ad-390941 -- Walter Dnes <waltd...@waltdnes.org> I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
