What Display Daily thinks: A company pitched a multi-display product to us recently. No doubt you will hear about it soon enough, but it set off a chain of events as I searched to do a competitive analysis. It was shocking. I don’t use that word lightly.
It was shocking because every display manufacturer, every seller of computer monitors, lacked multi-monitor sales pitches. Sure, some, particularly Samsung, have an extensive library of support articles for configuring multi-monitor setups or daisy-chaining a number of displays. Most of it you can find in a general internet search. None of it was any more appealing than reading a forum a post.
No one was selling bundles or promoting multi-monitor configurations in any meaningful way. The more you see, the more you can do. Why is that so hard to get across to the consumer?
If the world belongs to technocrats then we should take a leaf out of their productivity experiences. Our displays are cramped, and stuffed with tabs and windows, none of which are natural or easy to manage. Multiple monitors can organize their space for different functions. Programmers understand this. They would have a hard time being productive without multiple displays, and I would venture to argue that triple displays should be the norm for keyboard jockeys.
Switching between tabs and application windows is called context switching and it is hard on the brain. It is an overhead in your thinking. And, most of us, not just programmers, are in front of displays more than 8 hours a day. There is undoubtedly a lack of evidentiary analysis of the benefits of multi-monitor setups and that’s just ridiculous.
So, now you have shocking and ridiculous to contend with.
Granted, our existing software applications, operating systems, and general workflows are not optimized or intuitive for multi-monitor setups, but neither is a cluttered desktop. We have the desk space, and a curved monitor may cover a lot of distance but it really makes for a difficult work setup.
The display industry needs to do a much better job of serving an underserved population: practically everyone who works with computers in the workspace. It’d be almost like trying to sell more displays. Surely that is something that everyone desires.
Jon Peddie’s Research on Multiple Monitors
JPR did some research on multiple monitors a few years ago and found that information workers, designers, and engineers can realize up to a 42% increase in productivity through the use of multiple displays. JPR survey over 1,000 users in its study.
Respondents were asked to give us an estimate of actual, or expected improvement in productivity. In 2002, the average expectation of productivity improvement due to the use of multiple monitors was 46%. Productivity expectation in 2012 dropped a bit to 42%, and in its 2017 survey it stayed the same at 42% average expected productivity.
JPR found that multiple displays give users a resolution multiplier: users simply cannot get the same resolution on one big screen as with two displays or more. While the report needs to be updated, it is as relevant today as it was then, and nothing has changed in terms of the fundamental assumptions behind the survey. Nothing has probably changed in terms of the value of multiple monitors as providing a cost-benefit, either.
