I do the same, but don't recycle them. I make notes in them and put them in binders with other datasheets for that project. I find that if I make notes in the datasheets, I'll remember more information. I'll also mark up the PDFs so the information stays with them, too. I tend to use both when studying a new part. The PDFs allow searching, while the dead trees are easier to digest.
16x10 is much better for a computer display. Much more than you'd think from the 11% increase in height. Fortunately there are a few manufacturers out there who make them without hideous price premiums (FSVO hideous - a Samsung 24" 850 is "only" 50% more expensive than a comparable 16x9 monitor, although you can certainly spend far less than $280 on a 24" 16x9). They also make some nice higher resolution monitors (the new 28" UHD monitor is pretty attractive, even though it's 16x9 - it's tall enough that you almost don't care* - it's also cheaper than, say, the 27" version of the 850 - which is 2560x1440 vs. 3840x2160 for the UHD monitor).
One thing that has puzzled me is the lack of 16x10 options for TVs. A ton of existing programming remains 4x3, and a 16x10 is vastly better for watching 4x3 content.
The 28" UHD monitor is about 3/8ths of an inch shorter than the 27"
16x10, although with 50% higher vertical resolution.Two things, About three years ago, I finally broke down and got some reading glasses. They are my regular prescription, but with a +2 addition. This has much improved my working on the computer with a lot less eye strain.
If you still wanted to go to the 2x2 arrangement, then you probably need to lower the bottom screens so that your eye shifts downward for them, and tilt them back, and then tilt the top screens slightly forward. Think spherical surface...
I have a friend that has a 4x1 arrangement, in a custom arc'd mounting system, but I realized that, while watching him use it, that the far left display is only used for 'holding' stuff, not actively used, and this is for a single workstation.
On my system, I have two non-identical monitors. Right one is dedicated to my desktop, left one can switch between the decktop and my laptop. Even with two 22" monitors, I usually find that the left one is primary, and the right one is secondary. I literally shift my chair when working for any length of time on the right one...
Charlie
I haven't had a problem with any applications trying to come up in the 'middle' of my two displays. They basically just take up one, or the other. I have to physically reduce and move an application to have it cross that center barrier.
Den tirsdag den 26. august 2014 00.19.58 UTC+2 skrev Charles Edmondson:
in the old days when windows didn't support dual monitors natively, you could get a matrox card that had two outputs but behaved like one wide screen and everything would pop up in the middle
now the monitors show up separately and you choose which one is the primary
-Lasse
Ohh. That points out the flaw (for me, anyway) in the upper monitor. It would play hell with my progressives. I have progressives for both distance and computer/reading.
Yep. But that's what I'd use it for. Essentially, the proposed upper would perform much the same function.
At work, I have two identical 22" 1600x1200 monitors. The right one is directly in front of me and used for the primary task at hand. The left one is used for secondary tasks and reference (the third monitor on the right is for another system and not the same as the others). I find that this works well but I'd prefer better monitors.
At home the monitors are different, one 24" 4:3 on the left and a 20"
16:10 on the right (which is shared with my netbook). I generally use the left monitor for the primary on that setup.
The "monitor distance" is the "sweet spot" for my current vision. Anything closer starts to make my eyes feel as if "crossed". Farther and things get blurry.
I have an assortment of "reading glasses" that I use as "wearable magnifying glasses" when working on PCB assembly, etc. But, wearing ANY of them and trying to look at the screen is just not possible (I'd have to get much closer)
Yes. Problem is the work surface forms a lower limit to how low you can go! :< SWMBO wears progressives. I had to find a monitor for her that sat *on* the desk (i.e., not ABOVE) so she could read through the bottoms of her glasses.
Of course, the farthest extremes tend to be the least used areas. But, having to "make a lot of motion" to read them *forces* this usage. If, instead, they are just slight eye/head motions off of center, then you can work them into your regular usage pattern.
E.g., when I have to pivot my chair to access another workstation, I have effectively *shed* the items that were (and still are!) displayed on the original workstation. This is OK if, for example, I am now going to interact with the application I just compiled and downloaded (to the target connected to that second workstation). It *wouldn't* be OK if I was consulting a schematic that corresponded to a PCB layout I was modifying on the first workstation (too much "back and forth")
I can see both of mine comfortably just by shifting my eyes. If I need to concentrate on one or the other, then I can twist my neck a bit to more directly face the monitor in question -- my torso can remain "in place".
E.g., I spent today revising a letter-to-sound algorithm. I had FrameMaker open to allow me to view (and revise) the document that describes the algorithm as well as presents the various (~600) rules. On the second monitor, an IDE into the code to parse the input and apply the rules from the table (the FrameMaker document is far more "user friendly" than the encoding that the software uses).
When I wanted to test (and profile) the algorithm, I would swivel to a second workstation and compile the (portable!) sources that were NFS exported from the first/Windows workstation. Then, apply the regression tests (a few hundred thousand words) and gather statistics, etc.
Any unexpected errors in the test case I could examine there -- by consulting a PDF version of the FrameMaker document (my FM license is only for Windows so viewing the document elsewhere means resorting to the more portable PDF form).
Then, swivel back to the debugger and figure out why some particular rule wasn't being applied correctly in those failing cases.
I could do *all* of this with a single monitor -- if I wanted to keep shuffling windows (or, shrink them so their contents were unreadable!)
It depends on how windows views your monitors. And, if there is any "helper" software involved.
E.g., currently, my (identical) monitors are regarded as one seamless monitor that just happens to be twice as wide as the single monitors of which it is comprised. So, my (Windows) taskbar *wants* to be
3200 dots wide, etc.The driver/helper software allows me to have the taskbar confined to a single monitor -- which is what I have done. (allows me to operate with one monitor powered off if not needed -- and still have the system tray present/visible/accessible on the first monitor).
E.g., the logon screen spans both monitors. And, apps that want to instantiate "centered" would be annoying. But, the helper software lets me declare where I want each app to materialize, etc.
If windows wants, instead, to treat your monitors as two *independent* monitors, then it inherently knows about the "seam".
Weaker glasses are the solution for that. Either that, or perhaps you have a mild astigmatism?
I have that problem, so have a few pair of glasses (also progressives) with the "tops" set for monitor use ("bottoms" for desk use). It's too painful (PITN ;-) to use the "distance" prescription for monitor use.
I like to markup PDFs too, but some idiotic manufacturers lock their data sheets against editing, sometimes even copying data from them.
-- Rick
What kind of laptop are you using that is only 400 pixels wide? I've seen cell phones with more resolution. BTW, I put the task bar on the side of my screen. I find that a more natural fit.
-- Rick
There can be. I used a free app on my old laptop to manage the desktop icons, worked great. But that machine is dead and I don't remember the name of the program. It would remember a default for each screen resolution and you could save off setups to files and recall them. It worked well under Windows Vista, but my new machine is Windows 8 and there are lots of things like that which don't work so well anymore.
Aren't OSes supposed to be backwards compatible?
-- Rick
Often, simply printing the PDF to a (non-Adobe) "PDF Writer" and using the resulting PDF gives you what you want (though you can lose other things present in the original!).
There are, of course, "other" methods for achieving similar goals!
(something about "locks" comes to mind... :> )
Every time I have done this I end up with a graphic rather than a text based document. Not very desirable.
I've looked for software that lets me just turn off those pesky settings, but not found any so far.
-- Rick
Don't use Adobe's "printer" product. E.g., I just tried printing a "SECURED" PDF via "Corel PDF Printer" (or, maybe it's "Writer"?). The resulting document is still "text" (i.e., you can highlight text and copy/paste it into another document) -- but no longer "secured".
You can also print to an XPS document (and convert to PDF from there).
Of course, any enhanced PDF features tend to get lost in the process. But, for the most part, I don't see datasheet publishers making use of any of these!
I think PDF Unlocker (or something like that) is one I have used in the past. I think there are also online services that will do this...
Usually printing the PDF to PDF will unlock them enough to print. Some will print protect theirs (usually those under NDA), so that doesn't work. The ones where printing them doesn't work, can't be searched or copy-n-pasted to, either so they really are pretty useless. I let the suppliers know in pretty nasty terms when they lock them down that far (watermarks are understandable). The customer facing people are try to get this fixed. But like corporate Internet systems, functionality is way down on the list of priorities.
You're doing it wrongly. PDF is very like postscript - there's a direct mapping between most features - and tools like CutePDF convert quite accurately - it uses ghostscript to convert the Postscript output from the Windows Postscript print drivers. It works a treat.
Clifford Heath.
PDFWriter and the Adobe PDF printer seem to work fine, 99% of the time.
Not sure it's possible. If it's a picture to begin with, there isn't much you can do.
Wide? High (read what *you* wrote). OK, 40 lines is >5% but the screen is already too small for most web sites.
Such a thing would be nice but they frown on freeware at work.
Now *that's* funny!
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.