The author's argument boils down to "when I use my second monitor (which I put twitter and other inane distractions on) I get distracted by it. Therefore 2 mon

The author's argument boils down to "when I use my second monitor (which I put twitter and other inane distractions on) I get distracted by it. Therefore 2 monitors are bad" no way! My argument is "When I have my editor on one screen and my debugger/docs/browser in the other, I get more work done than if I had to alt tab every 5 seconds. Therefore 2 monitors are good" Considering we are comparing anecdotal evidence, I'm going to go ahead and say my reasoning is a lot more coherent. The authors problem, is that if he sees no productivity decrease or he even sees a productivity increase is that he had no business using multiple monitors in the first place. (And considering this person is a journalist, I don't see why he would need more than one half of the monitor for word and the other for his research)