---

If failure is a supposedly the best teacher, then I think I’ve assembled an Ivy League faculty here. Conversely, failure is easy - much easier than success - given so many more opportunities. We should therefore be surrounded by excellent teachers. Unfortunately, that doesn’t appear to be true - especially when financial failure, if catastrophic enough, seems to be rewarded. So... I offer some cautionary material that can serve as the “don’t screw up” portion of anyone’s success formula.

If you used software in the 80s and 90s, In Search of Stupidity will be a great read. Why aren’t we all using WordStar, Dbase, and Quattro on CP/M-based PC-Juniors? The answers are all there in tragic (and funny) detail. If you don't really want to buy the book, the site also has some cute examples in “The Museum”.	In Search Of Stupidity
This is a study of the classic cartoon that clearly illustrates the abyss that can appear between requirements and an end product. For an IT professional, it’s funny in a depressing kind of way.	Tree Swing
Virtualization machines are wonderful.  They install, backup, restore, failover, and rollback better than any "real" system - in fact this site was developed on a virtual appliance.  However, I have often noted that "the more code between you and the silicon, the better the odds of failure”.  This event of 2008 illustrated my point in a rather painful way.	Virtualization “Doh!”
In addition to being really funny, Dilbert and his dysfunctional co-workers are wonderful illustrations of what to avoid in both professional and personal relationships. This is probably why they make money selling reproduction rights for presentations and intranets. Even if you just want to look, you can see almost 8000 strips at the Dilbert.com.  (just click "Buy" for reprints and licensing)	Dilbert Comics
There’s nothing more irritating than an overoptimistic, cheery, motivational poster when you’ve had a few setbacks. Despair Inc. has an alternative. Their depressingly cynical posters and t-shirts make even small successes seem glorious by comparison.	Demotivator Posters Despair T-Shirts
While it’s pretty common practice to mislead with statistics and cleverly drawn charts, it’s even funnier when a chart's author has no idea what they're trying to say.  This site has a nice collection of weird and uninformative graphics.  Note: Lack of recent updates implies that this site may disapear soon - so look quickly.	Ugly Charts

Netbooks – a.k.a. "Tablets with keyboards"

Laptops definitely don’t last forever

Having been responsible for laptop support as an IT manager, I heard many complaints and saw many broken laptops. One thing that impressed me was that aside from failing batteries, physical damage was much more common than internal failure. These included broken hinges, cracked screens, snapped connectors, and missing keys. One unit mostly worked, but had sand inside the case; another was actually bent – which prevented the DVD from opening. As computers, Dell made their laptops pretty reliable, but they just weren’t armor plated. Not that armor plating wasn’t available... Field engineers had Itronix laptops that were both durable and waterproof (when closed). However, these military-grade units cost about 5 times as much as Dells and were as heavy as bricks. Ultimately, I had to find a replacement for the aging laptops used by sales, marketing, field support, and other mobile workers.

How I discovered Netbooks

By mid 2008, I found that a single standard would not make every laptop user happy. People who occasionally took their work home wanted a desktop-replacement that was just easy to pick up. True road-warriors wanted something that was easy to carry - continuously. The home workers were easy to satisfy with a standard, midsize (15") Dell or HP - which were among the lowest priced units available. The truly mobile staff was more of a problem. At the time, laptops had an almost inverted price structure; the smaller the size, the higher the price. This meant that the most portable, lightweight laptops were the most expensive - and, due to constant travel, were most likely to be damaged or lost. That was a problem; so I started looking beyond the “business” machines offered by major computer manufacturers.

What I found was the ASUS EEE PC 1000, a new netbook intended for students and not considered powerful enough for business users. I, however, disagreed with that. The EEE’s 1.6 Ghz Atom processor, was not very different from the Pentium M processors in the old Dell laptops. Since we had no plans to change our application suite, I expected them to perform the same. By opting for Solid State Drives and 2GB of memory, the netbooks were actually faster. They were also lighter, smaller, and cheaper than almost any other laptop. Their batteries also lasted longer.

What I learned

In spite of their advantages, Netbooks were not the perfect answer. Some people needed a larger display and were able to justify the added cost and/or weight. Other people just didn’t want a laptop that looked like a “toy” to them – which was understandable, given the netbook’s intended market. Still, people who actually worked with a netbook had no usability problems. With a volume-licensed copy of XP Pro and the same software found on everyone’s desktop, the ASUS product was a good corporate laptop.  Of course, almost 10 years later, Netbooks have largely been replaced by tablets as the "student friendly" device.  But, the bright side is that the market now has cheap, business-oriented laptops.  For example, a Lenovo Ideapad 110s costs $170, has an 11-inch screen, and includes a year of Office 365.  For the rest of this essay, however, I'll continue to call these ultra-cheap laptops "Netbooks".

Generalizing the lesson

In addition to recalling my own experience, I have tried to consider what a typical mobile worker needs. I have also looked at the modern features promoted by laptop manufacturers. The result of this exercise confirmed my decision to use netbooks in a business environment. While there are many “nice to haves” features available, laptops have the same fundamental constraints as always: a tradeoff between speed, display size, and battery life on one side - weight, bulk, and cost on the other. While netbooks sacrifice speed and screen size, I believe the only significant tradeoff is screen size. However, on the other side, weight, bulk, and cost are all at an absolute minimum. In the following sections, I will explain this by reviewing what a mobile worker typically needs for business and what they don’t.

What a road-warrior needs for business:

Software

MS Office -	Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, Project, Visio
Communications -	browser, e-mail, chat, soft-phone, remote control
Security apps -	firewall, anti-malware, VPN client
Other -	PDF viewer, media player, CRM software, custom database apps

Interfaces

Multi-media -	VGA, HDMI, audio
Communications -	10/100 Ethernet, WiFi
Peripheral -	USB, flash device reader

While there are Office documents, spreadsheets, and databases that can stress multi-core desktops, that is exceptional rather than typical. Likewise, hosting a group video chat would be more unusual than a person-to-person call. The listed interfaces should be available on any laptop for connecting external devices and communication.

What they don’t always need:

This is where most laptops distinguish themselves from netbooks; by including features that business users don’t need. While some might be considered “perks” for the employee, those features are usually not essential. Basically, any machine that is great for entertainment is probably wasting a company's money – unless entertainment is their business.

Dolby 5.1 -	Nice to have, but it won’t suddenly make a bad presentation good.
Gb Ethernet -	10/100 is more than enough for Internet use – and still quite acceptable at the office.
Fast processor -	Except for some really obnoxious firewalls, most business apps won’t even stress the dual-core processor on the slowest machines. Games, on the other hand...
Disk space -	You can’t buy a disk small enough to match the data you probably carry around for work. Even the entire US phone directory is less than 4 GB.
Blue-Ray disc -	If you need this for work, then everything else about a netbook is wrong too.
Windows -	OK, you probably do need Windows, but businesses and governments have definitely saved money by switching to open-source desktops.  If document editing, presentations, web access, and communications are all you need, a Chromebook might be the answer.

Exceptions:

Of course there are specific business uses where a netbook is completely inappropriate. While these should be obvious, I’ll briefly list them here:

Multi-media editing -	Everything needs to be bigger.
Processor intensive apps -	Software like PhotoShop and AutoCAD also need bigger screens.
Game design and testing -	See “Multi-media editing.”
Desktop presentations -	Even a 17-inch laptop is barely big enough.
Desktop replacement -	The display should be large and the external video port should allow for an independent, second monitor. (see my Paper & Pixels essay)

The tradeoffs

As previously acknowledged, there are definitely some trade-offs to using an ultra-portable netbook. However, these have to be considered in context - along with some ways to mitigate them.

Small screen -	This is the primary tradeoff for a netbook’s small size, weight, and cost. However, for a regular traveler, asking about the TV before booking a hotel is a good way to ensure a nice, big monitor at night. Most new flat-screen TV’s have HDMI inputs; some still have both VGA inputs too.
Dual Core CPU -	While dual-core is the low-end for CPUs, that's probably good enough for all the things you would do on your desktop PC, just not all at once.  With an efficient malware scanner, and limited non-work applications, CPU loading should not be a problem.
No CD/DVD drive -	Aren’t these pretty much obsolete for anything but entertainment and OS installation? USB flash drives are a definitely a much easier way to move data around. If you really need one though, an external USB-powered DVDRW drive costs less than $30.
Tiny keyboard -	Although Dell and ASUS claimed “92% full-size keyboards”, they're still not the same as your desktop. If you want a full 104-key keyboard, you might try a rollup keyboard or just add a numeric keypad.

Too much space in the laptop bag?

Or, too much money left in the budget after deploying cheap netbooks? I recommend a portable printer. Aside from compensating for the netbook’s small screen, there are times when data on paper is important; for instance: sales quotes, directions, handouts, reservations, receipts, how-to instructions, and diagrams to name a few. If you’re not near a Staples or the hotel’s business center, it’s really nice to be self sufficient.

Paper & Pixels – or "Why I need another monitor & my own printer"

My really big display

On the right side of my desk there is a 40-inch diagonal, color, flat panel display. It can simultaneously show output from several PC’s, graphics resolution is excellent, and is visible in bright sunlight.  I have no idea what brand it is, but it cost about twenty five dollars brand new.  If you haven’t guessed, it’s a cork-board covered with laser print-outs held by push-pins.  I find it quite interesting that the only relevant characteristic it doesn’t share with my (much smaller) monitors is real-time updates.  That is, updates require waiting for the printer and then tacking the paper to the board.  Basically, if I can stand that delay (and the ~5¢ per-page cost), paper and cork are pretty good monitor substitutes.  Of course, I’m not recommending anyone toss their monitors and start using teletype terminals - but I am saying that pulp-based “static displays” need some consideration.

What are you looking at?

In the beginning (1981), the typical IBM and Apple PC was configured with a monitor sitting on top of the CPU.  For the next two decades - unless you used a CAD package - it seemed that 1-to-1 ratio was essential to PC technology.  Except with proprietary hardware or software, the average DOS/Windows user could not have more than one monitor until Win98.  Even then, monitor prices still tended to enforce the limitation.  The surprising thing is that, some pundits continued the 1940’s fantasy of the “paperless offices”.  Somehow, that tiny 1 square foot of screen was supposed to replace the 12 square feet of paper-ready desk on which it stood.  That’s not to say heroic feats of window cascading and screen tabbing weren’t performed on a daily basis; it’s just that constantly hitting “Alt-Tab” is no substitute for having everything right in front of you.  Incidentally, Post-its were introduced shortly before IBM’s PC – obviously anticipating everybody’s need for little yellow “screen extensions”.

And my point is...

Some data is static, some is dynamic, and some is interactive.  Depending on your job, you need varying degrees of access to each.  The trick is to find the right set of appropriate interfaces for your workspace.  Sometimes that means multiple monitors; sometimes that means a good local printer, and sometimes a scanner.  Whiteboards and projectors are also appropriate for collaborative environments.  Obviously, I don’t know everyone’s job and my opinion is subjective, but I’m pretty sure of one thing: when the data you need is more than a head-turn away, you’re probably wasting time.  I also suggest that you know situations where having a single monitor is going to cause that problem.  For example:

• viewing reference material while writing a document or presentation
• editing a spreadsheet and a corresponding document
• reading e-mail interspersed with working on something else
• creating a web page and previewing the results in a browser
• viewing a map and directions at the same time
• comparing product descriptions, features, prices, etc.

Of course, you can use my pulp-based “second display” method to get around the problem. Unfortunately, unless you were planning to keep the output for a while, printing time and resources might be wasted instead. So... at last, here’s my point: almost everybody needs at least two monitors.

A second point

While I refer to the importance of paper at the beginning of my essay and then put it down in the previous paragraph, I want to make my position clear: personal printers are really important.  Moreover, if the printer isn’t within arm’s reach, you’re probably wasting time.  Useful and re-usable reference material is definitely worth having somewhere in your peripheral vision.  As soon as you realize you need it, you should be able to put a copy on the cork board or cube wall as soon as possible – and then get right back to work.  Print-outs also have an important feature that no monitor has: they have no size limits. I’ve seen people struggling with single screen views of a large spreadsheet or diagram when 3 or 4 sheets of paper (and a little tape) would have put everything right there on the desk.  When comparing some products, I’ve occasionally hung 4-foot feature lists side-by-side on the wall to get a good overall view.  Basically, I have two criteria regarding my paper and pixel-based displays.  If it’s persistent or large, print it; if it’s transient or interactive, just use the monitor.

Let’s do some math

Ultimately, all my talk about saving time and getting extra monitors and printers has to have some financial benefit.  First, let me propose some reality-based numbers that you can easily replace if you want to do the calculations yourself.  Note: Although the references are a bit out of date, the relative costs haven't changed that much.

Item	Value	Type	Source
Typical Salary	$52,000/year $25/hour 42¢/min	Info Worker Level I to II	Salary.com
Power – monitor	35 W	22-inch LCD	(measured)
Power – printer	.0017 kWh/page 6 W (at rest)	Brother MFC7340	(measured)
Cost – power	18¢/kWh	New York, commercial, July	DOE
Cost – monitor	$150	22-inch Viewsonic, Samsung	Tiger Direct
Cost – video card	$40	EVGA - GeForce 8400 (dual)	Tiger Direct
Cost – printer	$150	Brother MFC7340 (~1500 pg)	Tiger Direct
Cost – toner	$44	Brother TN360 (~2600 pg)	Amazon
Cost – paper	$38	8½ x 11 Case (5000 sheets)	Office Depot

 

Second, let’s make some convenient assumptions:

• A new printer or monitor will only last 3 years.
• A work week is 40 hours.
• A work year has 52 weeks.
• Monitors and printers are turned on all week.
• The printer will print about a dozen pages a day.
• The printer will be thrown out before it needs a new drum.(~12000 pages)
• Prices and salaries don’t change.

Now for some calculations (with rounding where appropriate):
Adding two monitors to a desktop

• Two monitors and a video card cost $340 (150 + 150 + 40).
• The two monitors will draw 374 kWh (2 * .03 * 40 * 52 * 3) for $67 (374 * .18).
• Total monitor cost is $407 (340 + 67), $2.61/week (407 / (52 * 3)), or 52¢/day (2.61 / 5).
• If the added monitors save the worker at least 1.5 minutes a day, they’ve covered the cost.

Adding a personal printer

• The printer and enough toner for 9300 pages (~12/day) costs $282 (150 + (44 * 3)).
• 10,000 sheets of paper will cost $76 (38 * 2).
• Power used for printing 9300 pages is 16kWh (.0017 * 9300) for $3 (16 * .18).
• Power used when not printing is 37 kWh (.06 * 40 * 52 * 3) for $7 (37 * .18).
• Total printing cost is $368 (282 + 76 + 3 + 7), $2.36/week (368 / (52 * 3)), or 47¢/day (2.36 / 5).
• If the printer saves the worker a little over a minute a day, its cost is covered.

OK, I cut some corners: shipping, tax, and installation were not included in the costs.  On the other hand, I didn’t mention some of the peripheral benefits like the fault tolerance from having multiple monitors – if one breaks you can still work with whatever is left . If you had started with 1 monitor, you wouldn’t be able to work very well at all.  Having distributed printers also minimizes the impact of any one printer breaking – in contrast to everyone being affected when a high-capacity department printer/scanner/fax machine breaks.  Aside from time savings, there are timeliness advantages as well. For instance, an urgent e-mail that was visible (and responded to) instead of hidden (and ignored) could easily pay for all the hardware at once.  Similarly, a plainly visible quick reference guide could avoid potentially expensive application misuse or accidental abuse.

In any case, the numbers show that these added peripherals are pretty cost effective.  The extra mouse clicks and alt-tabs, re-finding your place in a swapped window, and re-reading what you forgot when a screen was covered can waste much more than a couple of minutes a day.  Similarly, not having regularly-used information within view can waste even more time while you search for it again (and finally walk down the hall to print it).

What I recommend

Having (I think) made the financial case, here are some suggestions on how to arrange the items in a workspace.

Although I didn't explicitly say this before, I find that 3 monitors offer the ideal amount of screen space. Although, they can offer a continuous Windows desktop, I tend to semi-dedicate each one to a particular purpose.

Primary Monitor

Position:	centered (between the other two).
Properties:	largest of the three monitors (if not equal); has task bar and start menu
Purpose:	workspace for creating/editing documents, spreadsheets, drawings, programs, web sites, etc.; also for important business-specific app used most of the time.

Secondary "Reference" Monitor

Position:	which ever side of the Primary monitor you would read printed materials.
Properties:	similar in height (if not aspect ratio) to the Primary monitor.
Purpose:	web search, reference documents, transcription source, file management, preview results (from primary monitor), expansion space for primary, secondary business apps.

Communication Monitor

Position:	opposite the Secondary monitor; possibly separated from the other two
Properties:	smallest of the three (if not equal); may even be a separate CPU, like a laptop – although direct cutting and pasting might be handy.
Purpose:	mail, chat, news, reminders, alarms, and other real-time information.

Multi-function Monochrome Laser Printer

Printer:	one color is usually enough for reference material.
Scanner:	really useful for something I did not mention: getting rid of extra paper and making document retrieval easier (for ones that didn’t merit being put on the cork board).
Fax:	although not that popular anymore, has legal status that e-mail doesn’t; still the lowest common denominator for rapid document transmission.
Copier:	one less trip down the hall if 8½ x 11 copies are all you need.
Sheet Feeder:	automatically scans, faxes, or copies a small pile of paper.