Terminal Type/Productivity correlation

[Chip Salzenberg]

[ Followups to comp.misc ]

According to onward at fsg.UUCP (Onward Lam):
>How about a discussion on Editors and productivity (NO, not the
>vi vs. emacs religious debate), but more like size of terminals
>(ie. lines x columns), or windows/xterms vs ascii terminals.

I use 25x80 exclusively, but it's either SCO's "mscreen" program with
our home-grown multi-screen ANSI terminal emulation program, or KA9Q
over an Ethernet, hacked for multi-screen ANSI emulation.

As a result, I have at least four sessions available simulaneously,
and switching among them is as easy as <Alt-Fx>.  I find this
arrangement close to ideal for development and debugging, since I can
almost literally do four things at once.

As to line count: I prefer four screens of 80x25 to fewer screens with
more characters, since I find tiny characters distractingly difficult
to read.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT     <chip at tct.uucp>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip>
    "I've been cranky ever since my comp.unix.wizards was removed
         by that evil Chip Salzenberg."   -- John F. Haugh II