Display space usage and window management operation comparisons between single monitor and multiple monitor users

ABSTRACT

The continuing trend toward greater processing power, larger storage, and in particular increased display surface by using multiple monitor supports increased multi-tasking by the computer user. The concomitant increase in desktop complexity has the potential to push the overhead of window management to frustrating and counterproductive new levels. It is difficult to adequately design for multiple monitor systems without understanding how multiple monitor users differ from, or are similar to, single monitor users. Therefore, we deployed a tool to a group of single monitor and multiple monitor users to log window management activity. Analysis of the data collected from this tool revealed that usage of interaction components may change with an increase in number of monitors, and window visibility can be a useful measure of user display space management activity, especially for multiple monitor users. The results from this analysis begin to fill a gap in research about real-world window management practices.

REFERENCES

• 1: Michel Beaudouin-Lafon, Novel interaction techniques for overlapping windows, Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, November 11-14, 2001, Orlando, Florida [doi>10.1145/502348.502371]
• 2: Blaine A. Bell , Steven K. Feiner, Dynamic space management for user interfaces, Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, p.239-248, November 06-08, 2000, San Diego, California, United States [doi>10.1145/354401.354790]
• 3: S. A. Bly , J. K. Rosenberg, A comparison of tiled and overlapping windows, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.101-106, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 4: Czerwinski, M., Smith, G., Regan, T., Meyers, B., Robertson, G. and Starkweather, G. Toward characterizing the productivity benefits of very large displays. Proc. INTERACT 2003, IOS Press, 9--16.
• 5: Douglas J. Funke , Jeannette G. Neal , Rajendra D. Paul, An approach to intelligent automated window management, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.38 n.6, p.949-983, June 1993 [doi>10.1006/imms.1993.1044]
• 6: K. B. Gaylin, How are windows used? Some notes on creating an empirically-based windowing benchmark task, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.96-100, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 7: Jonathan Grudin, Partitioning digital worlds: focal and peripheral awareness in multiple monitor use, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.458-465, March 2001, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/365024.365312]
• 8: D. Austin Henderson, Jr. , Stuart Card, Rooms: the use of multiple virtual workspaces to reduce space contention in a window-based graphical user interface, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), v.5 n.3, p.211-243, July 1986 [doi>10.1145/24054.24056]
• 9: David M. Hilbert , David F. Redmiles, Extracting usability information from user interface events, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.32 n.4, p.384-421, Dec. 2000 [doi>10.1145/371578.371593]
• 10: Dugald Ralph Hutchings , John Stasko, Revisiting display space management: understanding current practice to inform next-generation design, Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Graphics interface, p.127-134, May 17-19, 2004, London, Ontario, Canada
• 11: Dugald Ralph Hutchings , John Stasko, QuickSpace: new operations for the desktop metaphor, CHI '02 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, April 20-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA [doi>10.1145/506443.506605]
• 12: Eser Kandogan , Ben Shneiderman, Elastic Windows: evaluation of multi-window operations, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.250-257, March 22-27, 1997, Atlanta, Georgia, United States [doi>10.1145/258549.258720]
• 13: Brad A. Myers, A Taxonomy of Window Manager User Interfaces, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, v.8 n.5, p.65-84, September 1988 [doi>10.1109/38.7762]
• 14: Renaud, K. Expediting rapid recovery from interruptions by providing a visualization of application activity. Proc. OZCHI 2000, 348--355.
• 15: Meredith Ringel, When one isn't enough: an analysis of virtual desktop usage strategies and their implications for design, CHI '03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, April 05-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA [doi>10.1145/765891.765976]
• 16: George Robertson , Maarten van Dantzich , Daniel Robbins , Mary Czerwinski , Ken Hinckley , Kirsten Risden , David Thiel , Vadim Gorokhovsky, The Task Gallery: a 3D window manager, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.494-501, April 01-06, 2000, The Hague, The Netherlands [doi>10.1145/332040.332482]
• 17: Tan, D. S. and Czerwinski, M. Effects of visual separation and physical continuities when distributing information across multiple displays. Proc. INTERACT 2003, IOS Press, 252--265.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS
      D.4.9 Systems Programs and Utilities
          Subjects: Window managers

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Graphical user interfaces (GUI); Evaluation/methodology

General Terms:
Experimentation, Human Factors, Management, Measurement

Keywords:
UI logs, automation, multiple monitors, space management, user interaction, window management