the problem with all these cheap/easy/portable solutions is that the monitor and keyboard are at the same height. this works when you're sitting but when you're standing you really need the keyboard to be lower (at around elbow height) and the monitor at face-level. This way you're not looking down (bad for your neck) or lifting your arms the whole time.
Perhaps I'm confused, but shouldn't the distance between your elbows and eyes be roughly the same regardless of whether your sitting or standing? If not, then what's the best non-(cheap/easy/portable) solution that addresses the issue?
It should be the same, but it's easier to tweak ergonomics for a non-portable set-up.
I can't change the height of the desk, so I set the keyboard on the desk and adjust my chair so the keyboard is at the right height. Then I put books under the monitor until it's at the right height. Like so: http://abughrai.be/pics/desk4/DSC_8568.JPG
For portability, there's not much you can do. Laptops are great, but they have trade-offs. Whenever a decent head-mounted display comes out, it will drastically improve the ergonomics of portable computing.
I did some research online and came to the same conclusion. I really like my $22 solution that addresses that. I've been using it for a month now and it's phenomenal. http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=4134307
I'm not a fan of laptop on a flat surface... because do you put it on the right surface for your arms? Or your eyes? Something is losing out.
I concur - the different levels (as well as the option of sitting) make for a very comfortable setup.
FYI, my relatively cheap solution was to get an ikea fredrick "computer workstation" off craigslist. The item is discontinued, but they're still floating around, sometimes in the as-is section of an ikea.
many people don't bother to look up the canonical name for their desk when posting a listing so they're a little tricky to find.
Actually, gazing downward has been shown to reduce headaches, eye strain, blur, and mental fatigue. You aren't supposed to tilt your neck to look down, though, you are supposed to angle your eyes downward to get the less strain benefit. Monitor at eye height just seems to be a bunch of companies wanting to sell prop up accessories and more complex desks.
So what? The guy owns a Mac, therefore he's bathing in money?
This kind of prejudice is ridiculous. He bought a Mac ergo he has boatloads of money and can throw some more without a thought?
I'm not one of the Apple Tax conspirationists: I find Macs fair priced for their value (hardware, software and daily ROI), but I recognize they are not cheap (in any sense). So I put my money where my mouth is, saved some cash, and bought a MacBook Pro stuffed with 4GB RAM and a 256GB SSD a few years ago. That was IMO some well-spent money, but I am not able put even a tenth of what it cost me on the table right now.
Even then, just because you have money doesn't mean you need not think about how to spend it (if anything that might be the biggest contribution as to why one "has money": because it's spent thoughtfully, else you just burn what you earn). Especially if it's to put some serious money on something akin to an experiment (and it's not like he thought about it every single day during three years).
Oh come on - the macbook air is no four hundred dollar laptop.
> Even then, just because you have money doesn't mean you need not think about how to spend it
It didn't say that. I said it makes no sense no ponder over something for years. Better to earn money where he's good at earning money, and get the extra three years utilisation and enjoyment from what he wants to buy.
The cheap way to solve this is to prop the monitors up on something. At my old office we used sturdy paper cups flipped upside-down under the monitor stand (3 per monitor).
I've read this a couple of times, and I'm still not understanding it. How does the area of your desk surface (6'x2') relate to me or the parent post using items (paper cups, reams of paper) to elevate our monitors?
I'm presently in the process of renovating my office, and for months I was adamant about not having a desk at all.
I've finally compromised with a dual approach that I think will be workable (and still prevent me from spending 16-20 hours a day sitting in front of my desk).
The jury is still out on how sustainable it'll be, but here's what I've come up with:
A Steelcase Airtouch Table‡1 (which I think is what they use at Fogcreek, but if not, it seems similar) for standing some period of the day.
A ridiculous setup for sitting which involves mounting a Manfrotto Magic Arm‡2, and a Tether Table base‡3 to the chrome frame of my LeCorbusier lounge‡4.
I figure I can stand for a bit, then sit in the lounge, etc.
Sorry, I can't tell whether you are trying to parody the whole "check out my awesome workspace"-thing or whether you are actually serious?
In case you are serious (please excuse the profanity): Holy Sh* *!
I'm "serious" in the sense that this is indeed what I'm planning to do (I haven't gotten the Airtouch table yet as I've only recently come back around to the idea of having a desk at all, but I already have the lounge chair/arm mount combo thing).
I recognize that it's kind of pretentious (although my previous plan was to make my office into a 1940's detective office, so I'm no stranger to pretension).
It's really really comfortable. Maybe an 8 or 9 (I suppose I'd reserve a 10 for "the womb").
I've always had a hard time figuring out what to do with my arms though, as I either hang them down by my side, or sort of fold them on my lap, so for years, the chair has mostly been "occasional seating".
With the arm mount though, I end up having a really comfortable typing position.
The double dagger shouldn't appear prior to the dagger or asterisk, inserting unusual Unicode is confusing and detracts from this comment's readability. I appreciate the desire for flare, but this just looks daft appearing on a comment thread (and forces me to involuntarily think "ponce!" at each occurrence of the symbol :).
Placed the laptop at about eye level then used a couple of art books to prop up the keyboard and trackball at the right height. At the end of the experiment it went back in the garden functioning as an accessory to the barbeque grill. :)
Being stationary in either a sitting or standing position is bad. There are ways in which sitting is uniquely bad, but there are also ways in which standing is uniquely bad. Both are bad. The answer is: you need to walk around or in some other way incur gross motor exercise regularly, on the order of twice an hour or so.
This has been one of 'tzs beats on HN for the past year; he's written some pretty detailed comments, try searching at the bottom of this page for [standing by:tzs].
Just Google for [atherosclerosis standing]. This is well-studied, not because of ergonomics but because of correlations between heart disease and the occupations of people likely to develop heart disease.
"The study found that women who sit for more than six hours a day were about 40 percent more likely to die during the study than women who sat fewer than three hours per day."
I think this is why people who pay attention this sort of stuff want sit/stand desks, like Geek Desks, or something like the OP, who I think wants to be able to stand sometimes and sit sometimes.
This comes up a lot. It seems like a worst-of-both-worlds solution. Prolonged sitting has been shown to disrupt fat metabolism. Prolonged standing is associated with a ninefold increase in carotid atherosclerosis. Even if sitting half the time leaves me with only a doubled exposure to atherosclerosis: that's not a win!
I've got a timer on my iPhone, two different spots in the office to sit (my desk and one of the couches in the lobby), and no weird gadgets; the Cornell page seems to suggest that this is pretty optional, and I dont' have to pronounce any weird Ikea furniture names to describe it. :)
Yup, this seems to be the best solution, and surprisingly makes the laptop the best workstation. You get to change your workspace every 30 minutes to an hour with ease. And virtual desktops + remoting into more powerful computers mitigates the problems with a laptop.
I'm part of a small cluster of people here who don't like big monitors, because it makes working on the laptop screen harder when I don't have it (I get acclimated). Mobility is much more valuable to me than screen real estate.
I'm not sure you can interpolate between the two situations.
One of the potential reasons behind both of these is that being sedentary in any position is essentially bad (in one way or another - a PhD out of Australia whose name escapes me has done the research here).
The body was built to move, giving extra options seems like a win and puts less stress on any one system (esp. musculo-skeletal).
You have to ask yourself, what is the process by which prolonged standing causes or exacerbates atherosclerosis, then try to reason through how much standing you'd need to do to increase your risk significantly. I find stuff like this to be un-encouraging:
A recent study reports a reduction of plasma volume by 500-550ml or about 16% after only 15 minutes of quiet standing. The reduction in plasma volume in turn triggers several changes that can be grouped into hemodynamic and humoral effects, including but not limited to increased hemoconcentration, increased release of catecholamines, changes in pulse pressure, and increased heart rate. For example, one recent study measured a significant increase in heart rate and catecholamines after 10 minutes of standing for men with CVD and also for healthy referents. (em mine)
Did my browser not load part of the CSS, or is this site really incredibly hard on the eyes? Light grey text on a pure white background isn't readable. I tried highlighting the text to read it, but it highlighted at a neon pink hue.
Cute to quote a troll comment. However, you can see it's a MacBook Air - those start at $1000, as it appears to be an 11-inch model. Moreover, the article never mentioned being unable to afford; he mentions lack of space.
