john c. dvorak
Lost Productivity Lament
T
here is some unwritten law or concept that tells us that computers have contributed to worker and individual productivity. The concept is even embedded in various productivity calculations whereby just getting a faster machine means you have higher productivity. I question this, as I have been with the desktop computer scene and have had a personal computer—usually the hottest one around—since 1976. My productivity as a columnist is obviously improved by word processing, but the difference between a word processor in 1980 and a word processor in 2009 insofar as my personal productivity is concerned shows no difference. It peaked right away. And how many people are writers where they can show any productivity at all? The way I see it, only writers, accountants using spreadsheets, and graphic artists using Photoshop can show any real productivity gains of any consequence insofar as the desktop computer is concerned.
42 PC MAGAZINE DIGITAL EDITION NOVEMBER 2009
And, yes, the microprocessors have aided machinists and embroiderers, and that does affect productivity. But can we balance all these productivity gains with the downside of computers? Why isn’t that factored into the equation? Where Did My Two Hours Go? From the perspective of the desktop computer user, the opportunity for these machines to steal time is phenomenal. Ever go into a chat room? They are kind of interesting and compelling until you realize that you are communicating in one of the slowest and most demanding mediums ever. The relative baud rate is nil and time is squandered. These chat rooms have almost all evolved into social networking quagmires. My daughter, who until recently eschewed Facebook, for example, used to spend her spare time making art. She adopted Facebook as a conduit for keeping up with friends, whom she sees all the time anyway, and now her time is simply wasted writing vapid posts. This is just the tip of the time-wasting
