Time saved by Touchscreen Laptop

The evolving technology has brought touch screen laptops to the market, but they are in general more expensive than the non-touch-screen laptops. Touch screen saves time but is more expensive. The amount you would save by not buying a touch screen laptop is clear but the time saved by buying a touchscreen laptop is rather obscure.

The calculations that are about to follow will involve a prudent estimate, meant to identify the least possible time saved. The calculations are also a generalisation not backed by research. Let's assume you save one second per click by using the touchscreen interface rather than the mouse. Let's also assume you use the laptop for an hour a day making approximately 500 clicks per day. This means you would save 500 seconds per day. This implies that  you would save 3500 seconds a week, which is 58 minutes or about 1 hour a week. You would then save 4 hours a month and 36 hours a year. If you use your laptop for two hours a day all the above estimates doubles and so you would end up saving  2 hours a week, 8 hours a month and 72 hours a year.


If you think saving 72 hours a year is significant then you should shell out the extra money to buy a touch screen laptop. If however you value money over time, then do not buy a touchscreen laptop. With 72 hours of extra time on your hands you can watch 2 more movies a month and if anybody ever comes up to you and asks you how you have so much time, you can reply saying "I've got touchscreen bro".

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nudge to Prevent Food Wastage

Image
I found this board in a cafeteria at the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore.  The sign board mentions the wastage of food in weight (Kilograms) of the previous day and the number of people who could have been fed with that amount of food.  Although breakfast at the cafeteria is a limited serving, a considerable proportion of the people can't finish their meal. To know if the sign board indeed helps reduce wastage, there are several aspects that we need to consider. Firstly, the sign board can, as hoped, make people actively ask for the quantity of food that they think they can finish. This is troublesome for people who are new to the cafeteria. Regular customers, however,  would know exactly how much they would eat and would have no qualms in asking for a smaller quantity of food. Secondly, the sign board could also work as an incentive for people to try harder to finish all the food on their plate. Economists are probably the only ones wh...
Read more

Should taller people pay a higher tax?

A cafe in Melbourne charges men an 18% higher rate than women, for the same food. The goal of this is to raise awareness about the gender earnings gap. The proceeds from the premiums are donated to various charities supporting women's causes. Higher prices for men can be seen as a "Man Tax". Would LOVE everyones thoughts on this. My friends cafe in #Brunswick , Handsom Her - is for women by women AND an has a 18% gender tax! pic.twitter.com/tVSX3PO4q8 — Paige Cardona 🏳️‍🌈 (@paigecardona) August 3, 2017 Studies find that a gender earnings gap does exist . But there are several other gaps.  Attractive  people earn a higher income. This is often referred to as "The Beauty Premium." Taller people are found to earn a higher income than shorter people. One study  proposes to include a height tax. Based on a data analysis of the existing height earnings gap, they propose that a tall person earning $50,000 should pay $4,500 more in tax than a short perso...
Read more