PDA

View Full Version : Widescreen HD LCD monitors



Unknown_K
November 28th, 2013, 07:55 PM
What do you guys think of Widescreen LCD monitors?

OfficeMax had a DELL E2414H 1080P 24" LED backlit LCD for $99 shipped (half off) today and I ordered one. I am keeping my 19" 1280x1024 in my room for my main machines and will use this in the lab for some older gaming machines.

As usual I am late to the latest and "greatest".

Chuck(G)
November 28th, 2013, 08:22 PM
Here's what I don't like about 16:9 widescreen monitors. Measure the vertical screen dimension on your old 19" monitor. Compare it with the 24" monitor. It may not make much difference to you, but it doesn't represent much of a readability improvement to me.

I want to see a big 5:4, 3:2 or even 16:10 monitor. If I want to watch TV, I use a TV for that.

Stone
November 29th, 2013, 04:12 AM
Aspect Ratio aside, I think the overall picture quality beats the CRTs hands down.

Mr.Amiga500
November 29th, 2013, 05:02 AM
What do you guys think of Widescreen LCD monitors?

OfficeMax had a DELL E2414H 1080P 24" LED backlit LCD for $99 shipped (half off) today and I ordered one. I am keeping my 19" 1280x1024 in my room for my main machines and will use this in the lab for some older gaming machines.

As usual I am late to the latest and "greatest".

I always know an American is talking when I see the "shipped" price. In Canada, that same thing would probably be $169 plus $48 shipping - even if shipped within Canada. We never get free shipping - so we never talk about the "shipped" price.

I avoided LCD for years (decades) because of the awful jagged scaling and chunky pixels - but when higher density and LED backlighting came out, I finally got a 1080p LCD. It was an improvement over CRT, but the 16:9 ratio didn't leave enough vertical space. Now I'm using a 16:10 LCD and I like it much better - 2880x1800 scaled to 1920x1200 (MacBook Pro). Any monitor I get in the future will have to be 16:10. (and high density)

Chuck(G)
November 29th, 2013, 09:45 AM
As an aside, my wife just got back from the local OfficeMax (she had some copying+binding work) and reported that they've hired extra people for "Black Friday" and have decked out the store with various big arrows pointing to special deals.

She said that there were about 5 customers in the store, including herself.

paul
November 29th, 2013, 10:29 AM
The only vendor selling that monitor in NZ is Dell and it's NZ$349 shipped, and those dollars are one-for-one just as equally hard-earned as they would have been when I lived in the US. But then I don't need to buy one every day :) and our economy is doing fine.

A shop near my apartment was chucking out some 4:3 LCD monitors last week and I scored a Philips 19" in perfect condition. Looks funny after using a widescreen for so long but I will keep it for my unix machines which output analog 1280x1024 with composite or sync on green that the Philips is compatible with.

Unknown_K
November 29th, 2013, 11:44 AM
I was thinking about looking for older 4:3 LCD around here using craigslist since quite a few people are ditching them for widescreens. 1280x1024 are what a lot of older games top out as for max resolution.

Black Friday has lost a bit of the craziness when you can just order the deals online. I have NEVER gone to a store in the middle of the night and in the cold to wait in line for hours just to save a couple bucks IF they still had the item I wanted (maybe 5 stocked in each store).

I refer to shipped price because I am used to Ebay shopping (low auction price with jacked up shipping). I love Newegg for free shipping a lot of the time, but OfficeMax had a better price oddly enough. I did get my 4TB HD from Newegg a few months back, haven't seen a better deal for black Friday either.

Unknown_K
November 29th, 2013, 06:09 PM
Hmm shows it as backordered, so I will see it in 2025? Wasn't backordered when I ordered it.

Chuck(G)
November 29th, 2013, 06:24 PM
Newegg's got it w/free shipping for $109.

Ole Juul
November 29th, 2013, 09:35 PM
I'm also new to the big screen thing. I just got a better monitor for my wife and I got the old (now almost worthless in the marketplace) Acer x223w 23" one. I'm liking it a lot. I can see more at one time. I tend to have everything open all the time so I can see what I'm doing. Right now I have 5 terminals on one desktop because I'm writing a web page (which requires two terminals, one for edit and one for ftp) and doing compiling/upgrading on my wife's computer upstairs is taking up the other three. When I switch to desktop number 3, I have 5 Firefox windows open with each their theme of tabs. The remaining 8 desktops are similarly set up and multiple windows on each, side by side, is definately a matter of clarity. When I switch to the DOS machine, the text is pretty big, but that's just so much more visually relaxing - which that machine is for.

About my sweetie's new screen. I had seen this new 27" monitor at monoprice (http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=1130703&p_id=10489&seq=1&format=2) and was impressed. So, I just got it for her for Christmas. She does a lot of genealogy, so usually has spreadsheets and pdf documents lined up side by side for research purposes. The space is really worthwhile for that kind of thing. In fact I imagine that anybody working with information and using spread sheets will want as big a screen as vision and space will allow. We don't watch a lot of movies (no TV for us), but do use Youtube and similar sometimes. It does look good on a bigger screen, and the extra clarity of this one is great. If anybody is interested, it would probably be a good choice for watching in a bright room or daylight as well. We turned it down to around 10% (3 stops) and it's still brighter than anything else around here. But the bottom line is lining up documents/windows side by side. That rocks!

vwestlife
November 30th, 2013, 09:03 AM
Many of the cheaper widescreen LCD monitors are fixed at 16:9 aspect ratio, and there is no way to get them to show 4:3 video modes (640x480, 1024x768, etc.) at the correct aspect ratio. So unless you like circles looking like stretched-out ovals, they are useless for anything other than modern PCs and operating systems which have native support for widescreen resolutions.

Chuck(G)
November 30th, 2013, 09:34 AM
I view 16:9 displays as being basically TVs without the tuner. 16:10 usually have a bit more capability.

A lot of the work I do involves documents that are very tall and not very wide. A 16:9 monitor is the antithesis of this and many of the larger ones do not permit turning the screen 90 degrees.

Unknown_K
December 2nd, 2013, 01:52 PM
My 19" Samsung 1280x1024 allows for rotating the screen, think I did that once in a couple years. Speaking of tall displays I will want to get one of those Radius Full page mono displays for my 68k macs.

Anyway OfficeMax shows the DELL monitor as shipped or partially shipped, they must have sent me a broken one in multiple boxes shipped at different times ;)

Chuck(G)
December 2nd, 2013, 03:12 PM
Yeah, a couple of my 5:4 monitors can be rotated, but none of my widescreens can (AFAIK). I can rotate the image using randr, but the stand won't rotate. Maybe I can do something with a screwdriver...

Unknown_K
December 2nd, 2013, 03:36 PM
Is the mounting in back some kind of standard where you can just connect it to a swinging arm stand? You would need one hell of a tall stand to have enough clearance to rotate a 24" LCD but it would probably be a hell of a page view.

Plasma
December 2nd, 2013, 03:48 PM
A lot of Dell LCDs rotate. The stand telescopes so you can have it at a normal height for widescreen or "tall screen".

NeXT
December 2nd, 2013, 04:19 PM
Is the mounting in back some kind of standard where you can just connect it to a swinging arm stand? You would need one hell of a tall stand to have enough clearance to rotate a 24" LCD but it would probably be a hell of a page view.

Most if not all LCD mounting hardware conforms to a VESA spec so you're almost assured your LCD will bolt on.

njroadfan
December 2nd, 2013, 04:46 PM
Yeah, a couple of my 5:4 monitors can be rotated, but none of my widescreens can (AFAIK). I can rotate the image using randr, but the stand won't rotate. Maybe I can do something with a screwdriver...

My 24" HP LP2475w can rotate, but a 10:16 display is pretty darned tall.

vwestlife
December 2nd, 2013, 07:54 PM
My 24" HP LP2475w can rotate, but a 10:16 display is pretty darned tall.

It would be perfect for watching those tall and skinny videos that people take with their iPhones!

Ole Juul
December 2nd, 2013, 09:29 PM
It would be perfect for watching those tall and skinny videos that people take with their iPhones!

Also very good for arborists, as well as certain kinds of shopping, such as when buying a ladder or flagpole.

Unknown_K
December 4th, 2013, 06:08 PM
It came in today, not bad for $100. LED backlight is decent.

Chuck(G)
December 4th, 2013, 07:21 PM
Also very good for arborists, as well as certain kinds of shopping, such as when buying a ladder or flagpole.

In my case, it's orchestra scores, with one staff per part. My worksheet is a virtual 24" high by 11" wide. I would like not to have to do too much vertical scrolling.

EverythingIBM
December 21st, 2013, 09:36 PM
16:9 is horrid because I like having more vertical pixels than horizontal. Nothing beats the 1600x1200 full screen 20" IBM LCDs.
I'm with Chuck, there's no reason to integrate a TV in a computer.

PS: I'm a bit shocked that folks here are saying LCDs are better than CRTs. Never. CRTs will always outperform liquid crystals with movement.

Unknown_K
December 21st, 2013, 11:21 PM
LCDs are decent for most things these days, use less energy, take up less space, and won't give me a hernia moving them around. Outside of laptop screens I only have 3 LCD panels in the house and only one is widescreen compare that to a dozen or so CRT monitors for my vintage systems.

EverythingIBM
December 22nd, 2013, 01:58 PM
LCDs are decent for most things these days, use less energy, take up less space, and won't give me a hernia moving them around. Outside of laptop screens I only have 3 LCD panels in the house and only one is widescreen compare that to a dozen or so CRT monitors for my vintage systems.

Oh yeah, I agree, LCDs are fine for newer computers (as modern GUIs don't have fast moving objects, everything has a set delay for transitions, and you never change resolutions).

But older computers definitely require a proper CRT. A lot of DOS games and interface behaviours move extremely fast-- and I like that. I don't have to wait for something to "move".

Does anyone here have the 16:9 Sony GDM-FW900? That's a rather funky CRT.

Unknown_K
December 22nd, 2013, 02:15 PM
I wanted one of those Sony 24"? monitors real bad until I seen one up close and found out how much space they need and how much they weight. You need a solid wood desk for one of those with a huge area behind it for overhang.

I have an old AVID monitor in the garage that syncs to Amiga sync rates perfectly but I just don't have the space to set up a 20" CRT that weights a ton next to the other gear.

Chuck(G)
December 27th, 2013, 12:49 PM
Here's something that I've wondered about--and I hope that someone here has knowledge of this.

When I view some TV programs, I see that they oven have a mosaic of large LCD screens to display each panel in the mosaic. I see that those screens, if not square are pretty close to square.

Who sells these and what are they called (in TV production terms)?

paul
December 27th, 2013, 01:53 PM
... CRTs will always outperform liquid crystals with movement.
Well, with the clear exception of the IBM 5151 monochrome displays :)
And there are other examples of early specialty CRTs with a high persistence phosphor designed to hide a slow refresh and/or interlacing.

Other than the need to keep them for matching hardware such as for the early IBM PCs with MDA, CGA and EGA, I'm glad to be be rid of heavy and somewhat hazardous CRTs wherever possible.

Other reasons I feel little need to keep the old iron is that in some cases the CRT displays were manufactured at a much lower level of quality than the associated computer, and/or did not match the styling. The IBM 5153 (CGA) by Tatung is one example of the prior. Generally the Sony monitors sold with UNIX machines were of very high quality with a weight to match, but for example the Silicon Graphics-branded monitors where one of few with matching styling.

deathshadow
January 26th, 2014, 06:10 PM
16:9 is horrid because I like having more vertical pixels than horizontal. Nothing beats the 1600x1200 full screen 20" IBM LCDs.
Except perhaps a 27" 2560x1440 IPS? ... or two 24" 1920x1200 on each side of a 27" 2560x1440?


PS: I'm a bit shocked that folks here are saying LCDs are better than CRTs. Never. CRTs will always outperform liquid crystals with movement.

I used to think like that... seven years ago.

CRT's have a decay time just like LCD's do... Hell, CRT's are by definition PoV (persistence of vision) devices relying on phosphor decay and the low response of the eye; which means flicker, something LCD's will never do. All those nutters who used to push 85hz, 120hz or more because they couldn't stand the 'flicker'? No such problem with LCD's.

In terms of movement, it's all about the ms rating of the LCD. Even a cheap LCD has 6 to 8ms decay, which translates to what, 166 fps theoretical throughput on what's typically a 60 fps signal? If that REALLY bothers you, get a 2ms one; though the color depth isn't as good on them. "Ghosting" is a non-issue on a GOOD LCD.

I'd stack my 20" IBM CRT (It's in the garage) against a cheap 21" LCD any day... my 27" Potalion IPS blows both so far out of the water you'd think they were hit with a nuke tipped torpedo.

... and I've got this nice pair of 1280x1024 17" Viewsonics that could give most CRT's a run for their money on color repro too. Was running those for a long time in portrait on each side of a 24".

Most of the 'problem' with LCD's is the use of software not designed for them -- non-native resolutions are garbage until you get into the REALLY high resolution / high dot count displays. You run some old 1024x768 game on them it's going to look like crap; OH WELL.

Though I've been pleased with the number of older games getting updates for native resolutions and aspect correction; see newDark and DDFIX for the old Dark Engine games (Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2).

Stone
January 26th, 2014, 06:38 PM
But older computers definitely require a proper CRT. A lot of DOS games and interface behaviours move extremely fast-- and I like that. I don't have to wait for something to "move".I dunno about that. I play Tristan Pinball and several others (Epic Pinball, and a couple of Silverball editions) (I guess you could say I'm a pinball freak) and as you know those balls shoot around the table at near lightning speeds sometimes and there's never any waiting, lag or other types of distortion on my LCD screen. Of course I'm using DOSBox on a contempory computer with the LCD. I've never tried an LCD on my XT but then I don't use it for games, either. I use one of my original NEC Multisyncs on that as I do on all my vintage machines.

SpidersWeb
January 26th, 2014, 07:20 PM
In my case, it's orchestra scores, with one staff per part. My worksheet is a virtual 24" high by 11" wide. I would like not to have to do too much vertical scrolling.

You can buy screens that rotate. My co-worker runs 1080x1920.
I just run 1920x1200 on a 24" Dell, and have a second LCD off to the side so I can check my emails by just glaring left. Works well for me (coder).

As for CRT vs LCD - modern LCD has come a long way. I've never had an issue with motion - except on old laptops. The only thing I admire about my old Dell 19" CRT - is the intense colours right next to pitch black - but even then my new LED backlight TV is pretty damn close!

deathshadow
January 26th, 2014, 07:49 PM
In my case, it's orchestra scores, with one staff per part. My worksheet is a virtual 24" high by 11" wide. I would like not to have to do too much vertical scrolling.

So... smaller than my display's 1440 pixel height at 13" :D -- Sonar kicks ass on it, especially once I detach the controls to their own windows and move them to other displays.

They're getting "cheap" too... Ebay search for "ips 2560 pixel perfect", $320 to $400. Quite reasonable given you'd have paid that five years ago for a decent 24" 1920x1200.

Of course, it's not like you can't just get a 1920x1080 and a monitor stand -- VESA screw mounts are square.