17 vs 19 inches

[coolpurplefan]

If you've moved from 17 to 19 inches, do you find it was a good choice? I mean, at higher resolutions, you'd think the larger screen would show things more pixelated.

What's your take on the "look and feel" of different screen resolutions on different sized screens?

 

[JBT]

I think they look just fine. For a lot of computer illiterates at my work they want the 19"ers to be set to 800x600... lol.

 

[BassBomb]

Originally posted by: JBT
I think they look just fine. For a lot of computer illiterates at my work they want the 19"ers to be set to 800x600... lol.

Shudders at the scaling...


I never had 17" 1280x1024 but i did for 19" and when i went to my NEC, i loved the change. I prefer it small for work

i only dislike it for games i bring the monitor real close and my eyes are shot

 

[Auric]

I personally use a 17" and recently bought a 19" for my mum. I briefly considered giving her my 17" and getting a newer one for myself but knew the text would either be too small or too blurry compared to the 17" CRT @ her preferred less-than-max res.

Anyway, she is happy with the 19" and I found it refreshing and now wouldn't mind one myself

Sure, it ain't quite as detailed but it's not o'er the top. Since the font and DPI options are wanting in Windows right up to XP, I wonder how the suppos-ed improvements in Vista are?

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: JBT
I think they look just fine. For a lot of computer illiterates at my work they want the 19"ers to be set to 800x600... lol.

Most computer illiterate people tend to do that...they don't understand the advantage of higher resolutions in terms of sharpness and desktop real estate. Not to mention the fact that LCD actually can't really change resolutions, just strecth and scale smaller ones.

This woman at my work just got a Dell 2407WFP. It's the best monitor I've physically seen in my life. And yet she runs it at 1024x768!! :Q :Q :Q It looks awful, specially because you have a 4:3 resolution streched over 16:10. What a waste.

 

[liquid51]

Here's a question along the same lines: When reading monitor comparisons, you usually see a comparison of a bunch of monitors in the same class. But I've seen no comparison or thread discussing, say, 24" vs 37". I'm still in the air over the benq 24 or the westinghouse 37. Am I going to be kicking myself over the 120 lost pixels vertically if I go with the westy? And what about dot pitch? The difference between like resolutions on a 17 vs a 19 are negligible, but what about 24 vs 37? I believe it's almost twice the dot pitch. Any input?

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: Auric
Since the font and DPI options are wanting in Windows right up to XP, I wonder how the suppos-ed improvements in Vista are?

I suppose they could be called improvements, strictly speaking, but I really dislike the way the DPI options are implemented. If you increase the DPI, certain software like Visual Studio gets upscaled, which looks *horrible*. For software that supports the new DPI stuff, the upscaling won't happen, and the stretchable shell icons are great. Overall, the implementation seems only half done. Perhaps there is no perfect solution?

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: Noema

This woman at my work just got a Dell 2407WFP. It's the best monitor I've physically seen in my life. And yet she runs it at 1024x768!! :Q :Q :Q It looks awful, specially because you have a 4:3 resolution streched over 16:10. What a waste.

Clearly, it's a cry for help. She needs an intervention.

Originally posted by: liquid51
Here's a question along the same lines... snip what about 24 vs 37? I believe it's almost twice the dot pitch. Any input?

Welp, they are suited to general PC use and video playback respectively so I'd go with whichever is the primary useage. Aw heck, just get both. Actually, the 37 itself is barely big enough so at least go for a 40-42.

 

[liquid51]

Originally posted by: Auric
Welp, they are suited to general PC use and video playback respectively so I'd go with whichever is the primary useage. Aw heck, just get both. Actually, the 37 itself is barely big enough so at least go for a 40-42.

Because I'm just filthy rich anyway, my question wasn't about which I should buy. No, it's about which one I should throw into the garbage because with all this money lying around, I just don't have room for both.

Ok, the $ from returning two 7900GTOs and OT for the last few months is how I'm going to be purchasing the monitor, video card, and (the reason it's all happening in the first place) my wife's new ring . I just know what I want and end up saving forever untill I can afford it. And personally, 37" is pushing "too big" for a monitor. Unfortunately, the office in my mansion wouldn't provide enough room to mount a 42" monitor with enough room for me to not have to crane my neck just to read this post .

 

[SonicIce]

My friends parents use thier widescreen 1440x900 LCD at 800x600....

 

[Frintin]

Looking at a 19" LCD is absolutely the greatest compared to a 17" anything or even a 19" crt IMHO! I immediately fell in love with the bigger screen even if it was in 1280X1024!

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Noema

This woman at my work just got a Dell 2407WFP. It's the best monitor I've physically seen in my life. And yet she runs it at 1024x768!! :Q :Q :Q It looks awful, specially because you have a 4:3 resolution streched over 16:10. What a waste.

Good god :Q
Horrifying.

That being said, while i used to be opposed to the idea of buying a bigger LCD w/ the same resolution as a smaller one (19" vs. 17", 22" vs. 20"), i am finding that bigger pixels don't bother me at all, since i sit farther away from the desk more comfortably then, & it mean less eyestrain & DPI/font size tweaking.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Noema

This woman at my work just got a Dell 2407WFP. It's the best monitor I've physically seen in my life. And yet she runs it at 1024x768!! :Q :Q :Q It looks awful, specially because you have a 4:3 resolution streched over 16:10. What a waste.

Good god :Q
Horrifying.

That being said, while i used to be opposed to the idea of buying a bigger LCD w/ the same resolution as a smaller one (19" vs. 17", 22" vs. 20"), i am finding that bigger pixels don't bother me at all, since i sit farther away from the desk more comfortably then, & it mean less eyestrain & DPI/font size tweaking.

Thats kind of my opinion as well. I was annoyed that 22" 1680x1050 monitors started coming out right after I bought my 20". It was sometimes kind of hard to read, perhaps I sit to far away...perhaps my eyesight is getting worse. Regardless, a larger monitor with the same resolution was exactly what I was looking for.

Plus I get a bigger screen for games without having to buy a graphics card a class higher.

 

[craftech]

Has someone overlooked the obvious when it comes to the people at work using lower screen resolutions. They aren't there to play computer games. Right now I have my screen resolution set to 800 x 600 for one simple reason. Everything is simpler to read and I can get my work done...................when I stop posting on forums.

John

 

[imported_Imp]

Originally posted by: Noema

This woman at my work just got a Dell 2407WFP. It's the best monitor I've physically seen in my life. And yet she runs it at 1024x768!! :Q :Q :Q It looks awful, specially because you have a 4:3 resolution streched over 16:10. What a waste.

A fine waste of company funds. Probably could have been better off with a 19". Ughh... wonder if she's blind... oh wait, she probably is; my old employer use to get hueg monitors, but only for visionally impaired.

 

[Matt2]

I hate huge dot pitches!

I can't stand 19" or 22" LCDs. I know you guys are infatuated with 22" screens, but the dot pitch is just horrendous IMO. Not to mention the panel that comes with 22" screens is the worst in terms of image quality.

If they would start making S-PVA or S-IPS 22" monitors, then I might bite. But as long as TNs rule the 22" arena, I'll be steering clear.