I get a kick out of these manufacturers who advertise new 22" monitors when in reality the default viewable screen is often less than what you get on most conventional 21" monitors.
Let's use the Mitsubishi 2040u as an example. Mitsubishi advertises it as a 22" (20" viewable) monitor. I believe them, it is measured diagonally across the face of the entire CRT. However the default viewable area is 393mm x 295mm according to their datasheet. Doing the math that comes out to 19.34" viewable, not 20" viewable. 20" viewable is only if you use the front controls to stretch the image all the way out to the bezel which is approximately 406mm x 305mm. The math says this is 19.99", close enough to 20" in my book and the same as almost every 21" monitor on the market today.
Why do some manufacturers default the viewable area so small? It is a known fact that focus and convergence will fall off in the corners and around the edges of the display. By defaulting to a small viewable size some of these artifacts are hidden in the black boarder. I guess they are betting that most people will not use the controls to stretch the image out to full size. When I evaluate monitors side by side the first thing I do is set the viewable size the same on both in order to make certain I'm comparing apples to apples. After all if I'm going to spend money on a large screen monitor I want to use all the real-estate I can.
So keep in mind that these monitors are capable of 20" viewable screen just like the conventional 21" monitors if you stretch the image out to the edge of the bezel. However in doing so you may notice the focus / convergence may start to fall off in the corners.
Good Luck
Jim Witkowski
Chief Hardware Engineer
Cornerstone / Monitorsdirect.com
Facebook
Twitter