Are "average" computer users comfortable with LCD native resolutions?

[polypterus]

So John Q. Computer-user always preferred 800x600 or 1028x764 on their CRT's, but now that LCD's are becoming more mainstream what are they doing? Do they scale them down or do they use the native resolutions? I know I would always bump up the resolution on other people's CRT's when I'd use them and then they'd always complain that it's "too small." So if John Q. Computer-user buys a shiny new Dell with a 19" LCD how do they deal?

In other words, if a non-enthusiast friend asks if he should get an LCD what do you say? I don't have an LCD and have never seem them run at non-native resolutions so I don't know how bad it looks, but do average users not mind a 19" LCD scaled down to 1028 or do they like the higher native res or what?

 

[Jaihahih]

Originally posted by: FrizQuadrata
So John Q. Computer-user always preferred 800x600 or 1028x764 on their CRT's, but now that LCD's are becoming more mainstream what are they doing? Do they scale them down or do they use the native resolutions? I know I would always bump up the resolution on other people's CRT's when I'd use them and then they'd always complain that it's "too small." So if John Q. Computer-user buys a shiny new Dell with a 19" LCD how do they deal?

In other words, if a non-enthusiast friend asks if he should get an LCD what do you say? I don't have an LCD and have never seem them run at non-native resolutions so I don't know how bad it looks, but do average users not mind a 19" LCD scaled down to 1028 or do they like the higher native res or what?

I don't mind my 17 inch scaled down to 1024/768. Not noticable for me at least.

 

[Dkcode]

I dont think 19" lcds are bad at 1280 x 1024, due to the bigger dot pitch text is much more readable. I use a 17" lcd running its native 1280 x 1024 and when reading text it sometimes hurts my eyes but i would never scale down. I actually like the higher res, things have much more clarity. A casual gone enthusiast friend of mind who used to use a 17" panel complained about the native res been too small for him and he would scale to 1024 x 768, i guess it just depends on the users eyes.
I have non enthusiast friends, and in the past when setting up there machines ive set there 17" panels to the native res and never recived any complaints. I think once people get used to the higher resolution, going back to 1024 or even 800 x 600, you start to notice the shobbyness.

 

[dug777]

ALMOST EVERY casual computer user's home i have been in has either a CRT running at 60hz or a LCD that is capable of far higher resolution running at 1024 (usually capable of 1280). I always reset them, and in the former case they invariably declare they can't notice the difference between 85 and 60Hz, in the latter they ask me why everything is so tiny and tell me to set it back

So i give up, fvck'em all

 

[VIAN]

I don't think they would mind. I've seen many non-enthusiast people working on non-native and they don't seem to mind. 19" actually use a big resolution for it's size so it might not be that bad.

 

[Conky]

I usually set clients monitors to the native resolution and if they complain about the text being too small I bump up the text size instead of messing with the resolution.

I have really good vision but I prefer large text for ease of viewing myself. The only problem then is that some lame webpages don't take into account that some people use larger text and then the text displays incorrectly.

 

[lexmark]

how do you increase text size in windows?

 

[Sc4freak]

I think you need to set the DPI in the display settings.

 

[Falloutboy]

isn't vista supposed to finally give us a resolution independent os? if so I will be so happy

 

[RobsTV]

Originally posted by: dug777
ALMOST EVERY casual computer user's home i have been in has either a CRT running at 60hz or a LCD that is capable of far higher resolution running at 1024 (usually capable of 1280). I always reset them, and in the former case they invariably declare they can't notice the difference between 85 and 60Hz, in the latter they ask me why everything is so tiny and tell me to set it back

So i give up, fvck'em all

Exact same results that I see with customers, but in commercial use, not home use.
Recently delivered and setup 7 LCD's in an office, and after I set LCD to native, they complain about how it is too tiny compared to the CRT's they used to have. So I make it look bad by adjusting resolution down, and they like it better. Nasty, but what are you going to do? Tried the font game, but even that was not good enough, as it does suck with LCD's.

 

[polypterus]

Originally posted by: RobsTV

Originally posted by: dug777
ALMOST EVERY casual computer user's home i have been in has either a CRT running at 60hz or a LCD that is capable of far higher resolution running at 1024 (usually capable of 1280). I always reset them, and in the former case they invariably declare they can't notice the difference between 85 and 60Hz, in the latter they ask me why everything is so tiny and tell me to set it back

So i give up, fvck'em all

Exact same results that I see with customers, but in commercial use, not home use.
Recently delivered and setup 7 LCD's in an office, and after I set LCD to native, they complain about how it is too tiny compared to the CRT's they used to have. So I make it look bad by adjusting resolution down, and they like it better. Nasty, but what are you going to do? Tried the font game, but even that was not good enough, as it does suck with LCD's.

Interesting, so they don't complain about the quality of a scaled down image? I'm just wondering how bad it looks, everything I've read says LCD are only good in their native res. What about a 19" LCD with a 5:4 (1280x1024) screen, the lower resolutions are of course 4:3, do they notice the distorted image? I guess most people don't notice 1280x1024 on a 4:3 CRT, so probably not.

 

[RobsTV]

Yes, they complain about how bad it looks scaled down, but to them they have a choice of two evils, scaled down crap or tiny text that is screwed up with many apps if you counter it by playing with fonts. They all have always choosen to go with scaled down. For the past year, I always warn them ahead of time of what will happen when I deliver. Explain that for best use, you must have it at native, which may make text smaller than they are used to. Delivery time comes, they see what I mean, and I adjust to suit there needs. I talk them into using native for a while to see if they get used to it (adjust DPI and fonts to help), but within a week I am back to adjust resolution lower. Sucks, but is part of business.

If I could find good quality 17" or 19" LCD's with 1024x768 native resolutions, they would all be much happier. Most of the time I end up getting the Rosewill (actually pretty decent) 1280 x 1024 native. Many of the clients were used to 17" CRT's displaying 800x600.

I too fall under the same problem, except I would live with native.
With my 21" CRT, it is normally set at 1280 x 1024.
So when I choose laptop LCD screen, I choose 17" with 1440x900 resolution.
Very good choice for me.

 

[duragezic]

Originally posted by: dug777
ALMOST EVERY casual computer user's home i have been in has either a CRT running at 60hz or a LCD that is capable of far higher resolution running at 1024 (usually capable of 1280). I always reset them, and in the former case they invariably declare they can't notice the difference between 85 and 60Hz, in the latter they ask me why everything is so tiny and tell me to set it back

So i give up, fvck'em all

QFT / FTW!!

CRTs at 60hz are nasty. And a night and day difference between 85hz (I could maybe see not noticing a 10 Hz difference, but 60 is just plain bad)

 

[kpb]

Originally posted by: RobsTV
Many of the clients were used to 17" CRT's displaying 800x600.

I think this is really the root of the issue. Far to many people are "used to" working at 800x600 because thats windows defaulted to even on thier 17 or 19 inch monitor and they didn't know how to change it or even that they could.

 

[rstrohkirch]

The most I can persuade 95% of our 250 onsite users to do is 1152x864, some even refuse that and stick to 10x7.

 

[xtknight]

I gave my mom my old LCD, and ran it at 1024x768. She said things were blurry compared to her CRT. So I tweaked with the sharpness just a bit, then she loved it.

 

[Bateluer]

I run at the highest resolution allowed by the monitor. My last CRT, a 19in, I ran at 1600x1200@80Hz. Having a lot of desktop space is great.

 

[Rockhound1]

Originally posted by: Dkcode
I dont think 19" lcds are bad at 1280 x 1024, due to the bigger dot pitch text is much more readable. I use a 17" lcd running its native 1280 x 1024 and when reading text it sometimes hurts my eyes but i would never scale down. I actually like the higher res, things have much more clarity. A casual gone enthusiast friend of mind who used to use a 17" panel complained about the native res been too small for him and he would scale to 1024 x 768, i guess it just depends on the users eyes.
I have non enthusiast friends, and in the past when setting up there machines ive set there 17" panels to the native res and never recived any complaints. I think once people get used to the higher resolution, going back to 1024 or even 800 x 600, you start to notice the shobbyness.

I run my 19" LCD at 1280 x 1024. I don't have any issues with this resolution. My experience agrees with Dkcode's assessment.

 

[JBT]

At my last job like 95% of the people there wanted their res to be set to 1024x768 on a 19" LCD. There were some that even wanted 800x600.

Because of this our base image we used to roll out PC's or re-image dead ones was 1024x768.

Even most of the laptop users who had UXGA screens. (1600x1200) would cry if it wasn't set to 1024x768... It was sad there was so much money wasted on those users to give them UXGA screens...

 

[secretanchitman]

at my school, some classrooms have tablet pcs, and their resolutions are ALWAYS set to 1024x768. its blurry like no other. so i always set mine at the max, 1440x900. when people see mine, they always ask "why is yours so small", but the knowledgeable ones will say, "wow it looks much cleaner, how do you do that?"

some people are just...ugh.

and why arent laptop resolutions found on desktop monitors? sorry for the side question.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
and why arent laptop resolutions found on desktop monitors? sorry for the side question.

I know they're somewhat limited in manufacturing capability for these relative to 'desktop' LCDs, so maybe they literally just can't make enough of them to sell them as a separate desktop product. Most of the new LCD plant capacity has been going towards bigger screens (for TVs), since they are easier to manufacture (MUCH lower pixel density) and have much bigger profit margins.

I also, personally, wouldn't want a 15" 1900x1200 widescreen. That's too small for desktop use; I'd have to sit with my nose against the damn thing to read anything. Anything smaller than 18-19" is, to me, not usable on the desktop.

Now, if they wanted to make a reasonably-priced 19" 1600x1200 LCD with good response times, OTOH... I think there could be a market for that. And/or for a 20/21" at 2048x1536.

 

[Thorny]

I always used 1024*768, on CRT and 19" or smaller LCD. I hated having to squint to read. Low refresh gave me headaches too, I found 72 to be perfect for my eyes.

Now that I have a 2005FPW, I use native res because scaled looks like crap one this monitor. The small print still sux, but its better than the fuz created by scaling.

 

[0roo0roo]

i don't think that many do that anymore. windows autodetects the lcd and chooses the native res these days no?
refresh rate is irrelvant to boot. many people have laptops, those are always default at native so people are used to that

 

[junkyardDawg]

I got my wife a 17in LCD last year. She's pretty much an average user; office apps, email and web. She was on a 17in CRT 800x600 before and the first thing she said was "I can't read this, it's too small." I scaled down to 800x600 (looked like crap) and told her she could have that or her old CRT back. She got used to 1280x1024 quick and loves it to this day!

 

[sodcha0s]

Why don't you guys just set the DPI setting for the fonts higher, and icon size for the icons? I run a 17" LCD at 12x10, and have the DPI set to 120. Text is sharp and easily readable, without being too big. Seems like a better solution than lowering resolution.