Has anyone switched from 19" CRT to 15" LCD?
- Thread starter jrichrds
- Start date
Well, kinda.
I use 2 19" monitors(18" viewable) at my boxes at work, but every now and then I have to work on computers with 15" LCD's, and I always get annoyed by how small they are.
To me, going to anything smaller wouldn't be an option, but I guess that depends on the person, to some people it would probably be worth it.
And another thing to considder is that I use a 21"(20" viewable) CRT at home, so 19" is actually kinda small too
I use 2 19" monitors(18" viewable) at my boxes at work, but every now and then I have to work on computers with 15" LCD's, and I always get annoyed by how small they are.
To me, going to anything smaller wouldn't be an option, but I guess that depends on the person, to some people it would probably be worth it.
And another thing to considder is that I use a 21"(20" viewable) CRT at home, so 19" is actually kinda small too
A good rule of thumb for decent CRT's is size-1" for viewable area.
At least that's what I've seen on pretty much every monitor I've used in the past 5 or so years.
At least that's what I've seen on pretty much every monitor I've used in the past 5 or so years.
sort of, I've used a 15" LCD (laptop) for quite a while now and I tried switching back to a 19" CRT and I couldn't do it. I dont care what size it was, it was simply too blurry for my eyes.
This is, in fact, exactly what I'll be doing. I ordered the Dell 15" UltraSharp LCD last friday to replace this 19" Princeton Ultra 95e CRT here at my office. I'll let you know how the transition goes. Two things:
1. The CRT is very blurry in certain areas of the screen. OSD adjustments result in sharper text in some areas while blurring up other areas... I can't seem to get a 100% clear picture (particularly with small text) on the entire screen. This seems to be a common characteristic of lower end CRTs.
2. Text on an LCD is very clear from all my LCD experience (used Samsung 151S, and Planar 19" LCD). If you do mostly text work, I would suspect you could never go back to a CRT.
I'll update after I've had a few days with the new LCD.
1. The CRT is very blurry in certain areas of the screen. OSD adjustments result in sharper text in some areas while blurring up other areas... I can't seem to get a 100% clear picture (particularly with small text) on the entire screen. This seems to be a common characteristic of lower end CRTs.
2. Text on an LCD is very clear from all my LCD experience (used Samsung 151S, and Planar 19" LCD). If you do mostly text work, I would suspect you could never go back to a CRT.
I'll update after I've had a few days with the new LCD.
I use two 19" CRTs and have just set up some LCDs (a 17" and a 15"). I could never get any work done on a single 15" LCD compared to my dual 19" CRTs. I will replace my CRTs with two 17" or two 18" LCDs next year.
off topic, but I found it kinda funny that you call it a rule of thumb and use 1" smaller as the measurement. the Inch measurement originated as the length from tip of your thumb to the first joint. So your rule of thumb is a true rule of thumb.
its not just the size.. its mostly the resolution
I run all my 19"ers at 1600x1200, so a 1024x768 15" lcd isn't much realestate.
Right now, i'm using a inspiron 8100 with a UXGA 15". It looks awsome, if you can get something like this.. go it. I'm also using a 19" philips on the side at UXGA as well. I use the LCD much more often... Its just so much easier to read.
I'd say you will have trouble switching to a 15" lcd if its just 1024x768.
I run all my 19"ers at 1600x1200, so a 1024x768 15" lcd isn't much realestate.
Right now, i'm using a inspiron 8100 with a UXGA 15". It looks awsome, if you can get something like this.. go it. I'm also using a 19" philips on the side at UXGA as well. I use the LCD much more often... Its just so much easier to read.
I'd say you will have trouble switching to a 15" lcd if its just 1024x768.
My 19 incher is happily running at 1600x1200, and now whenever I use a 17 inch monitor, I feel like anything below 1280x960 is too small. If I were to get a LCD, it would probably have to be a 16 inch one, since those can do 1280x1024, while their 15 inch cousins can only do 1024x768, and that's just too freakin' huge after you're used to more.
Of course, what the others said about the relationship of CRT sizes to LCD sizes applies (a 15 inch LCD is about like a 17 inch monitor, but maybe just a teeny bit smaller). If you like running your 17 inch monitor at 1152x864 or higher, moving to a 15 inch LCD may be hard. In that case, just get two LCDs.
Staticfly hit the nail on the head.
Once you get used to 2048x1440 or higher, 1600x1200 just seems too cramped. Especially if you generally work with multiple terminal services and/or VNC windows open.
It will be a long time before I ever consider using an LCD.
Once you get used to 2048x1440 or higher, 1600x1200 just seems too cramped. Especially if you generally work with multiple terminal services and/or VNC windows open.
It will be a long time before I ever consider using an LCD.
Not only Terminal Services but also VMWare as well. It's hard for me to do anything in a VMWare window unless it's at least 1024x768 (and even that seems small). Now I've started needing more than one VMWare window at once! Perhaps it's time to move to dual 21 inchers.
BTW, what monitors do you use that go higher than 2048x1440? The only one I know of is that $9K USD IBM flat panel that does something in the range of 3000x2000, but AFAIK that requires a special video card.
I add custom resolutions with powerstrip, using a very low vertical back porch to maximize refresh rate at any given res.
Right now I'm using 2048x1440 @ 71Hz on a HP P1100 (107kHz max horizontal scan)
Generally I go as high as the monitor will let me with 68Hz or greater refresh. Anything lower refresh than that bothers my eyes (could never use 60Hz for extended time).
Also the Geforce2 MX at work becomes become pretty flaky at 2048x1536 and above. At home I got my Geforce 2 GTS/Pro to do 3072x2048 (at something like 47Hz). Wasn't actually readable on my screen at that res, just wanted to see if it could do it.
P.S. <- another VMWare user. Do you also use it for Kazaa?
Right now I'm using 2048x1440 @ 71Hz on a HP P1100 (107kHz max horizontal scan)
Generally I go as high as the monitor will let me with 68Hz or greater refresh. Anything lower refresh than that bothers my eyes (could never use 60Hz for extended time).
Also the Geforce2 MX at work becomes become pretty flaky at 2048x1536 and above. At home I got my Geforce 2 GTS/Pro to do 3072x2048 (at something like 47Hz). Wasn't actually readable on my screen at that res, just wanted to see if it could do it.
P.S. <- another VMWare user. Do you also use it for Kazaa?
Holy crap, 3072x2048! :Q
I run 1600x1200 at 75Hz (the most my philips 109B can support at that res) and I can see the flicker very lightly in bright white areas. It doesn't really bother me, though (72Hz and below does bother me), and I can't stand any lower resolution (not enough screen real estate!).
And BTW, no I don't use VMWare for Kazaa. Kazaa-lite 2.0 is installed on my computer, but I never use it (edonkey works best for me). I've been beta testing Windows .NET Server in VMWare, though, and I also use it to try out new and exciting OSes who's bootloaders I don't trust to my MBR (read: NetBSD).
Another BTW, but do you think a high end 22 or 24 inch CRT with a good quality video card could actually hit 3072x2048 and be readable? Anyone tried it?
On the topic of refresh rates, I hear it doesn't matter for LCDs. But then I still see 15" LCD advertisements claiming "High refresh rate! 1024x768@85Hz" (whereas the norm seems to be 1024x768@60Hz to 1024x768@75Hz) It's just a marketing gimmick right?
On normal CRTs, I have to have it at 85Hz or higher or I can see the flicker, possibly due to the fluorescent lighting in the room.
On normal CRTs, I have to have it at 85Hz or higher or I can see the flicker, possibly due to the fluorescent lighting in the room.
2400x1600 is readable (although blurry) on a high quality 19", so I would hope a high quality 22" or 24" could do 3072x2048 readably (in proportion to size its not that different).
1 major caveat though: with a normal ratio of horizontal active area to horizontal sync width/front/back porch, and even a really small vertical sync/etc time, 2400x1600 at a reasonable refresh rate requires a 325+ MHz dot clock even at 60Hz or 400+ Mhz dot clock at 75Hz. Most current video cards go a little over 350MHz, so you have to either go with crappy refresh or tweak the horizontal timings a lot (which means also spending time getting the monitor geometry to match), or both, unless you have a card with a really good RAMDAC. 3072x2048 requires a 60% faster RAMDAC than 2400x1600 at the same refresh (good luck finding a card that does this at a reasonable refresh rate).
1 major caveat though: with a normal ratio of horizontal active area to horizontal sync width/front/back porch, and even a really small vertical sync/etc time, 2400x1600 at a reasonable refresh rate requires a 325+ MHz dot clock even at 60Hz or 400+ Mhz dot clock at 75Hz. Most current video cards go a little over 350MHz, so you have to either go with crappy refresh or tweak the horizontal timings a lot (which means also spending time getting the monitor geometry to match), or both, unless you have a card with a really good RAMDAC. 3072x2048 requires a 60% faster RAMDAC than 2400x1600 at the same refresh (good luck finding a card that does this at a reasonable refresh rate).
I switched last week. Used to use Sony E400, Compaq p910, Samsung 950p, and a Hitachi 751. All pretty nice monitors, up to 16x12 at 85Hz on the p910.
I jumped on the Dell deal last week that came with a free e151 LCD.
I must say I am impressed. The size does not seem to be a problem. Neither does the refresh. No ghosting. Cs plays and feels just fine.
And I realized even at 16x12 I was only using half of the screen anyway. 95% of the websites are optimized for 800x600 max, so you waste all that space anyway. (edit) you just get the white stripes on both sides.
On the LCD I just run all windows maximized and I get the same amount of text on screen.
Bottom line is, unless you deal with high-res imaging, there seems to be no probemo switching to 15" LCD from a 19" CRT.
I jumped on the Dell deal last week that came with a free e151 LCD.
I must say I am impressed. The size does not seem to be a problem. Neither does the refresh. No ghosting. Cs plays and feels just fine.
And I realized even at 16x12 I was only using half of the screen anyway. 95% of the websites are optimized for 800x600 max, so you waste all that space anyway. (edit) you just get the white stripes on both sides.
On the LCD I just run all windows maximized and I get the same amount of text on screen.
Bottom line is, unless you deal with high-res imaging, there seems to be no probemo switching to 15" LCD from a 19" CRT.
*whoosh* (the sound what you just said made as it flew high above my head
)My 19 incher can only hit 1920x1440 at 60Hz, so 2400x1600 is only likely to be possible at some insanely low refresh rate like 47hz, if at all. Talk about a good headache generator...
So I've had my Dell 1504FP UltraSharp 15" for a couple days now. Previously I was using the 19" Princeton (Costco special) CRT. The difference is huge - text is a LOT sharper, and ghosting is not a problem on this screen for the work I do (mainly text-based). My eyes feel better. Glare is much less of an issue - I can have the window open without going blind or getting a headache - that makes it worth it right there.
The main thing I do notice now with the LCD, is the blurry text I saw on the CRT is now "dancing pixels on the edges of fonts." Which basically means, it's the video card that's sending a poor signal. I will get a $29 Radeon and hook this LCD up via DVI in the next few weeks.
I think 1024x768 is a great size; if I was in front of my own personal machine more than 4 hours a day, I would definitely consider a 17" or 19" LCD (one of my friends got the 19" Planar for $650 a couple months back...)
The main thing I do notice now with the LCD, is the blurry text I saw on the CRT is now "dancing pixels on the edges of fonts." Which basically means, it's the video card that's sending a poor signal. I will get a $29 Radeon and hook this LCD up via DVI in the next few weeks.
I think 1024x768 is a great size; if I was in front of my own personal machine more than 4 hours a day, I would definitely consider a 17" or 19" LCD (one of my friends got the 19" Planar for $650 a couple months back...)
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 19K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter