• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HOLY MOLY!!! look at this 19" widescreen

Sweet. Finally, an affordable WS for the masses. This is what we need to make WS mainstream so it gets the support from developers that it deserves. I really do hope that review sites start benching at WS resolutions.
 
1400x900 is horrible, too much scrolling around for me

might be excellent in portrait mode though. could view well more than a whole page in a word doc (splitting views is awesome, btw)

ugh no portrait!
 
Nice monitor for the price, but as other people said, no DVI is a negative. I bought the Viewsonic monitor with similar specs + DVI for $299.
 
i don treally think 6 bit vs 8 bit is a big deal.

some of the 6 bit panels i've used are far better than the 8 bit ones.

that said 19" and 17" widescreens pretty much suck. resolution is way too low. i dont think analog is too big a deal at this resolution with a video card with really clean analog output (i.e. not integrated video or $30 video card). the real analog vs dvi issues come up at 1600x1200 or 1680x1050, it is just more data over an analog connection to be interferred with, where 1280x1024 or 1440x900 doesnt require enough video bandwidth for it to matter that much (which is probably why most 17 and 19" lcds are analog only now)

1440x900 is just too low though. that is slightyl less resolution than 1280x1024 and costs more to boot and is a non standard res.
 
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Originally posted by: BinZ
Between DVI and analog on my 2405FPW...I swear I can't tell a difference... :-/

-- Chuck --
Click to expand...

run a 2405 dvi and 2405 analog right next to each other and report back
Click to expand...

Depends on how good your video card's 2D output is.
On my old 5900, I could not tell the difference between the two on my 2001FP. But my newer 6800, the analog quality is absolutely horrendous.
 
Its probably not really true 4ms but that is an insane response time for a monitor at this price, even with no dvi. I wish someone would buy this monitor and review it so we have some sort of idea what it holds. My next buy will probably be a WS 19".
 
I was a DVI snob as well but honestly, the quality of the 2d on the video card is very important as well. Newer video cards (X600, X800, X850XT, 6600GT) that I've used did a great job with my secondary LCD on analog. I noticed pretty much no difference between those and dual DVI cards I used (6800GT, 7800GT). Although my second screen is a 17" LCD...
 
The Leadtek 6800NU I had had had the crappiest VGA quality I've ever seen in my life. Low contrast, blurry. My new 7800GT is crystal clear.

Is 'had had had' proper English? 😕
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top