The LCD you've been waiting for

[addragyn]

The new Xerox 7 Series LCD is available in 15-, 17-, and 19-inch models. All three are Active Matrix TFTs, have 16-milisecond response times, and on-screen digital controls. The 15-inch monitor has a 160-degree viewing angle, and the other two have 170-degree viewing angles. All three work with both PCs and Macs.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1229726,00.asp

 

[dullard]

Still though, no significant benefit over CRT and cost a ton more. Not the LCD I've been waiting for.

 

[Dug]

What makes this so special compared to the other 16ms lcd's that have been out on the market for quite awhile now?

 

[sinthon]

Weak sauce still probably has some shadowing and ghosting.

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Dug
What makes this so special compared to the other 16ms lcd's that have been out on the market for quite awhile now?

Those are all 17" models. This would seem to be the first commercially available 19" with 16ms. Wonder if I can get an employee discount?

 

[fredtam]

It is a misprint people. The 19" has a 25ms response time. PDF.

 

[Budman]

The LCD you've been waiting for

Really? does walmart now have a 21" LCD for 99$ ?

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: fredtam
It is a misprint people. The 19" has a 25ms response time. PDF.

doh

 

[addragyn]

Originally posted by: X-Man

Originally posted by: fredtam
It is a misprint people. The 19" has a 25ms response time. PDF.

doh

 

[techwanabe]

You live in Rochester NY (Wester - Salt Rd)?

 

[Lonyo]

18" or higher with 1600x1200 and 16ms is the LCD I'm waiting for.

 

[Shagga]

Originally posted by: addragyn

Originally posted by: X-Man

Originally posted by: fredtam
It is a misprint people. The 19" has a 25ms response time. PDF.

doh

Blox.. :frown:

 

[BigFatCow]

got my hopes up...

 

[jswjimmy]

when lcd's are the same price and jest as good looking as crt i will buy one

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
when lcd's are the same price and jest as good looking as crt i will buy one

i think they will just stop making CRT's then LCD's will be cheaper. that is like saying when CDRW drives are the same price as CDR drives... they just stoppped making them

 

[Nebor]

The picture on my LCD is far better than that of my HItachi CRT...

I went ahead and got a 17" LCD... couldn't stand the CRT headaches... Even at 100hz, I'd get headaches after only 3 or 4 hours...

 

[buleyb]

does it have full color support in the 16ms range, because the AU Optics panels don't, and the Hyundai monitors do, but i'm still waiting on the other panel makers...

 

[SUOrangeman]

How many of you have actually used an LCD? From some obvious hints of bias towards CRT (which is not necessarily a bad thing), I have to question the weight of your comments that you've really never used one.

If there aren't any benefits to LCDs, why are they even being made?

-SUO, 3 18" LCDs at home and at least one at work

 

[fredtam]

Amen. I love my 191T. I would not consider going back to crt. Yes I do game.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: SUOrangeman
How many of you have actually used an LCD? From some obvious hints of bias towards CRT (which is not necessarily a bad thing), I have to question the weight of your comments that you've really never used one.

If there aren't any benefits to LCDs, why are they even being made?

-SUO, 3 18" LCDs at home and at least one at work

There are benefits, but to me they are not significant.

It is the same as the SUV/ Pickup + car battle. You could buy one SUV or for the same amount of money buy a pickup for hauling and towing and a good car for driving to/from work. To me I'd rather have two vehicles with all the capabilities and yet good gas mileage. But other people want the glitz and glamour of the SUV and are willing to pay triple what it is worth. I feel the LCD is the same. It is the glitz and glamour of the computer world. It is smaller and lightweight but the vast majority of people don't carry the monitor around more than once in the monitor's lifetime and the majority of people have enough deskspace for a CRT. But the glitz of the LCD wins. An LCD just looks cooler.

Face it if you have an LCD at one set in stone resolution, games suck unless you can achieve that resolution. To me that matters a great deal. What if my video card cannot make playable games at that resolution? What if the game doesn't offer that resolution? You have trouble all the time with gaming. Not to mention ghosting (which is significantly better recently), and the worse viewing angles of LCDs. I'm just not paying double for a monitor with less resolution options!

Yes I have used LCDs many times, and I always dislike what I've seen. They have their benefits - like 3 18" monitors. But honestly how many people do that? Not many. Thus still no significant benefit over CRT (neglecting the coolness factor which I don't care about).

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: SUOrangeman
How many of you have actually used an LCD? From some obvious hints of bias towards CRT (which is not necessarily a bad thing), I have to question the weight of your comments that you've really never used one.

If there aren't any benefits to LCDs, why are they even being made?

-SUO, 3 18" LCDs at home and at least one at work

There are benefits, but to me they are not significant.

It is the same as the SUV/ Pickup + car battle. You could buy one SUV or for the same amount of money buy a pickup for hauling and towing and a good car for driving to/from work. To me I'd rather have two vehicles with all the capabilities and yet good gas mileage. But other people want the glitz and glamour of the SUV and are willing to pay triple what it is worth. I feel the LCD is the same. It is the glitz and glamour of the computer world. It is smaller and lightweight but the vast majority of people don't carry the monitor around more than once in the monitor's lifetime and the majority of people have enough deskspace for a CRT. But the glitz of the LCD wins. An LCD just looks cooler.


Face it if you have an LCD at one set in stone resolution, games suck unless you can achieve that resolution. To me that matters a great deal. What if my video card cannot make playable games at that resolution? What if the game doesn't offer that resolution? You have trouble all the time with gaming. Not to mention ghosting (which is significantly better recently), and the worse viewing angles of LCDs. I'm just not paying double for a monitor with less resolution options!

Yes I have used LCDs many times, and I always dislike what I've seen. They have their benefits - like 3 18" monitors. But honestly how many people do that? Not many. Thus still no significant benefit over CRT (neglecting the coolness factor which I don't care about).

Amen. I love my Dell P1110. I would not consider a LCD. Yes I do game.

 

[JKing76]

Running games on an LCD at less-than-native-resolution is just free FSAA.

 

[fredtam]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: SUOrangeman
How many of you have actually used an LCD? From some obvious hints of bias towards CRT (which is not necessarily a bad thing), I have to question the weight of your comments that you've really never used one.

If there aren't any benefits to LCDs, why are they even being made?

-SUO, 3 18" LCDs at home and at least one at work

There are benefits, but to me they are not significant.

It is the same as the SUV/ Pickup + car battle. You could buy one SUV or for the same amount of money buy a pickup for hauling and towing and a good car for driving to/from work. To me I'd rather have two vehicles with all the capabilities and yet good gas mileage. But other people want the glitz and glamour of the SUV and are willing to pay triple what it is worth. I feel the LCD is the same. It is the glitz and glamour of the computer world. It is smaller and lightweight but the vast majority of people don't carry the monitor around more than once in the monitor's lifetime and the majority of people have enough deskspace for a CRT. But the glitz of the LCD wins. An LCD just looks cooler.


Face it if you have an LCD at one set in stone resolution, games suck unless you can achieve that resolution. To me that matters a great deal. What if my video card cannot make playable games at that resolution? What if the game doesn't offer that resolution? You have trouble all the time with gaming. Not to mention ghosting (which is significantly better recently), and the worse viewing angles of LCDs. I'm just not paying double for a monitor with less resolution options!

Yes I have used LCDs many times, and I always dislike what I've seen. They have their benefits - like 3 18" monitors. But honestly how many people do that? Not many. Thus still no significant benefit over CRT (neglecting the coolness factor which I don't care about).

Your logic is flawed. A better comparison would be between your car and a hybrid/electric car. You pay slightly more for the LCD but use far less power, you don't have electrons shooting through your eyes, and it takes up less room which are the equivelants to fuel efficiency, less pollution, and less depletion of recourses.
Most monitors today can scale resolutions perfectly down to a considerably low level. If your game needs a lower resolution its time to stop playing pong. It is definately time to upgrade video cards if it can't push 1280x1024. Also it has a large viewing area which makes it about equal in price to a comparable quality CRT. It cost $611.
When you finish reading this check the prices on a major brand CRT with a 19" viewable area. I wonder what LCD you used many times. One of those KDS with a 50ms response time and a 200:1 resolution no doubt.

I did not buy my LCD because it looked cool. I got it because it takes up liitle space and I don't need Dramamine to use it for extended periods. Gaming is perfect (AIW9800PRO) with no ghosting at all.

 

[Lyfer]

Originally posted by: Budman

The LCD you've been waiting for

Really? does walmart now have a 21" LCD for 99$ ?

:beer:


LCD prices are rediculous for 19" and greater. I'll stick with CRT for now.

 

[sellmen]

LCD's are overrated IMO. I had a NEC 1760NX for awhile, then got rid of it for a CRT. Even though it was a very bright LCD, it displayed dark colors extremely poorly. Shades of grey all became black, making DVD viewing/games difficult. Changing the brightness/contrast helped a little, but not much.

I greatly dislike the fixed resolution of the LCD as well. Being forced to play games, view your desktop, etc in 1280 x 1024 is hardly ideal. Scaling down resolutions led to some less than stellar image quality.

Dealing with dead pixels is another problem. I had one, and found it quite annoying. Ghosting wasn't too bad, but it was noticable.

Paying $400+ for a monitor which is inferior to a $180 CRT is not worth it. I'll pick up an LCD when their image quality is equivalent or better to a quality CRT.