What's better for programming? UXGA vs. WSXGA+

[Hard Ball]

So what do you think would be the best solution if someone needs to do a lot of coding, and need to look at emacs, vi, idle, and other editors at the same time. What would be the most convenient format to work with?? (or for that matter, anyone who needs to work with large amount of text)

Basically it's between something similar to Dell 2001FPT and 2005 FPW. The UXGA 1600X1200 will have a little more screen realestate, but the WSXGA+ at 1680X1050 will have a wider aspect ratio to look at two or more docs simultanously easier. Also the dot pitch is very similar, 2.55 vs. 2.58.

You experiences and expertise will be appreciated.

 

[Shimmishim]

i have both.

but i game.

i had the 2001fp for a while then started using the 2005fp.

decided widescreen wasn't worth it.

switched over back to my 2001fp.

but for things you want to do with multiple windows open, i think the 2005fp would be better for you. just my 1 penny.

 

[Hard Ball]

So what would you say abou the screen real-estate on 2005fpw, is it large enough to accomodate a large amount of texts; and how's the contrast between the 2001 and 2005, any marked difference?

Also for gaming, how many games have you found out actuallysupports WSXGA+ mode?

 

[xtknight]

For vi, the smallest res so it's easier on your eyes. For dev environments that have windows like Solution and Properties, you need a bigger res because the code window has to be big enough.

Never mind, since the dot pitch is about the same it'll be just as OK on your eyes so you might as well go widescreen for programming, yes.

 

[HDTVMan]

DUAL-SCREEN

 

[n7]

I guess for what you're doing teh WS may be the better way to go, but so many games don't support that rez...so i like my 1600x1200 LCD myself TYVM

 

[Hard Ball]

Thanks guys for your excellent opinions,

Please keep them coming.

Originally posted by: HDTVMan
DUAL-SCREEN

I already have dual display at the moment, I'm running a Dell 1704FTP along side a NEC CRT at 1600X1200. And the CRT may be about to kick the bucket, so I will need to replace that with something of similar resolution, so either something like the 2001FPT or 2005FPW

 

[duragezic]

Depends what you mean by support for 1680x1050. Many many games can at the very least by "hacked" to run 1680x1050 (often just an .ini to edit or command-line argument). The only game that I don't play at 1680x1050 is Joint Ops because its ghetto-style and I haven't checked out widescreengamingforum.com to see if there is any way to force that res. Some like HL2 support it natively and you actually get more viewing area. This is where WS kicks ass. Sadly, not that many other games do this. Some have support for 1680x1050 but don't actually adjust your view so the widescreen has no benefit. Hopefully, more games will follow suit with HL2, because it is quite a sight to see running 16:10 with high details!

I am back home using my 900NF which is great at 1360x1024 or even 1600x1200, but I miss my widescreen. Since I got my 2005FPW I was so used to tiling out windows side-by-side. The right side of my screen is almost always reserved for Winamp/playlist and ICQ windows, since I can run all of my other windows like Firefox in a very large window still. I've not used 1600x1200 on a 20" LCD and it may be better, but what I've used my 2005FPW so far has been excellent.

 

[shuttleboi]

Wow, Hardball. You're a vi user; that's pretty hardcore considering this board is typically loaded with teenagers. I've been using vi/vim for the last 15 years on Unix/Linux myself. What kind of software engineering do you do? At work or home?