Why do flat panel monitors only do 1280 x 1024 ?

[Zombie]

just wondering?

 

[3chordcharlie]

It's common for them to only do sxga because they are bad at non-native resolutions, and most people run similarly sized crt at sxga. So even though enthusiasts and spreadsheet folk would love 16x12, we're stuck with what some mythical joe user wants. ANd I guess it costs too much to run two lines for the same size panel (so you could choose 12x10 or 16x12).

 

[JoPh]

teh sux0rz.

CRT all the way!

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

My Dell 2001FP does 1600x1200.

 

[aceO07]

They have lower and higher native resolutions. Just depends on which model you get.

Check out the 30" apple display. 2560 x 1600

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed
My Dell 2001FP does 1600x1200.

 

[cKGunslinger]

I assume you mean 1280x1024 (5:4), instead of the more natural 1280x960 (4:3)?

 

[Arkitech]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed
My Dell 2001FP does 1600x1200.

 

[Confused]

What I want to know is why are there no <20" desktop panels that do 1600x1200.

I use 1600x1200 on my laptop's 15" display (native resolution) and I absolutely love it. I have put off getting myself an LCD for my home PC as there is nothing smaller than 20" that does 1600x1200. I'm too used to this resolution on my laptop.


Confused

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
I assume you mean 1280x1024 (5:4), instead of the more natural 1280x960 (4:3)?

That's because FP monitors designed to do 1280x1024 native ARE 5:4, not 4:3

Unlike people who run that resolution on CRTs and end up with squashed pictures.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Confused
What I want to know is why are there no <20" desktop panels that do 1600x1200.

I use 1600x1200 on my laptop's 15" display (native resolution) and I absolutely love it. I have put off getting myself an LCD for my home PC as there is nothing smaller than 20" that does 1600x1200. I'm too used to this resolution on my laptop.


Confused

I think it's because people sit a LOT closer to their laptop screens than they would to their desktop screens.

 

[Confused]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Confused
What I want to know is why are there no <20" desktop panels that do 1600x1200.

I use 1600x1200 on my laptop's 15" display (native resolution) and I absolutely love it. I have put off getting myself an LCD for my home PC as there is nothing smaller than 20" that does 1600x1200. I'm too used to this resolution on my laptop.


Confused

I think it's because people sit a LOT closer to their laptop screens than they would to their desktop screens.

I'm sitting here at work 2.5ft away from my laptop, and a 17" LCD running @ 1280x1024, and I can still see the laptop screen perfectly well, with standard font sizes.

If there was an easy way of using a laptop LCD on a home PC... (and I know there isn't )

 

[imported_smilingcrow]

Maybe your eyesight differs a bit from the average? I can't imagine finding 1600 * 1200 useable on a 15" display, but then again I've never seen a very high quality TFT of that size. Aren't the fonts going to be tiny though, regardless?

 

[ajayjuneja]

My laptop does 1600 x 1200 on a 15" screen, and I love it. lot's of space!

I just bought a Samsung 213T per Anandtech recommendation (got it for $1000 at Fry's) which does 1600 x 1200

 

[Mr N8]

Mine does 1680x1050 on a 15.4" widescreen.

 

[DotheDamnTHing]

Originally posted by: JoPh
teh sux0rz.

CRT all the way!

 

[yukichigai]

For a while they had yet to find a way to (for a reasonable cost) make a single, unbroken LCD panel at a pixel size greater than 1280x1024. Now the limit is roughly 1600x1200.

2 years from now the question will be "Why do flat panel monitors only do 1600x1200?"

 

[randomlinh]

i'm waiting for a 17-19" that will do 14x11 or whatever... something around there.. that's all i need so basically, waiting for 16x12's.

 

[imported_smilingcrow]

I find it strange that there is an almost universal jump from 19" (1208*1024) to 20" (1600*1200) on desktop panels? Maybe there's more money in laptop panels running other resolutions, so the manufacturers are chasing that market. It could be an anomaly of the market, what with TFT panel demand going into overdrive in recent times. I imagine once the manufacturers have caught their breath, they might focus on other areas apart from response time.

Isn't this more of a technical thread than OFF Topic?