Why no 19" LCD with 1600x1200 res?

[aakerman]

Just wondering.. why don't manufacturers make 19" LCDs with a decent resolution of 1600x1200, instead of measly 1280x1024 ? I just don't get it.. I would buy one in an instant if it had a decent resolution... as it is, you have to go beyond 20" if you want 1600x1200.

It's not because of the limits in the technology, because on laptops you can easily find 15" LCDs with 1600x1200. So why is it?

 

[0roo0roo]

higher density harder to make? if it costs the same as making a 24" wide screen or whatever then why bother i guess. just a guess. its the same with smaller screens..laptops sometimes have the higher density ones, but i guess it doesn't make sense to screw up your product line with them else where.

 

[aakerman]

Just don't get it, the demand is certainly there... it does not cost the same to make a 24", because there is a major price difference between 19" models and 20.1" etc

 

[BenSkywalker]

Just don't get it, the demand is certainly there... it does not cost the same to make a 24"

In a theoretical sense it is possible it costs considerably more. When you increase the pixel density, you are increasing the probability of failure and are also utilizing a far less standardized build process- swapping build processes is a costly venture for any industrialized production.

I'm not saying it does cost considerably more, nor making any comment on exactly what the relative cost is. I'm just pointing out that moving to a more complex build process can easily elevate costs well beyond a larger, less complex, more refined build process.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: aakerman
Just wondering.. why don't manufacturers make 19" LCDs with a decent resolution of 1600x1200, instead of measly 1280x1024 ? I just don't get it.. I would buy one in an instant if it had a decent resolution... as it is, you have to go beyond 20" if you want 1600x1200.

It's not because of the limits in the technology, because on laptops you can easily find 15" LCDs with 1600x1200. So why is it?

Because of costs. Would you pay $600 for a 19" at 1600x1200, or $500 for a 20" 1600x1200?

VAST majority would pick up the extra inch, even if the price were identical.... but they wouldn't be. That's where i think you're confused... you assume because it's a smaller size, it would be cheaper.

 

[aakerman]

huh?`I'd rather want a 20" 1600x1200 to be honest.. the problem is 20" are much more expensive than 19".. if 19" just came in 1600x1200 at roughly the same price as existing 19", I'd get that =)

 

[boran]

and now it's silly to get a 19" over a 17" because they both have the same max res.

 

[exar333]

just be patient...LCD's have finally come down in price, and you cant have everything you want....give it time and they will have higher res soon as well...if you want to have 1600x1200, spend 2x as much....i decided it wasnt worth it to me and got a 19" 1280x1024...im happy with it...was 300 dollars more for higher res worth it? i decided no...plus there are a lot of other performance aspects to look at

 

[aatf510]

I am personally looking for a 20"+ LCD monitor that is 1280x1024 native.

 

[thraxes]

Originally posted by: toattett
I am personally looking for a 20"+ LCD monitor that is 1280x1024 native.

Do you have eyesight problems? A friend of mine is in the same situation, he wants a large LCD but due to his eyes (illness) he also wants a low native res. I think we may end up getting him a 21" CRT .

 

[corkyg]

Practically speaking, the print size on a 1280x1024 is small to read, a 1600x1200 would be really difficult. Yes, it can be zoomed - but why. I would not go 1600x1200 with less than a 23 inch screen.

 

[Dman877]

If you need a large low res flat panel, look at lcd TV's. They make like 30 inchers with like 1280x768 res. I'm with toattet though, 12x10 is plenty of real estate for me, I would love a 21 inch with 12x10 native for surfing the net.

 

[0roo0roo]

yea only problem is they are charging nutty amounts for tv lcd.

 

[aatf510]

There are certain text (such as the text in game) that is unable to enlarge.
So 1600x1200 would be harsh on the eyes.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: toattett
There are certain text (such as the text in game) that is unable to enlarge.
So 1600x1200 would be harsh on the eyes.

Some people (myself) run 1600x1200 on a 19" CRT (which is like an 18" LCD), so 19" would make it larger than on a CRT.
In terms of raw real estate at the moment though, you can get 2 17" LCD's for less than a 20" LCD, and get more screen space, which is IMO the better deal if you need space and can get away with more than one monitor (ie: not a gamer)