Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Information > Standard or Widescreen monitor?

Reply
Thread Tools

Standard or Widescreen monitor?

 
 
Agamemnon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006

"Slurp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:44c0c975$0$22126$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>> (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)

>
>
> ???? the Dell 30" does 2560 x 1600


It needs a dual link DVI graphics card so I can't use it on my present
computer which would need a new motherboard as well as a new graphics card.

>
> http://tinyurl.com/hozec
>


Its only 16:10.

If its not 16:9 I can't see any advantage for it over a 4:3 display at
1920x1440.

> Slurp
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ThePunisher
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
"Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)
>
> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>


LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
time would be?

--
ThePunisher


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
On 2006-07-21, ThePunisher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>

>
> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
> time would be?


A quarter the size of said 19 inch or larger CRT. Have you any idea how
silly that question was?

--
David Taylor
 
Reply With Quote
 
Agamemnon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006

"ThePunisher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9t5wg.16412$(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>

>
> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
> time would be?


Since I am using 1920x1440 resolution right now the answer is yes. The size
of each of the windows would be 93% of the window size when expanded to full
screen if you were using 1024x768 resolution. If you overlap the top and
bottom borders of each window and the side scroll bars then you'd be able to
see the same work area you would see at 1024x768 in each quadrant and anyway
there is not need to overlap. You can tile 4 instances of Word with A4
documents selected at 100% and still be able to see the whole of the page
within the standard margins. For most web pages 4 instances of Internet
explorer tiled will display the whole width of the page since most pages are
set to 800 pixels wide.

If you want more you could always use 2048x1536 resolution by my monitor
isn't really designed for that resolution although it can go up to it.
Useful for editing lots of images side by side though or very large spread
sheets where the fonts are not too small.

>
> --
> ThePunisher
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
On 21 Jul,
"housetrained" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Do yourself a favour. Buy a 19" flat LCD 4.3. You will wonder how you
> managed with that old 17" for so long!
>

Most seem to be 5:4.


--
BD
Change lycos to yahoo to reply
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bazzer Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006

"ThePunisher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9t5wg.16412$(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>

>
> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
> time would be?


960X720 bigger than the 800X600 I have been using for the last 10 years.


>
> --
> ThePunisher
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Bazzer Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
Thanks thats useful. I think forgot how to do that somoe time go!!


"Hawkins" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Pressing F11 on most browser set ups will remove the 2 to 3 toolbars at
> the top of the screen and also the main bar at the bottom. A second press
> will bring them back again. It is also possible to drag the bars to
> display vertically at either side of the screen. I have not tried the
> effect of F 11 in this configuration.
>
> Richard.
>
>
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>>
>> Bazzer Smith wrote:
>>> I am probably thinking a big standard shape monitor would be best?
>>> I incidently I have a Freecom DTTV stick so I sometime watch TV
>>> on my PC, but the monitor shape is not really a problem as you watch in
>>> a nicely framed box, you don't get black ugly bars wasteing space as you
>>> do on a proper TV.

>>
>> If you watch a reasonable amount of TV on it then i'd go for a
>> widescreen. 17" is usable but doesn't have a huge amount of vertical
>> space - for a desk a 19 or 20" widesceen is nice and will let you work
>> two docs side by side (or a document and email say). You can move the
>> windows bar to the side to maximise the amount of vertical workspace.
>>
>> It also depends on how much you're going to spend - w/s monitors tend
>> to cost more and i'd go for a really good 4:3 over a 'budget' w/s
>>
>> Widescreens on laptops are a terrible idea as theres just not enough
>> vertical height on a 15" screen (above that and they're not really
>> portable). I think a 12" 4:3 screen for a laptop you regularly carry
>> and a 15" for one you carry less often.
>>

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
kony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:33:29 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 2006-07-21, ThePunisher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>>
>>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>>

>>
>> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
>> time would be?

>
>A quarter the size of said 19 inch or larger CRT. Have you any idea how
>silly that question was?



He was making a point, about how poor a choice it would be
to get a larger CRT and have the 4 windows tiled, and he was
quite right, it would be a very poor and clumsy way to work.
"IF" someone actually needed 4 open windows the obvious
choice is two widescreen LCDs.




 
Reply With Quote
 
kony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:30:44 +0100, "Agamemnon"
<(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote:

>
>"ThePunisher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:9t5wg.16412$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>>
>>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>>

>>
>> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the same
>> time would be?

>
>Since I am using 1920x1440 resolution right now the answer is yes. The size
>of each of the windows would be 93% of the window size when expanded to full
>screen if you were using 1024x768 resolution.


No, not the size, only the # of pixels. BIG difference on a
CRT.

>If you overlap the top and
>bottom borders of each window and the side scroll bars


It is ridiculous to suggest working like that.

>then you'd be able to
>see the same work area you would see at 1024x768 in each quadrant and anyway
>there is not need to overlap. You can tile 4 instances of Word with A4
>documents selected at 100% and still be able to see the whole of the page ...


No, you will be able to see a percentage of the outline of
it, but not be able to discriminate at a per-pixel level
anymore even with all pixels supposedly displayed. That is,
unless your monitor has dual DVI, you sit extremely close to
it, and it has outstanding quality. With all these factors
in place, it's merely a very poor way to work with all that
overlapping and manual adjustment every time a window is
opened.


>...within the standard margins. For most web pages 4 instances of Internet
>explorer tiled will display the whole width of the page since most pages are
>set to 800 pixels wide.


You don't seem to grasp what is obvious to most people. The
goal is not merely to have every pixel on screen, it's to
have them large enough and accurately enough reproduced to
be discernable, individually. If you're not going to to
that, there wasn't any point to it in the first place, you
could merely choose smaller window elements and font sizes.


>
>If you want more you could always use 2048x1536 resolution by my monitor
>isn't really designed for that resolution although it can go up to it.
>Useful for editing lots of images side by side though or very large spread
>sheets where the fonts are not too small.



Why are you suggesting such a horrible way to work? It is
far worse than any other alternative, especially for image
editing because the CRT at high res has terrible contrast
and suffers from bleeding.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Agamemnon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2006

"kony" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:30:44 +0100, "Agamemnon"
> <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote:
>
>>
>>"ThePunisher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:9t5wg.16412$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> "Agamemnon" <(E-Mail Removed)_SPAM> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)
>>>>
>>>> Get a 19 inch or larger CRT that can display up to 1920x1440
>>>> resolution or over. Then you will be able to watch HD movies at
>>>> 1920x1080 and tile 4 wordprocessor or internet explorer windows on
>>>> the screen at the same time and have no problems with loss of usable
>>>> area. (LCD's only go up to 1600x1200 which is not big enough.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> LOL!! have you any idea how small the 4 open windows on screen at the
>>> same
>>> time would be?

>>
>>Since I am using 1920x1440 resolution right now the answer is yes. The
>>size
>>of each of the windows would be 93% of the window size when expanded to
>>full
>>screen if you were using 1024x768 resolution.

>
> No, not the size, only the # of pixels. BIG difference on a
> CRT.


My CRT can go up to 2048x1536 pixels

>
>>If you overlap the top and
>>bottom borders of each window and the side scroll bars

>
> It is ridiculous to suggest working like that.


I can tile 4 applications such as Word or IE on the screen without need for
overlap since they only require 800x600 resolution to display all that is
required.

>
>>then you'd be able to
>>see the same work area you would see at 1024x768 in each quadrant and
>>anyway
>>there is not need to overlap. You can tile 4 instances of Word with A4
>>documents selected at 100% and still be able to see the whole of the page
>>...

>
> No, you will be able to see a percentage of the outline of
> it, but not be able to discriminate at a per-pixel level
> anymore even with all pixels supposedly displayed. That is,
> unless your monitor has dual DVI, you sit extremely close to
> it, and it has outstanding quality. With all these factors
> in place, it's merely a very poor way to work with all that
> overlapping and manual adjustment every time a window is
> opened.


I am using a CRT therefore I don't need dual DVI.

>
>
>>...within the standard margins. For most web pages 4 instances of Internet
>>explorer tiled will display the whole width of the page since most pages
>>are
>>set to 800 pixels wide.

>
> You don't seem to grasp what is obvious to most people. The


No, you don't.

> goal is not merely to have every pixel on screen, it's to
> have them large enough and accurately enough reproduced to
> be discernable, individually. If you're not going to to
> that, there wasn't any point to it in the first place, you
> could merely choose smaller window elements and font sizes.
>


I can discern every pixel on my display at 1920x1440.

>
>>
>>If you want more you could always use 2048x1536 resolution by my monitor
>>isn't really designed for that resolution although it can go up to it.
>>Useful for editing lots of images side by side though or very large spread
>>sheets where the fonts are not too small.

>
>
> Why are you suggesting such a horrible way to work? It is


No, its a very nice way to work. I have the equivalent of 4 screens on one
19 inch monitor and I don't have to keep maximizing and minimizing in order
to switch applications. Right now I have Outlook Express on the top right,
IE on the top left, live TV on the bottom left and space to write this
message on the bottom right without overlapping or needing to minimize any
of my other applications.


> far worse than any other alternative, especially for image
> editing because the CRT at high res has terrible contrast
> and suffers from bleeding.


My CRT has none of these problems. It has gamma correction as does my
graphics card and does not bleed.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What are the standard network functions provided in standard C? disappearedng@gmail.com C Programming 5 06-10-2008 08:57 PM
Widescreen: Widescreen TVs at SEARS liukaiyuan DVD Video 0 05-04-2008 01:45 AM
add pexpect to the standard library, standard "install" mechanism. funkyj Python 5 01-20-2006 08:35 PM
How standard is the standard library? steve.leach Python 1 04-18-2005 04:07 PM
Widescreen shows on widescreen TV Limited Edition Clear Vinyl DVD Video 10 04-04-2004 10:03 AM



Advertisments