OT: 20" dell lcd deal

Sweet, but I will not buy one untill 1600x1200 @ 75+ Hz is supported.

Regards, Scott Baugh, CSWP

>

I called Dell 2 days ago, was quoted 599.00 with free shipping. Order thru your business to get the same deal.

>

Check out the same deal here:

Regards, Scott Baugh, CSWP

>

If you have some place nearby where you can look at one for a while, you ought to try it out before rejecting it. 60 Hz doesn't seem to give me any problems, unlike on a CRT. On the other hand, I'm not very sensitive to refresh rates that drive other people nuts.

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

Refresh rates drive me nuts if it's not smooth. But I f I get a chance to look at one I sure will!

Thanks, Scott Baugh, CSWP

I don't LCDs support anything but 60Hz because they are such a different technology than CRTs.

Just a few months ago I purchased an SGI 1600SW monitor off eBay and it is by far the nicest screen I have used. If you can get your hands on one of these, it is well worth it. My 19" CRT is now gathering dust.

You can read about them here:

Scott,

My company just bought one of these for me. I run 1600 x 1200 32bit @ 60Hz but you'd never know it was 60Hz. It's rock solid. I work on it 10 hr /day and I am very susceptible to flicker. I can't detect any at that refresh rate.

Malc>Sweet, but I will not buy one untill 1600x1200 @ 75+ Hz is supported. >

I just bought one and there is no detectable flicker at 60hz and this is something I would notice. Must have a longer afterglow than CRT's.

Beta T.

I wonder. Not that I am on the market to buy one. But if they clear them, does it means that better, bigger, and cheaper LCD or OLED screens are coming?

"3d" a écrit dans le message de news:- snipped-for-privacy@bright.net...

>

I'm still having a hard time giving up my 22" CRT @ 1600 x 1200 Res though.

Regards, Scott

>

This is a non-issue with LCDs. They don't flicker because the method of refreshing the pixels is different. I think the pixels are always on in an LCD until changed whereas a CRT is interlaced. The illumination is flatter and the picture much sharper. No heat, no X-rays and no flicker.

Try this:

Wave your hand in front of a CRT monitor and you get a strobe effect.

Wave your hand in front of an LCD and you get nothing, just like waving your hand in front of a printed piece of paper.

P.

Your comments here on this subject are great. I never knew some of these benefits of an LCD.

I don't yet have an LCD and have never really used one. When they first came out, I looked at some of them at the stores and they all looked a little too pixilated for my likings. Later I found out that the smallest DPI available was around .32 (back then anyway) whereas CRT could be had at around .20 DPI. Therefore I lost interest in them and stuck to CRT's.

Have these 2 problems been improved any over the last couple of years? If so, besides the obvious benefits of space and weight, the other benefits you mentioned will interest me to start looking at them again very seriously.

That is a great way to describe the difference between LCD and CRT. Also be aware that viewing angles are something to check out on a LCD that would not be an issue with a CRT. You can also find information to compare power consumption and heat generation between the two...you may be able to justify the LCD based on energy savings.

My associate had his monitor malfunction about a week and a half ago. He went back to a CRT. It appeared as though he was looking through frosted glass. A good CRT will look crisp and sharp, but I have seen very few good CRTs. I used to get headaches from CRTs even when using higher refresh rates. I can work an LCD all day without problem.

At work the boss was farsighted enough to get us LCDs. We got Viewsonics capable of 1600x1200. Very nice when working on large assemblies. What I find useful is that I can turn a 1600x1200 on its pedastal so that it is 1200x1600. Then, because my graphics card supports it, I can rotate the screen. Then you can stack SW on top of FEA or Excel or some other program and you don't have to move windows front to back. In effect you have a 1200x800 dual screen which isn't bad. Most places that do a lot of large assembly work would really benefit from this because, from what I have seen, people need to have some sort of PDM, MRP or BOM software open along with CAD.

I think the NEC site has a calculator to find the payback on an LCD. It turns out that when you factor in the savings in energy, especially in the summer, the LCD can be economical over a year or two time frame.

A 20 inch LCD is the same size as a 21" CRT. So you wouldn't be giving up much. The increase in sharpness and the flatness of the illumination would give you more usable area.

And I can't believe you couldn't do with another 18" of desk space.

Scott wrote:

Have you used a laptop for any length of time and had eyestrain due to refresh?

Scott wrote:

As it always happens. I think more manufacturers are gaining capacity with these sizes and recouping their initial investment. Remember when VCRs were $1,000. Now you can get one for $50.

There are some fantastic technologies > I wonder. Not that I am on the market to buy one.

>

Thanks P. for your comments. I have what I believe to be a good CRT now. It is a ViewSonic Pro Series P225f (a few years old now). I have never had the headache problem however I have noticed for the past year or so the my eyesight is fading a little. Don't know if it is age or looking at this monitor all day.

I like the idea of rotating the monitor like you have. But I think I would like dual monitors better like I have at home (19" & 21" both CRT's). But the rotating idea is definitely something to keep in mind if duals are not possible.

Thanks again for your comments.

For 1600 x 1200 I agree with you. But I've got myself trained onto 2048 x

1536. Anything less seems like waste of display inches. If I'm going to be stuck with 1600 x 1200, I think I'd prefer the LCD. Otherwise, give me the CRT for sheer capacity and cost-effectiveness. I have a desk big enough for two.