Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Upgrading to LCD monitor - help please

Tags:
  • Dell
  • TV
  • LCD Monitor
  • Monitors
  • Computers
Last response: in Computer Brands
Share
February 20, 2005 7:53:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

I have a 17" monitor (one of the big fat ones that look like a tv
sitting on the desk) and I would like to upgrade to an LCD monitor,
19".
My questions - what are the most important considerations if I also
want to be able to watch movies and TV using this monitor (my pc has a
tv card fitted). Will an LCD monitor show DVDs, movies and TV as well
as the 17" old one did (when I say old, its like a year old)

More about : upgrading lcd monitor

Anonymous
a b C Monitor
February 20, 2005 7:53:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Great question Nikki, I'm looking to upgrade my system and thinking of going
towards a LCD monitor to save space. For I have found so far in my hunt is
you need to make sure you go towards the higher end of the LCD monitor group
to get the best possible picture quality such as Dells "UltraSharp" series
or equal quality monitor from the better company's such as Viewsonic which
seems to always get good reviews from they're users. Although another
question I would like to pose is picture size, seems to me a 17" flat panel
LCD looks to be the same size picture wise to an 19" CRT (regular monitor we
have now). Is this true or just a optical illusion on my part??


<Nikki> wrote in message news:4218bf81.9623046@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>I have a 17" monitor (one of the big fat ones that look like a tv
> sitting on the desk) and I would like to upgrade to an LCD monitor,
> 19".
> My questions - what are the most important considerations if I also
> want to be able to watch movies and TV using this monitor (my pc has a
> tv card fitted). Will an LCD monitor show DVDs, movies and TV as well
> as the 17" old one did (when I say old, its like a year old)
>
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
February 20, 2005 7:53:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Pinger wrote:
> Great question Nikki, I'm looking to upgrade my system and thinking of going
> towards a LCD monitor to save space. For I have found so far in my hunt is
> you need to make sure you go towards the higher end of the LCD monitor group
> to get the best possible picture quality such as Dells "UltraSharp" series
> or equal quality monitor from the better company's such as Viewsonic which
> seems to always get good reviews from they're users. Although another
> question I would like to pose is picture size, seems to me a 17" flat panel
> LCD looks to be the same size picture wise to an 19" CRT (regular monitor we
> have now). Is this true or just a optical illusion on my part??
>
>
> <Nikki> wrote in message news:4218bf81.9623046@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>
>>I have a 17" monitor (one of the big fat ones that look like a tv
>>sitting on the desk) and I would like to upgrade to an LCD monitor,
>>19".
>>My questions - what are the most important considerations if I also
>>want to be able to watch movies and TV using this monitor (my pc has a
>>tv card fitted). Will an LCD monitor show DVDs, movies and TV as well
>>as the 17" old one did (when I say old, its like a year old)
>>
>
>
>
One thing to keep in mind is that a 19" CRT (old style) monitor gives
you about 17.8 inches of screen space, but a 19" LCD monitor gives you
exactly 19 inches of screen space.

So, technically in terms of size, 17" LCD's usually are closest to 19"
CRT's.

While I own both a Dell Ultrasharp (connected via DVI) and a 17" analog
flat panel, I don't see much difference between the two. I would figure
out what your budget is and then find a monitor which fits into your budget.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
February 20, 2005 9:22:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

I've been using my new Dell Ultrasharp 1704FPV 17" LCD monitor about a week
now via DVI and love it. It's definitely very bright and sharp. My 3 year
old 17" Dell Trinitron was nice, but I do not regret upgrading to LCD. You
can sometimes find the 1704FPV on sale at Dell's site for around $250.

The only concern I've had with the 1704FPV is with the stand. No doubt Dell
offers the most sturdy LCD stands available, but with this unit the monitor
would not center perfectly level on the stand. It's built to rotate only one
direction and not the other. When rotated to top dead center as far as it
would go it would not center on the stand. Finally had to take the rotation
mechanism apart and remove a metal pin that restricts full rotation. That
fixed the stand for good, but the display quality has been nothing but
perfect.

<Nikki> wrote in message news:4218bf81.9623046@news-text.dial.pipex.com...

> My questions - what are the most important considerations if I also
> want to be able to watch movies and TV using this monitor (my pc has a
> tv card fitted). Will an LCD monitor show DVDs, movies and TV as well
> as the 17" old one did (when I say old, its like a year old)
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
February 21, 2005 12:55:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Pinger" <Pinger@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:aYGdnU_B-qNcTIXfRVn-oQ@adelphia.com...
> [] Although another
> question I would like to pose is picture size, seems to me a 17" flat panel
> LCD looks to be the same size picture wise to an 19" CRT (regular monitor we
> have now). Is this true or just a optical illusion on my part??

It just so happens that tonight I was gathering/generating some related
data, and in case you are interested, here it is. For proper alignment,
copy/paste the following into notepad or some other editor that uses
fixed width fonts.

In the following table, "Display Width" and "Display Height" are for
the viewable area of the displays.

Monitor Display Width Display Height Aspect Ratio Native Res
17" CRT 12.5 9.4 4:3 N/A
19" CRT 14 10.5 4:3 N/A
1704FPT LCD 13.3 10.6 5:4 1200x1024
1801FP LCD 14.1 11.3 5:4 1200x1024
1905FP LCD 14.8 11.9 5:4 1200x1024
2001FP LCD 16.1 12.1 4:3 1600x1200
2005WFP LCD 17 10.7 8:5 1680x1050

Below are figures for what I'll call "logical pixels per inch" (LPPI). If a
monitor is 12.5" wide and running at 1024x768, there will be approx
1024/12.5 logical pixes per inch. I say "logical" so that there is no
confusion with LCD panels, where the 1024 logical pixels will be scaled
to the N physical pixels of the display. Assuming all other things are equal
(Windows is using the same DPI, fonts size prefs are the same, etc),
I believe the following gives one some idea of how large things will look
on the various displays. For example, a 19" CRT at 1024x768 displays
roughly 73 LPPI. On a 2001FP, that same resolution would produce
roughly 63.5 LPPI. Thus the same text or picture would appear approx
13% larger on the 2001FP at that resolution.

Notes: The greater the difference between horizontal LPPI and vertical
LPPI, the more elongated text and images will be. If you run an LCD
display at a non-native resolution, the image quality will be reduced. In
some cases a little bit, in some cases alot.

Logical PPI data (hLPPI = hRes/dWidth, vLPPI = vRes/dHeight)...

17" CRT
1024x768: hLPPI = 81.92, vLPPI = 81.7
1152x864: hLPPI = 92.16, vLPPI = 91.91
1280x1024: hLPPI = 102.4, vLPPI = 108.94

19" CRT
1024x768: hLPPI = 73.14, vLPPI = 73.14
1152x864: hLPPI = 82.29, vLPPI = 82.29
1280x1024: hLPPI = 91.43, vLPPI = 97.52

1704FPT LCD
1024x768: hLPPI = 76.99, vLPPI = 72.45
1152x864: hLPPI = 86.62, vLPPI = 81.51
1280x1024: hLPPI = 96.24, vLPPI = 96.6 (native)

1801FP LCD
1024x768: hLPPI = 72.62, vLPPI = 67.96
1152x864: hLPPI = 81.7, vLPPI = 76.46
1280x1024: hLPPI = 90.78, vLPPI = 90.62 (native)

1905FP LCD
1024x768: hLPPI = 69.19, vLPPI = 64.54
1152x864: hLPPI = 77.84, vLPPI = 72.61
1280x1024: hLPPI = 86.49, vLPPI = 86.05 (native)

2001FP LCD
1024x768: hLPPI = 63.6, vLPPI = 63.47
1152x864: hLPPI = 71.55, vLPPI = 71.4
1280x1024: hLPPI = 79.5, vLPPI = 84.63
1600x1200: hLPPI = 99.38, vLPPI = 99.17 (native)

2005WFP LCD
1024x768: hLPPI = 60.24, vLPPI = 71.78
1152x864: hLPPI = 67.76, vLPPI = 80.75
1280x1024: hLPPI = 75.29, vLPPI = 95.7
1600x1200: hLPPI = 94.12, vLPPI = 112.15
1680x1050: hLPPI = 98.82, vLPPI = 98.13 (native)


A 19" CRT at 1024x768 compared to LCDs @ native...

1704FPT = 96.42 vs 73.14 = 31.8% smaller objects
1801FP = 90.7 vs 73.14 = 24% smaller objects
1905FP = 86.27 vs 73.14 = 18% smaller objects
2001FP = 99.28 vs 73.14 = 35.7% smaller objects
2005WFP = 98.48 vs 73.14 = 34.6% smaller objects

Comments/corrections welcome, I cranked this out pretty
quickly.
February 21, 2005 11:08:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Well done User N. Good to see someone so enthusiastic to help others
out. I learn't quite a lot myself for your hard earned nose to the grind.
ricardo

User N wrote:
>
> "Pinger" <Pinger@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:aYGdnU_B-qNcTIXfRVn-oQ@adelphia.com...
>
>> [] Although another question I would like to pose is picture size,
>> seems to me a 17" flat panel LCD looks to be the same size picture
>> wise to an 19" CRT (regular monitor we have now). Is this true or just
>> a optical illusion on my part??
>
>
> It just so happens that tonight I was gathering/generating some related
> data, and in case you are interested, here it is. For proper alignment,
> copy/paste the following into notepad or some other editor that uses
> fixed width fonts.
>
> In the following table, "Display Width" and "Display Height" are for
> the viewable area of the displays.
>
> Monitor Display Width Display Height Aspect Ratio Native Res
> 17" CRT 12.5 9.4 4:3 N/A
> 19" CRT 14 10.5 4:3 N/A
> 1704FPT LCD 13.3 10.6 5:4 1200x1024
> 1801FP LCD 14.1 11.3 5:4 1200x1024
> 1905FP LCD 14.8 11.9 5:4 1200x1024
> 2001FP LCD 16.1 12.1 4:3 1600x1200
> 2005WFP LCD 17 10.7 8:5 1680x1050
>
> Below are figures for what I'll call "logical pixels per inch" (LPPI).
> If a
> monitor is 12.5" wide and running at 1024x768, there will be approx
> 1024/12.5 logical pixes per inch. I say "logical" so that there is no
> confusion with LCD panels, where the 1024 logical pixels will be scaled
> to the N physical pixels of the display. Assuming all other things are
> equal
> (Windows is using the same DPI, fonts size prefs are the same, etc),
> I believe the following gives one some idea of how large things will look
> on the various displays. For example, a 19" CRT at 1024x768 displays
> roughly 73 LPPI. On a 2001FP, that same resolution would produce
> roughly 63.5 LPPI. Thus the same text or picture would appear approx
> 13% larger on the 2001FP at that resolution.
>
> Notes: The greater the difference between horizontal LPPI and vertical
> LPPI, the more elongated text and images will be. If you run an LCD
> display at a non-native resolution, the image quality will be reduced. In
> some cases a little bit, in some cases alot.
>
> Logical PPI data (hLPPI = hRes/dWidth, vLPPI = vRes/dHeight)...
>
> 17" CRT
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 81.92, vLPPI = 81.7
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 92.16, vLPPI = 91.91
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 102.4, vLPPI = 108.94
>
> 19" CRT
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 73.14, vLPPI = 73.14
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 82.29, vLPPI = 82.29
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 91.43, vLPPI = 97.52
>
> 1704FPT LCD
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 76.99, vLPPI = 72.45
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 86.62, vLPPI = 81.51
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 96.24, vLPPI = 96.6 (native)
>
> 1801FP LCD
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 72.62, vLPPI = 67.96
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 81.7, vLPPI = 76.46
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 90.78, vLPPI = 90.62 (native)
>
> 1905FP LCD
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 69.19, vLPPI = 64.54
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 77.84, vLPPI = 72.61
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 86.49, vLPPI = 86.05 (native)
>
> 2001FP LCD
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 63.6, vLPPI = 63.47
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 71.55, vLPPI = 71.4
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 79.5, vLPPI = 84.63
> 1600x1200: hLPPI = 99.38, vLPPI = 99.17 (native)
>
> 2005WFP LCD
> 1024x768: hLPPI = 60.24, vLPPI = 71.78
> 1152x864: hLPPI = 67.76, vLPPI = 80.75
> 1280x1024: hLPPI = 75.29, vLPPI = 95.7
> 1600x1200: hLPPI = 94.12, vLPPI = 112.15
> 1680x1050: hLPPI = 98.82, vLPPI = 98.13 (native)
>
>
> A 19" CRT at 1024x768 compared to LCDs @ native...
>
> 1704FPT = 96.42 vs 73.14 = 31.8% smaller objects
> 1801FP = 90.7 vs 73.14 = 24% smaller objects
> 1905FP = 86.27 vs 73.14 = 18% smaller objects
> 2001FP = 99.28 vs 73.14 = 35.7% smaller objects
> 2005WFP = 98.48 vs 73.14 = 34.6% smaller objects
>
> Comments/corrections welcome, I cranked this out pretty
> quickly.
!