24" LCDs

[GT98]

I had the Dell for a year now, amazing monitor - though it is a little bright if you work during the night.

mfg
wulfman

Just looking at this thread, I've had mine for over a year too...still never upgraded the video card...next year when I get Vista LOL

[Greebe]

I can't see spending money for a Dell 24"WS when the 20" version runs the same res (ie lower pixel pitch) and costs half the price.

Of course I still can't see dropping my P260 21" crt typically running @1600x1200 (some times higher, will go upto 2048x1536) for a monitor that can't even do that many pixels and have seen them shipped for under $150!

Have been thinking about the Sceptre X37SV-Naga 37" LCD monitor / HDTV running @1920x1050

It does have a few limitations but overall I can deal with them shipped for under $1350 via NewEgg.

AVS forum review. (warning huge thread)

[Wulfman]

I can't see spending money for a Dell 24"WS when the 20" version runs the same res (ie lower pixel pitch) and costs half the price.

I don't see 1600x1200 being the same resolution as 1920x1200, there's a 20% deskspace increase. and my digital images (3:2) make better use of the 16:10 format than of a 4:3 format, not even speaking of DVDs here. enough reasons for me.

mfg
wulfman

[Greebe]

I don't see 1600x1200 being the same resolution as 1920x1200, there's a 20% deskspace increase. and my digital images (3:2) make better use of the 16:10 format than of a 4:3 format, not even speaking of DVDs here. enough reasons for me.

mfg
wulfman

First off I was refering to something I'd like sometime early spring late winter time frame, and to be used as a TV and for gaming, not a monitor. Tho it would fit on my desk, it would be a waste of space. Personally would opt for the 30" or similar, but not at that price.

Secondly the monitor you all are refering to reccommended resolution is (grabbing my Dell catalog) 1680x1050 (yes I do know what it's Max res is) which may not scale as well to your picture format as well as the WS but then again whenever viewing pictures you don't use all that space anyway due to the app eating up the top and bottom edge of the screen. If I limit myself to 1600x1200 (remember I can go as high as...) the wasted space is absorbed by the additional headroom my monitor provides. The WS would force you to scale down a bit lowering the viewable resolution. Additionally The larger screen size only provides larger pixels, something I don't wish to see. With mine boasting a 0.24 pixel pitch (2407wfp = 0.27) anything larger seems absurd especially for image editing, not when there are monitors designed specifically for this purpose (photo proofing) having nearly half the pitch and nearly 4 times the res for the same size.

[schmosef]

Secondly the monitor you all are refering to reccommended resolution is (grabbing my Dell catalog) 1680x1050 (yes I do know what it's Max res is)

Maybe your catalog is out of date?

Here's the product page: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/p...n&sku=320-4335

All I see is max res 1920x1200. I don't see anything about 1680x1050 as a recommended res.

An employee bought one about 1.5 months ago (he had it shipped to the office and was running it here for a day) and it looked awesome at max res. The colour was uniform and consistent. The images on screen were sharp, crisp and clear.

I was jealous.

If I wasn't dropping about $10k on a vacation in December I'd have bought one when it was on sale yesterday.

Incidentally, when my employee bought one the Dell site screwed up and only ended up charging him $450.

You're right though, WS isn't for everybody.

[Greebe]

Catalog "Oct. 2006 | Dell.com/oct". Note on the back "Postmaster Please deliver between Oct11 - Oct13 and I got it a smidge over a week ago. It and the 4 months previous (only mentioning those because all others have been tossed) list it's recommended resolution as 1680x1050. I have no doubt it can go higher, just like my monitors' recommended res is 1600x1200, but it will do 2048x1536.

You can stop the insults now

[Helevitia]

I'm pretty sure it's 1920x1200. All of the reviews say that too. I think the mag is a misprint.

[Greebe]

Oh good grief Charlie Brown

Dell.com lists the Maximum Resolution @ 1920x1200, whereas their catalog lists it's recommened resolution as 1680x1050

The trade off is normally refresh rate for the extended resolutions beyond the recommended res.

It's not a typo, it is normal and typical for monitors to have both listed. Just as mine has it's listed as 1600x1200 with a max of 2048x1536. You really don't want todo the latter as it's only 60Hz. Now before anyone desides to give me a dissertation on the differences between CRT and LCD take a step back and think for a second who you are addressing.

[spadnos]

Hmmm.

The native resolution of my dell 2407FPW monitors is 1920x1200. This is the maximum resolution you can drive with single link DVI. I suspect that the 1680x1050 recommendation may be for the analog input(s), where refresh rate matters (it doesn't really matter much on LCDs in any case, but it does matter for the analog input circuitry).

I don't really care what the catalog or website says - I just look at the monitors

- Steve

[schmosef]

can stop the insults now

No one's trying to insult you. You can crank down the hyper sensitivity meter now.

spadnos is probably right. The 1680x1050 recommended res is probably for the analog input. Otherwise it's a misprint.

[Wombat]

It's not a typo, it is normal and typical for monitors to have both listed. Just as mine has it's listed as 1600x1200 with a max of 2048x1536. You really don't want todo the latter as it's only 60Hz. Now before anyone desides to give me a dissertation on the differences between CRT and LCD take a step back and think for a second who you are addressing.

I know who's being addressed, but you're still wrong. An LCD's max. res. IS its recommended res. Otherwise you're interpolating, or only using a portion of the screen.

[The PIT]

2407 and 2405 are 1920 x 1200 how do I know I've got one. End of argument. 1680 x xxxx would look crappy for reasons already stated. Unless you m ice pies are bad then I recommend getting some new glasses.

[rylan]

Yup those are 1920x1200. We have a couple at work. The EDID information has 1920x1200, and according to the lcd module manufacturer specs that is correct.

Oh and btw you can do a much higher resolution over single link dvi, but you'd need some special hardware in the panel to support it instead of the el-cheapo Pixelworks or Genesis scalar chips that everyone uses.. Incidently, that is some of the stuff I do at work.

[Greebe]

The max res is not neccessarily the native res tho it can be and it's not a misprint.

For those who decided that I've got it all cranked up think about this first. Did any of you bother contacting Dell and find out why they have two specs listed. Noting that I claimed a different res that was it's recommended choice and that what was being noted on various website and Dell itself was it's maximum res. Mentioning this was nothing more than an FYI

Am currently waiting for Dells support to contact me back with the difference (this is my second time on this subject; see below). Tho the person I chatted with did believe it was nothing more than refresh, still there is a bit uneasiness when not knowing for a fact. SOmething I know you all can appreciate. At the very least I wasn't accusing any of you of either having false info or claiming what you were saying was a misprint.

Because of these transgressions I felt attacked because I always do my homework prior to making such statements. We certainly don't need another Jorden around here do we? Nope, and I don't feel any of you are in that league, but still the statements made were out of line because all of you refused to give me the same benefit of doubt for the statements I made.

Did that compute?

Will refrain from further posts in this thread til I hear back for Dell and when I do, I won't be rubbing your nose in it like some do. Just the facts.

BTW I had considered this monitor until the noted recommended res was 1680x1050, Dell then didn't give me a straight answer (6months ago) until that time I also thought it was squarely @1920x1200. That's the reason this thread peaked my interest and thus reported what I had found out from doing a bit more digging

[Greebe]

rylan, the P260's EDID reports upto 2048x1536, but that's neither here nor there. @ that res Siezure inducing 60Hz refresh sucks and I'm sure you all can agree on that.