21/22" monitors thoughts

[Marmita]

I really opened this thread to inform the world that I bought a 22" iiyama Visionmaster Pro510 monitor and it is great.

But I would really love to hear some thoughts about other 21/22 monitors because to tell you the truth, this is the only big monitor I've ever seen so my prespectives are not so good.

I hope you r not going tell my I bought a bad monitor...

[Le Bodge]

If you're happy with it, how can it be bad?

[DuRaNgO]

oh man, you didn't buy that one!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
just kiding! it's sounds great, should show dvd's really well!
jim

------------------
PIII-500mhz @ 620 ! with an Abit BE6 mobo
128mb pc-100
Mill G400 (YAHOO!!!) 32mb @ 165/205 with MGATweak-410mhz, (2.5, 2, 2.5), PD 5.30 & bios 1.5-22
Maxtor 14.3 gb Uata66 hdd
SB Live!
Winblows 98se & DX7
32 lbs. of fans, heatsinks and aluminum ductwork
3DMark Result 5954.69 3DMarks
Synthetic CPU 3D Speed 9325.69 CPU 3DMarks
Rasterizer Score 2791.72 3DRasterMarks
Game 1 - Race 65.07 FPS
Game 2 - First Person 54.89 FPS
Fill Rate 268.79 MTexels/s

[Marmita]

I have been using a 17" Gateway Vivitron (It's just a MAG innovation with a different name) for about 5 years, and inthe past 2 year It became very blury, I got used to the shitty quality a now every monitor You'll give me will look great to me (I even thought about buying a 19" MAG again...)
So that's why I am asking just want to know what I've got in my hands...

[mathew]

SONY S O N Y SS OO NN YY MAN I JUST GOTTA SAY THAT I THINK SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY ARE THE MUTS NUTS IN MY OPINION HEHE

I gotta 21" and its sweet :P

[enKoDed]

I purchased a Cornerstone 50/101sf 21" monitor a little over a year ago. PC World reviewed this monitor as excellent in text and graphics. The text is so crisp it reminds me of a quality LCD. Cornerstone has come out with some budget monitors, and I can't vouch for the quality of those. It seems all companies have some lemons in their monitor lineup, and I imagine Cornerstone is no different. I like to run at 1152x864 resolution. This monitor was developed as an "imaging" monitor. It has an Hitachi tube that was further tweaked by Cornerstone for utmost text display quality. I have yet to see a monitor that has improved on this one, but I must admit that I am so content with mine, I haven't looked much

[Brian R.]

I bought my Nokia Multigraph 445Xpro 6 months ago and have nothing but good things to say about it. My G400 MAX and this monitor look perfect at 1800 x 1440. Best image quality I've ever seen.

------------------
Win98SE, 600 PIII @672 MHz (@2.40 V) w/Alpha P3-125 heatsink/fan, ABIT BX6-2 MB, 128 MB Siemens PC100 SDRAM, G400 MAX, Diamond V2 SLI, Diamond MX300 with Senheiser HD-600 headphones, Sennheiser DSP360 Dolby processor, and Shure FP22 headphone amplifier, CL Dxr3 Decoder, Adaptec AHA2940 w/uw SCSI, IBM 9ZX 9.1GB 10K UW SCSI HD, WDE 4360 4.3GB 7.2k UW SCSI HD, Pioneer 303s SCSI DVD, modified Supermicro SC750A case with PCP&C Silencer 275W PS, and a partridge in a pear tree.

[Dyre]

Sonies look great, but i noticed one problem that drives me insane with all Trinitron Tube based monitors. 2 small lines horazontaly across the screen, spliting the screen into 3 equal parts. The image quality is stunning, but as soon as i notice those lines i go insane!!!!! I dont know what it is, but every monitor with a sony tube has these "lines o death" as they have become know in our circle of computer geeks. Even the new Flat Tube Sony's have this flaw! WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY! Why does such an awesome screen have to be flawed!!

Anyone else notice? If you have a Sony and dont notice them yet, DONT LOOK FOR THEM! You will forever be cursed by the Pandora's Box of Sony Tubes!


HEHE that was fun.

------------------
</list>
PIII 450 @ 464
generic BX6 motherboard
G400 MAX : )
Maxtor 13 gig UDMA 33
Maxtor 13 gig UDMA 66
Creative 36x CD-ROM
HP 2x2x6x CD-RW
64 megs PC100 RAM
Intel 10/100
Soundblaster 32 AWE
DiamondMAX 56k
Logitech Wireless Desktop (best $50 ive ever spent)
4 large fans.

[rjcarr]

I just had a quick comment on my monitor and comments to some of the other people in this post.

I have a 19" ViewSonic G790 and I hate it. I run at 16x12 and it just is not crisp at all (I have tried at every reasonable resolution, and 16x12 is actually the best).
But, I think that my problem is that I previously had a 17" trinitron tube, where everything is absolutely silky. Does anyone else have any opinions on the G790? I have read reviews, but nothing from anyone I really respect (like all of you of course).

Okay, now for replies:

enkoded - how can you run a 21" monitor at 11x8, do you have a visual impairment? I ran my 17" monitor at that res and I wished I could bump it up to at least 12x10.

dyre - be happy, very happy. Trinitron tubes are awesome, get over it!

thanks -joe

[everettes]

Sony. Period.

Dyre. In a day or two you'll never notice the "Lines" again. They dissappear with any color other than white.

------------------
Reach me on MS Messenger as everettes@hotmail.com
PIII550, Intel SE440BX-2, 3 x 128 Kingston PC100CAS2 ECC, 2940U2W, Seagate Cheetah, Voodoo3 3000, G400-32 SH, Plextor 8\20, Plextor 40Max, Pioneer 303s, SBLive!, MS FFPro, Altec Lansing ACS-48, Sony CDP 520GS

[Tessen]

I'm using a 19" Optiquest V95, and the picture is very clear at 1024X768 and is what I like to use for the desktop. At 16X12, its highest resolution, the difference between a V3 2K and a Max is evident (the Max output is noticeable sharper). But I don't like to read text at such a high resolution.

I'm also using an old 14" as my second monitor (until I have enough $ for a bigger and newer monitor) from an IBM PS/1. It can only display at 640X480 with a vertical refresh rate of 60 Hz. Even the Max can't do much with that, I'm afraid.

....Tessen....

[Snake-Eyes]

Sounds like you've got a really sweet monitor now, Marmita.

I know what you mean about the Gateway Vivitron 17 monitor. I'm using one now, at least until I can afford a good 19" Sony. The Vivitrons are based on the Sony Trinitron tube, so that's one thing in their favor. The quality for the Gateways appears to be low though- this is the third for me since 1995 (Gateway at least has sent me replacements- both the others developed image problems, one with color, the other with a very out-of-proportion display).

------------------
Ace

[Grimace]

My Sony G500 is pretty sweet. It's a 21", perfectly flat, and can do 2058x1536@75 max. I run at 1600x1200 under Win98 and 1800x1440 under linux. A G400MAX and a G500, a pretty sweet combination...

[enKoDed]

Reply to rjcarr: Actually, I can read the smallest print found on paper today with no problems at all. I find a good rule of thumb is to use a resolution that allows one to efficiently manage and navigate the apps and documents they commonly use, while at the same time displaying a comfortable font size.
My 21" monitor tube measures 19 3/4 " viewable diagonally. Using HSIZE and VSIZE, I shrink the display down further so that there is a border of about 5/16ths around the edges. Why do I do this. Because most monitors display their utmost focus detail with a similar border. This is why many monitors default to having a border when their default sizings are selected for any given resolution. My eyes pick up the finest detail, and I can easily notice the improvement in focus the borders give me. For games however, I set the relevant resolutions to fill the screen.
For me, 1152x864 is an ideal trade off between app/document management efficiency and text readability. At this resolution, I can run IE5.01 with the favorites bar always open on the left side of the screen, and display Web pages with excellent coverage on the remaining 5/6ths of the screen. Many Web pages don't even fill the width of screen that is allotted them. Office 97 apps are efficiently managed at this resolution, and Word 97 in "page layout view" is a joy to operate. My graphics editing is also at an optimal layout as well.
Because I read a LOT of text on my monitor, I have opted to change the default "black on white" text/background scheme, to a "white on navy blue" one. Many older Dos programs use this color combination for the highest long-term text readability without eye fatigue. Even Word 97 has this contrast scheme selectable as an option.
If I ran CAD apps, I would then most likely run at 1600x1200, but my chosen resolution works the best for me by allowing for fantastic command over my apps, with attendant mercy on my overworked eyes. Many people have eyestrain after reading text for long periods of time due to the "resting focal accommodation" phenomena. This is when the eyes lose their ability to remain focused at the precise distance where the image is displayed on the screen, and gradually lock their focus on a point near the back of the monitor. The reason this happens is because a monitor can't display edges with the sharpness of quality magazine print. With a magazine, the edges of print are so sharp, and of such contrast, that the human eye is able to maintain exact focus for long periods of time. Computer monitors vary in this ability to display edges that maintain eye lens focus stability. So, it is always best to maximize the contrast and sharpness available to ones eyes, by using a good color contrast scheme, as well as the lowest resolution possible that will allow one to perform their computing duties with efficiency. With many video adapter/monitor combinations, using too high of a refresh rate can also blur the edges of on-screen objects. It is usually best to use the lowest refresh rate available that is friendly to the eyes. With most, this should be around 75 Hz. When I bump my refresh up to 85 Hz, I can definitely see a reduction in edge sharpness. Some monitors can run at 85 Hz or higher, and maintain optimal sharpness, so I won't argue with those who have good results at those higher refresh rates.
It seems to me that some people like to run at a higher resolution than necessary for their computing environment, for the same reason that *some* Voodoo owners like to claim a higher frame rate than the competition. Sometimes "higher" isn't analogous to quality. I hope this rant has answered the question you directed at me.

[Tseng]

I have a ViewSonic G790 too and I love it. I have used it with my ATi Rage Pro, Matrox G200, ATi Rage Fury and now Matrox G400. It performs very well 1280x1024. Going up to 1600x1200 does make it blurry, probably because the highest scan rate @ 16x12 is only 75Hz.