erm.. this is what I had experienced before. AG mon -> all geo distorted like mad (2 viewsonic highest end, and 1 sony tri) SM mon -> geo still distorted but not that bad. just around the edge but definitely not in the center like AG (samsung and philips)
I think the Viewsonic geometric distortion is seriously bad compare to my Sony. Mine is not perfect, but it's pretty good, considering that it's more than 3 years old now!
You win some, you loose some . On the other hand I find SM/IM monitors blurry - especially noticeable around the edges of icons. Maybe in a few years we'll have LCDs trumping CRTs in every way, but for now...
Yeah, it will take awhile before LCD can beat CRT completely. I want high res display too, since LCD is so much sharper than CRT, a 17" display 'should' easily handle 1600x1200.
Yeah, unfortunately, the highest desktop 17" LCDs can do is currently 1280x1024. Hmm.. But I think it's definitely a possibility. Fujitsu has been able to squeeze 1280x960 into a 10.1" panel for years now! Even my Joybook 7000's 14.1" panel fits 1280x960 pixels. So, 1600x1200 in a 17" panel "should" not be a problem. Only high cost is a concern.
I'm already quite used to 1280 wide display on 15" or smaller screens. Then again, the notebook screen is very close to me. Desktop monitors will be a little different. I think 1280x1024 on 17" is okay. 1600x1200 is better for 19".
I've been using 1280x960 on a 17" CRT, and 17" LCD has 1" more viewable space then 'equivalent' CRT, and since they are much shaper, I have no problem adapting to it. I want loads of desktop space, and capable of testing 1600x1200 resolution if needed.
my 2 cents, for gaming and movies use CRT as response time is 0ms. plus 19" is still less in price than a normal 17" LCD. whereas if surfing, work, etc with less power usage and you dont have air con in room, get LCD. latest response time is 8ms Samsung. am monitoring Samsung pricing n response time to go lower.. heheh
i dunno much about lcd but i played once on my freind 17 inch samsung lcd [ rich kid] . no ghosting problem as far as i seen after playing for hours. doom3
it must've been a better response time 16ms and below. usually ghosting(afterimages on screens) if not mistaken can seen with fast moving object on black background. but here's good news from (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18269) published in sept 2004 "LCD pixel response speed doubled JAPANESE newspaper the Nihon Kaizai Shimbun said that Mitsubishi has mastered a technology to improve the response speed of pixels on LCDs by 100 per cent or more. It’s done this by getting rid of the afterimages on screens which known as “ghosts”, said the newspaper, and invented a proprietary system called Dual Domain Bend. It cites unnamed sources at Mitsubishi saying that this method produces a response speed of one millisecond when power is applied and five milliseconds when the lights go off and the power goes down. That, the paper said, compares to up to forty milliseconds to switch pixels on and off. While the technique, when it gets to the manufacturing stage, will have immediate benefits for PC monitors, it will also help narrow the gap between LCD TVs and plasma displays, which have a quicker response speed."
gaming LCD, be sure too get a <16ms panel. i noticed slight ghosting on a 16ms benq 737s and i took that back and added on the difference for the 172x. i've had my 172x for around 8 months now and it still brings a smile to the face. won't dissapoint if u're taking the plunge into a expensive gaming lcd.
Not much geometry distortion on my 19" philips. It's great so far. Could have used the extra space from lcd if it's more affordable.
172x uses 6bit panel..and that explains why they can hit 12ms respone time. 6bit panel is something i do not want to get... it can do 16m color though, thru color dithering technique...but still..I would prefer 8bit panel. again, dun just judge an LCD based on respone time alone. get an LCD with good panel, even at 20ms respone time, u will not see ghosting.
That's why it's still best to eyeball the monitor before buying.. Argghh.. No one has tested the 1905FP yet??
