2007WFP vs. 2007FP

[stonedwaldo420]

I am picking out two LCDs for a dual monitor setup at work. Considering that it is at work, there will be no gaming or movie viewing (I know.. sucks to be me), so I was hoping to go with two non-widescreen 20inch Dell UltraSharp monitors.
However, here are the prices!
UltraSharp 2007WFP widescreen for $339
UltraSharp 2007FP for $449

Why the hell is there that much of price difference? The reason I wanted the non-widescreen display is that it should provide more vertical space for viewing documents.

Anyway, is there a large quality difference here? If they are of the same quality, I will compromise and go with the two widescreens and use the extra cash for the desktop.

BTW, I am limited to only Dell LCDs.

 

[fuziwuzi]

i don't think it;s related to quality, but availablility. widescreens are moer popular that 4:3 so they prolly produce more, and can get them cheaper. more to do with economy than anything else

 

[EvilNick]

Why don't you go ahead with the dual 2007WFP, then run both in portrait mode side by side?
That'll give you 1680 px of vertical space (80 px more than the 2007FP ).

 

[Destroid]

Also, 20" 4:3 has 488.2cm2 compared to a 454.2cm2 for 16:10.

And 1,920,000 vs 1,764,00 pixels.

And smaller pixels.

 

[joemama]

If you want vertical space for viewing documents...the 2007WFP in portrait mode will give you all you can handle.

 

[stonedwaldo420]

Thanks for all the advice!!

I will definitely go with two 2007WFPs and use the $$ i save to get an extra 160GB 10Krpm drive and RAID0 them.