D
Deleted member 104402
Guest
a
Last edited by a moderator:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
jamesavery22
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 123
Its all personal preference. Find a near by Apple store that has the 30" ACD so you can go play with it. Just sit infront of it for an hour reading this forum and playing with Mac OS 
Thats the only way you'll really know. Plenty of people here who feel 30" is great and plenty feel its too big.
As for future proof if all you are doing is avg joe tasks(web,email,excel, etc) then its arguably future proof. Some want more inputs.
Thats the only way you'll really know. Plenty of people here who feel 30" is great and plenty feel its too big.As for future proof if all you are doing is avg joe tasks(web,email,excel, etc) then its arguably future proof. Some want more inputs.
Yes, it's overkill. Seriously, what do you do at home that 1) requires that much desktop space and 2) do you really need to spend that much $$$ on your home computer display?
I have a 20" wide LCD on my desk at home. I went with the size because I felt it represented good value. I went wide because I work with audio/video in my spare time and felt it would be handy when working with timelines. I know that 21" and 22" displays don't cost that much more, but I don't need it. I also thought of doing a dual 19" or 20" setup but again, I don't need it.
As a consumer, it's always wise to stop yourself and ask "do I need this" before you open your wallent or slap that credit card down. I know we all splurge once in a while, but I know too many people who routinely buy *way* above their needs and either end up regretting it or overspend and can't actually afford what they bought.
I have a 20" wide LCD on my desk at home. I went with the size because I felt it represented good value. I went wide because I work with audio/video in my spare time and felt it would be handy when working with timelines. I know that 21" and 22" displays don't cost that much more, but I don't need it. I also thought of doing a dual 19" or 20" setup but again, I don't need it.
As a consumer, it's always wise to stop yourself and ask "do I need this" before you open your wallent or slap that credit card down. I know we all splurge once in a while, but I know too many people who routinely buy *way* above their needs and either end up regretting it or overspend and can't actually afford what they bought.
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
K10 said:
Whadareya......a smurf????!!!
No its not overkill. Its the perfect size and resolution (2560x1600). Perfect I tell yas.....PERFECTTTT!!!!!!!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2001
- Messages
- 20,694
this is a bad question to ask on this forums because for the most part everyone is going to be like get it man!!! but ask yourself if its needed, trust me I kicked the habit of buying stuff I honestly don't really need so i can have other things like my car.
LOL 30 is not overkill, 52 inch FTW (just a week or so away from getting an Aquos 52inch LCD, that will double as the primary monitor on my gaming rig. I think size is relative. So you sit back just a bit, I have 20 inchers now and am looking forward to being immersed in gameplay. Oblivion, round 2, will be fun at 52inches!
Sunin
Sunin
A 30" screen is overkill, at the beginning. Once you get use to it, it is worth every penny as long as you have a computer that is up to it. Gaming is wonderful on it. You can have a bunch of stuff open on it without having windows cover each other.
Don't listen to the people against it. When you get one, you will use it. They aren't that expensive. I don't know the OP's computer stats, but if you already have $3000+ invested in your computer, a $1500 LCD is not an overkill in size or price.
In reply to Kick
1) Games, photoshop, multitasking, everyday use, everything.
2) Compared to the $4000 I spent on my TV, it is dirt cheap for a display. I use my computer a whole lot more than my TV.
For the record, I moved from dual 20" to a single 30". Worth every penny!!
Don't listen to the people against it. When you get one, you will use it. They aren't that expensive. I don't know the OP's computer stats, but if you already have $3000+ invested in your computer, a $1500 LCD is not an overkill in size or price.
In reply to Kick
1) Games, photoshop, multitasking, everyday use, everything.
2) Compared to the $4000 I spent on my TV, it is dirt cheap for a display. I use my computer a whole lot more than my TV.
For the record, I moved from dual 20" to a single 30". Worth every penny!!
evilcartman
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,704
Personally, I think it's overkill for general tasks. It would be awesome for high-res gaming (if you have the GPU power) or watching movies...
Would it be nice to have? Of course. Is it needed? That's up for you to decide...
Would it be nice to have? Of course. Is it needed? That's up for you to decide...
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Sunin said:
Question....is the 52" your getting a 1080p?? If not I would skip it. But there are 1080p 50 inch plus LCDs coming from different manufacturers. I would look out for those.
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=974930
I love the reply I got
I really enjoyed the 20" ws but that felt big to me. I sold my system and bought a 14" ws laptop and that was fine for me. Since not needing the portability anymore I have returned to the desktops and again I am searching for that perfect monitor size for me. Spend some time at some B&M stores and see what fits you.
I love the reply I got
I really enjoyed the 20" ws but that felt big to me. I sold my system and bought a 14" ws laptop and that was fine for me. Since not needing the portability anymore I have returned to the desktops and again I am searching for that perfect monitor size for me. Spend some time at some B&M stores and see what fits you.
StalkerZER0 said:
Yes 1080P 1920x1080. Should look great, with DVI
Crossing fingers! My old TV is 10 yrs old so its time to upgrade regardless and this Aquos 52inch is 4ms. which is 4x faster then my current 20 inch lcd's. I've already bought the cables and have the best agp card I can get 7800GS OC. (Upgrading in about 3/4 a year computer wise)Only you can answer that question. Most people driving SUVs, that's overkill. Worse yet Hummers. But hey, I tell ya, if I can afford a Ferrari, that's definately not overkill for me; I sometimes need to go through the Krispy Kream drive through in an emergency Maybe you want to use a cost/benefit analysis route. Figure out how much time you spend in front of the screen vs cost/ life of product.
K10 said:
Well the trick with DVD's is to find a ratio of pixels on dvd to pixels resolution wise on screen. Otherwise the DVD is going to be blurry. I might be wrong, but depending on the DVD player some will do 480p which is the equivalent of what 640x480. So some variation there of 1280x960 will look alot better then 1024x768.
Just fyi,
Sunin
I had a 2005FPW, bought 2 x 2405FPW's and gave the 2005 to my sister. Bought a 3007WFP and gave one of the 2405FPW's to my dad
The 2405 is used as my MacBookPro's external display. But I've grown so used to the 3007 that I prefer sitting in front of the 30 incher for everyday work
More than what you want, it's what you got. If you have the money then go for the 30 inch LCD. If not, be happy with the one you have because size doesn't matter ( It's what you do with it that counts ).
Also remember that if you want to watch DVD and WMV movies on the 30 inch LCD, you need something like ffdshow or else the upscaling is lousy. And at 2560x1600, ffdshow is going to take some serious CPU horsepower. The 3007 does not have a lot of inputs either, so you're going to have to shell out $$$ for a dual link DVI/AGP card ...
The 2405 is used as my MacBookPro's external display. But I've grown so used to the 3007 that I prefer sitting in front of the 30 incher for everyday work
More than what you want, it's what you got. If you have the money then go for the 30 inch LCD. If not, be happy with the one you have because size doesn't matter ( It's what you do with it that counts
). Also remember that if you want to watch DVD and WMV movies on the 30 inch LCD, you need something like ffdshow or else the upscaling is lousy. And at 2560x1600, ffdshow is going to take some serious CPU horsepower. The 3007 does not have a lot of inputs either, so you're going to have to shell out $$$ for a dual link DVI/AGP card ...
StalkerZER0
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,207
Sunin said:Yes 1080P 1920x1080. Should look great, with DVI
Dudeeeeee!!!! Please, hook that baby up with DVI to a computer and run half life 2 at 1920x1080 ok??
And for goodness sake TAKE PICS AND POST EM HERE!!!!!!
Thank you.
The fact that this post exists would suggest that the OP is already suspect of the value a 30" LCD would represent. Generally speaking, do I think a 30" computer display is overkill? Yes. Do I think it's overkill for the OP's situation and intended use? Yes. Can I think of situations where a 30" or larger display is suitable? Yes. What concerns me is that a lot of the posts in this thread advocate a 30" or larger display based on what that person uses their PC for instead of the intended use of the person asking the question. Hmm, what do you think is more relevant? For example, if Sunin wants a 52" display for gaming then so be it. But, it makes no sense to advocate the purchase of a large display to someone that doesn't list gaming as their primary, secondary or even tertiary use of a PC. Cool factor aside, in my book, that's just bad advice.
My advice to the OP is to save your $$$. If you're in the market for a new LCD display I think you'd be happy with something in the 19" or 20" range, wide or regular. You can easily find a good display for less then $300.
My advice to the OP is to save your $$$. If you're in the market for a new LCD display I think you'd be happy with something in the 19" or 20" range, wide or regular. You can easily find a good display for less then $300.
syntax_terror
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2006
- Messages
- 57
"it makes no sense to advocate the purchase of a large display to someone that doesn't list gaming as their primary, secondary or even tertiary use of a PC."
I could care less about gaming, but I'd love to have a 30 for graphic design, photo and video editing, etc.
I could care less about gaming, but I'd love to have a 30 for graphic design, photo and video editing, etc.
In my defense he did not state he did not game until after my post! Although I have to disagree with you if his purpose is to use this as a his main home theater TV then 30 inch is not too big and in fact he is saving money by not bying a 40 or large LCD TV. Short of a very clear and concise approach from the OP it is hard to give accurate feedback. What truly is the purpose of being able to play DVD's through your computer? If it is to save teh cost of a DVD player ($200) and LCD TV(3k+) then go for the 30 inch.
Still stands by his opinion that 30 in this case is probably not overkill.
Sunin
Still stands by his opinion that 30 in this case is probably not overkill.
Sunin
I think the bad thing about large displays with high resolution such as the 24" and 30" is that you'll always want to play the games at or close to the max resolution. This means that you will be supporing your monitor with the latest video cards every couple of months just because the new games aren't playable at the max res.
I could be horribly wrong as I don't own a 24" plus so if people with those large displays think games still look good not at the native res let me know.
I could be horribly wrong as I don't own a 24" plus so if people with those large displays think games still look good not at the native res let me know.
kick said:
I don't get it. Why does big screen = gaming? I have a 2405 that I never use for gaming. Same with my 17" laptop that connects to it with the same resolution, thus 2xWUXGA resolution. I also have two 3840x2400 screen LCD monitor 22" that I never game on and it was designed specifically not for gaming (that's equivalent to 4 WUXGA per screen).
i agree with you that you need to put the users needs in prespective. But, the big deciding factor is cost, saving money is a good thing. Put another way, if 30" display from Dell or Apple cost $500 today, and everything else cost less as well, will the original poster still not be consider it? I doubt it.
K10 said:
No gaming is not the only reason to get a 30", Id say the reason not to get it is if you only plan on web browsing, other then that its great for just about anything else...watching movies-games-art work-any kind of office work-ect...saying a 30" is only good for gaming is just silly.
OMG, people need to read a little deeper. I used Sunin's post as an example of how most posters were advocating large displays based on their personal use of a PC, not to imply that 30" or larger is for gamers or is needed for good gaming.
Sunin, please don't take my comments as an attack - there's no need for a defense. I can certainly understand that a 52" display would be a blast to game on... friends and I occassionally game (console based) on projectors borrowed from work. We do that only a few times per year tho so I can't justify it as a personal purchase. I don't even own a console... someone else brings that. I just show up to play.
I still maintain my origional position. If you look at K10's original post, "day-to-day" use includes "web surfing, MS excel". That's what I based my first post on. K10 later followed up with his desire to watch the occassional DVD and do some light gaming (Mame/Quake). I must be a little more conservative then most here, but in my world, a $1500 30" LCD is still overkill for that sort of use.
Anyway...
Sunin, please don't take my comments as an attack - there's no need for a defense. I can certainly understand that a 52" display would be a blast to game on... friends and I occassionally game (console based) on projectors borrowed from work. We do that only a few times per year tho so I can't justify it as a personal purchase. I don't even own a console... someone else brings that. I just show up to play.
I still maintain my origional position. If you look at K10's original post, "day-to-day" use includes "web surfing, MS excel". That's what I based my first post on. K10 later followed up with his desire to watch the occassional DVD and do some light gaming (Mame/Quake). I must be a little more conservative then most here, but in my world, a $1500 30" LCD is still overkill for that sort of use.
Anyway...
Depends how hardcore a gamer you are.
Speed-wise, 30" LCDs are gonna lag some and just not be as good for gaming as the smaller ones which in trun can't quite match a CRT.
But if you aren't that concerned about gaming performance and care more about immersion then 30" might be cool.
Personally, I'd chill on huge LCDs and save my money 'cause I think we are still a bit ahead of the curve on the big ones.
Speed-wise, 30" LCDs are gonna lag some and just not be as good for gaming as the smaller ones which in trun can't quite match a CRT.
But if you aren't that concerned about gaming performance and care more about immersion then 30" might be cool.
Personally, I'd chill on huge LCDs and save my money 'cause I think we are still a bit ahead of the curve on the big ones.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,527
Hmmm....8 x 30" would be an overkill, 4 x 30", no.