![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Best LCD availible
- Thread starter Scotch77
- Start date
Unknown-One
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,909
Any particular size in mind? 17, 18, 19, 20+ inch? Widescreen?
Scotch77 said:
I am curious as to why you claim it "killed your vision"? I have been without glasses until just a few months ago, (I'm 41) and was warned years ago from an optomitrist that it's just a matter of time till age catches up with you.
I am in a serch for the "right" LCD myself. I just sold my Dell 2005FPW mainly because looking at things in other than native resolution (1680 X 1050) causes distortion, and native is too trying for my wifes poor vision.
I have been considering these:
BenQ FP91G+
Samsung 930bf
Viewsonic VX924
Hyundai L90D+.... but this one seems to have a problem with a batch being sold lately, has some vertical lines popping up after some time.
It very well could be ANY monitor you use....refresh rate makes it easier to veiw for a prolonged period of time, but major strain can be caused by prolonged viewing of anything you can think of....a bright monitor for example. Even if you have a super high u83r 1337 refresh rate, you can still get eye strain, and, over time, worsened vision.Greenwit said:
Greenwit said:
Idk The guy Graduated from Cornell and when he was 26. Graduated with his undergraduate from Stanford when he was 19.
He seems like a great doctor to me.
BTW, CRT's emit VLF and ELF radiation, which can lean to a large number of eye problems, such as macular degeneration
Albert Silver
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2005
- Messages
- 88
Scotch77 said:
Sure, but didn't you use a screen protector? BTW, you might consider the Viewsonic VP930b that just came out. It is the successor to the VP191b, which reviewers claimed is the best overall screen.
Albert
Pinipig523
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 1,742
Scotch77 said:
I'm in medical school right now (2nd year) and those are some IMPRESSIVE stats. He must be pretty DAMN good, dude.
Unknown-One
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,909
That screen does look good...Albert Silver said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116365
Whats all this about 8ms response time "grey to grey"?
samsung SyncMaster 930bf
http://www.samsung.com/au/products/monitors/tft/930bf.asp
http://www.samsung.com/au/products/monitors/tft/930bf.asp
texuspete00
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2002
- Messages
- 5,625
Unknown-One said:
The g2g is the continued bastardization of a spec that may have proved useful. I wish they had to do an average over the full spectrum of transistions. Don't laugh, check out tom's hardware. Yeah, that's right, I said tom's hardware! They graph the REAL response time. Wonder how you see blurring in 8ms displays? Oh that's right, because sometimes you're lucky to get 20ms!
Get the Vp191b if you wnt to go LCD. Maybe I'm bias but I could put up with everything about LCD's except for motion blur. It doesn't bother everyone though. If you want bigger than that viewsonic and think you too might be blur anal, tough, there is none. At least the Dell doesn't rape the wallet.
Is he a primary care physician or an ophthalmologist or something else?
For a physician to diagnose vision issues and then say it is due to your CRT.....that's frankly kind of stupid. It may or may not be the cause. I went to contacts in my late teens and had not even looked at a monitor of any kind at that age. It's kind of like saying I began wearing Nike's a few weeks ago then I got hit by a car when crossing the street. I guess I shouldn't be wearing Nike's anymore, right?
For a physician to diagnose vision issues and then say it is due to your CRT.....that's frankly kind of stupid. It may or may not be the cause. I went to contacts in my late teens and had not even looked at a monitor of any kind at that age. It's kind of like saying I began wearing Nike's a few weeks ago then I got hit by a car when crossing the street. I guess I shouldn't be wearing Nike's anymore, right?
UltimaParadox
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Messages
- 6,243
Scotch77 said:
Haha, yeah that is true, but the radiation is so small, you forget that everything emits radiation.
Uh oh that cell phone is going to cause a brain tumor, you better watch out.
UltimaParadox said:
So true. Guess what if your worried about the radiation from a CRT monitor you better get rid of all your TVs that use tubes because its the same thing. But yeah all electronic devices give off small amounts of radiation and ozone.
adrusch said:How old you are when you finish has NO bearing on how good of a doctor you are. Where you go has some impact, but there are great docs from "bad" schools and bad docs from everywhere...
no the earleir you graduate the more established of a doctor you are. which means better.
Greenwit said:
He is an Optometrists, I dont think its stupid,m knowing the time I use the monitor per day. Its alot. and how close I sit to it. The fact that before I got monitor I was
R 20/10 L 20/20
and now
R 20/30 L 20/50
Shows that it was most likly the Monitor, the whole nike schenerio makes no sense.
Scotch77 said:
An optometrist is not an MD.
The Nike scenario is meant to illustrate that you have not shown cause and effect. That your logic is flawed. People have needed eye correction for forever and a day.....way before computer monitors were invented. If your computer monitor is causing your eye problems then what caused eye problems in the 1930s? Is that simple enough?
UltimaParadox
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Messages
- 6,243
Scotch77 said:
Uh plain and simple your monitor did not cause that great of a degradation of sight, in that short amount of time. Its just not logical.
You probablly already had an underlying condition, which like probablly 50% of people have some type. On top of that your vision gets worse as you get older, thats proven fact.
And if your doctor is saying that is only reason, I don't care if he graduated from Yale, you better find a new optometrist. So when your vision gets worse and you got rid of that monitor, I wonder what he will say next.
Well, I am not a doctor so I am not going to touch the issue of whether or not your monitor caused your vision degradation. The point is that you need a 19" LCD for under $500. I would recommend the VP930B, but that is just based on what I have read. I am curious to know if anyone has purchased this as yet and how it compares to the VP191B. A friend of mine has an old VP191B from when it was a 25ms model and it looks good, but it ghosts, and has all the other common LCD issues (backlight in dark, etc).
Does anyone own or has seen the VP930?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116365
Does anyone own or has seen the VP930?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824116365
texuspete00
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2002
- Messages
- 5,625
I don't know about the vp930... but here's a perfect example of why I suggest Tom's for reviews. Here is one of the vp191b's successors asked about in this thread - the VX924. Pitting this allegedly speedy gonzales display, a leading "4ms" model, I know I'd stick with the "8ms" vp191b. It's all graphed out. Oh it's "4ms" alright, in an extremely isolated intance anyway. Don't be afraid, I know it's TOM's (eek) but a picture speaks a thousand words.
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050602/viewsonic-05.html
So I can only imagine if this is a vp191b successor, that there must be something better about it than the VP191b, but probably not a trade-off I'd want. I don't like blur.
"With the GTG system, we're getting announced values that have nothing to do with reality most of the time. "
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050602/viewsonic-05.html
So I can only imagine if this is a vp191b successor, that there must be something better about it than the VP191b, but probably not a trade-off I'd want. I don't like blur.
"With the GTG system, we're getting announced values that have nothing to do with reality most of the time. "
Scotch77 said:
The farther out from residency you are, the more out of touch with common medical practice and standards of care you are. I graduated from med school young, and don't think it helps or harms my practice in any way, with the exception of some older patients thinking I'm a "whippersnapper"
On topic, I've heard good things about the Samsungs, too. I'm waiting for a review of the new Gateway and Acers before I buy, though...
A
altcon
Guest
Burn in HELL YOU AWP WHORE!?!?!?!Scotch77 said:
I HATE AWP!!!
I think there is some truth about CRT causing eye problems. 20 years ago, I was told the same thing. To prove this theory, I sat in front of a 17 inch CRT for over 20 years now, and notice my eyes are going bad and now I need glasses. My neck is starting to hurt also, and my mouse hand is numb.
Cell phones are causing a tumors to form in brains, but I think it is because of all the heat from the phones cooking the brain. I used to scan cell sites and would have a phone on my ear for hours at a time, and I remember thinking how hot the phone was. To test this theory, I keep a cell phone on my ears at all times, for 6 years now. MRI images show a change, but only in one third of my brain. Not to worry because Doctor said, if we only use a tenth of our brain we can become a genious.
I do not hate AWP persons, just the ones that use hacks. Hacks can cause illiteracy.
Cell phones are causing a tumors to form in brains, but I think it is because of all the heat from the phones cooking the brain. I used to scan cell sites and would have a phone on my ear for hours at a time, and I remember thinking how hot the phone was. To test this theory, I keep a cell phone on my ears at all times, for 6 years now. MRI images show a change, but only in one third of my brain. Not to worry because Doctor said, if we only use a tenth of our brain we can become a genious.
I do not hate AWP persons, just the ones that use hacks. Hacks can cause illiteracy.
Actually,
I just came back from a trip to my opthamologist and asked him about all of this, as over the last few years I've went from 20/15 to being somewhat myopic ( near-sighted - aka you can't see things clearly at a distance ).
Everyone does have underlying tendencies that come out in their mid-to-late twenties on average. This is just a fact. You get what you get.
What happens with CRTs/LCDs and reading a lot of books is that your eyes focus more at that close distance and start to elongate. When they elongate, the eye can't revert back to its original shape and this in turn hurts your distance accuity.
To help prevent this, you can use reading glasses or special types of glasses that take the strain off the eyes to focus at a close range. This helps preserve your distance accuity. Unfortunately, this is great for children and young adults, but not all that useful for those of us who have already lost a decent amount of distance vision.
Where you get some variety of opinion is whether or not having glasses for distance makes you more near-sighted. Also, whether or not using reading glasses after you're show signs of near-sightedness will help you at all ( some tend to say hanging back a bit and reading text on your monitor or book at the point where it is becoming semi-blurry is just as effective as the reading glasses, etc ).
To answer 'what about the 1930's?', there is interesting research on uneducated peoples not having much exposure to near-sightedness. Why? Because they don't read books, etc.
Do some research on myopia to get further answers on all of these things.
I just came back from a trip to my opthamologist and asked him about all of this, as over the last few years I've went from 20/15 to being somewhat myopic ( near-sighted - aka you can't see things clearly at a distance ).
Everyone does have underlying tendencies that come out in their mid-to-late twenties on average. This is just a fact. You get what you get.
What happens with CRTs/LCDs and reading a lot of books is that your eyes focus more at that close distance and start to elongate. When they elongate, the eye can't revert back to its original shape and this in turn hurts your distance accuity.
To help prevent this, you can use reading glasses or special types of glasses that take the strain off the eyes to focus at a close range. This helps preserve your distance accuity. Unfortunately, this is great for children and young adults, but not all that useful for those of us who have already lost a decent amount of distance vision.
Where you get some variety of opinion is whether or not having glasses for distance makes you more near-sighted. Also, whether or not using reading glasses after you're show signs of near-sightedness will help you at all ( some tend to say hanging back a bit and reading text on your monitor or book at the point where it is becoming semi-blurry is just as effective as the reading glasses, etc ).
To answer 'what about the 1930's?', there is interesting research on uneducated peoples not having much exposure to near-sightedness. Why? Because they don't read books, etc.
Do some research on myopia to get further answers on all of these things.
jacuzz1
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2004
- Messages
- 7,315
Scotch77 said:
So it was you mofo!
lol
I don't think it really needs to be debated at all that CRT monitors are worse for you than LCDs. I get splitting headaches in the back of my head from looking at a CRT for more than 30 minutes, my girlfriend does as well and I know a good number of others who have the same problem. LCD's don't do this to anyone I know. As to whether it actually degrades your vision, that probably can't be proven, but it's a safe bet.