Does a WS LCD sound like overkill??

B

bssman

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
89
My NEC 21" CRT is slowly passing on and looking at upgrading to a similar sized LCD. Here is what I will be using it for:

1) 65% internet surfing
2) 15% simple games such as solitaire, mahjongg, etc
3) 10% computer work such as defrag, scans, etc
4) 10% watching TV with my PCI TV card

I won't be watching DVD's or playing intense video games as I do that on my HDTV. Is there really any reason for me to get a 20" WS for what I do or just stick with a standard 20"?? Most of what I do would probably look better on a 4X3 aspect ratio wouldn't it?? And the scaling issues have me concerned also.

Looking at maybe the Acer 20" seems reasonably priced.

Any helpful advice would be appreciated as I am trying to make an intelligent decision in the next couple weeks. Thanks in advance!!
 
Most pages are not designed with 16x10 aspect ratios in mind so your extra screen real-estate goes to waste unless you leave your browser un-maximized and run other apps on the side like WinAmp/Foobar or your IM client.

It sounds like you wouldn't really benefit from a ws monitor
 
With widescreen I like the way I can work on things and have extra room for tool and menu bars on the side (Vista also uses more of these things). I also move pics around a lot and I can have two folders open side by side with lots of viewing &swapping room. I also often find myself comparing things on web pages. I also use instant messengers a lot and I can keep the windows off to the side and not have to always be clicking between an IM window and browser window.

More height/area can be nice sometrimes but I like the widescreen better. I would like a second monitor in portrait mode better for vertical stuff. Having 2 monitors is pretty affordable these days (a refurb 2007wfp monitor from Dell is around $280 and it) and I would rather have a widescreen for both the horizontal and vertical. I'm just waiting on a bigger NEC since I already have the 20'1". I like wide better for video too
 
What about web pages that I have to scroll left to right to see the whole page?? Would the wider screen allow more viewing on each side?? Or am I going to only use part of the screen to surf with?

Guess I have to ask the newb question! Will a WS be filled with web pages and my desktop or will the screen be cropped?? Still haven't got that straight in my mind. And if if fills the screen is it going to be stretched and look ugly??
 
bssman said:
What about web pages that I have to scroll left to right to see the whole page?? Would the wider screen allow more viewing on each side?? Or am I going to only use part of the screen to surf with?

Guess I have to ask the newb question! Will a WS be filled with web pages and my desktop or will the screen be cropped?? Still haven't got that straight in my mind. And if if fills the screen is it going to be stretched and look ugly??
Click to expand...

Nope, the screen isn't cropped and web pages are displayed at the resolution they're created at for those with fixth widths, while those with adjustable widths will strech to fill the space but will look just the same (except wider).

Ok, just reread this and realised it's quite hard to comprehend. So as tired as I am I'll be heading off to sleep. Ugh.
 
Web pages will fill your widescreen format. All the pages I go to automatically fill to wide.
 
I like my widescreen because its easier to do 3 or 4 things at once without havin to alt-tab
 
Depending on the size of the screen, widescreen is good when tiling windows vertically. Widescreen is better on 20+ inch LCD than a smaller 19". However, the 19" WS would be ideal for watching dvds. But, not so good on web browsing. You would scroll more when viewing web pages or especially on spreadsheets due to its lower resolution. Here is my view on non WS and WS for LCDs

19" - best for web browsing, spreadsheets
19" WS - DVD viewing and some gaming. However, 19" non WS has the edge cause of the higher res 1280 x 1024 as oppose to 1440 x 900 on the WS
20" - best for graphic artist and people who use CAD because of the 1600 x 1200 resolution as oppose to 1680 x 1050 WS.
20" WS - good for gaming and DVD viewing. DVD are 16:9 and WS monitors at 16:10 are better for most DVDs because at least you don't see much of the black bars on the top and bottom.
21" - same as for 20" non WS because resolutions are 1600 x 1200
21 WS" - same for 20 WS because resolutions are the same 1680 x 1050.
22" - mainly in WS for these sizes and ideal for web browsing, dvd viewing and gaming because of the response times and low input lags. However, not recommended for graphic artist who demand image quality because of it being mostly 6 bit TN panels
24" - mostly in WS and you pretty much get everything at this size. Because of its high resolution 1920 x 1200 viewing multiple webpages is no problem. High resolution is ideal for graphic artists and that most likely will be 8 bit panels at this size. DVD vewing is good because you got the widescreen but standard dvds are only 720 x 480 so..it will more likely look pixelated stretching it to fit 1920 x 1200 resolution. PC gaming would be awesome on this because of its high resolution and because of high end graphics pushing it further you have more headroom to increase resolution down the road.
 
I went from a 21 inch crt to a 23inch widescreen apple lcd. Was a great move. Never watch movies on my system either. I use to use it to have 2 papers opened at once. I would have the fist draft of my paper open and an active copy that I was changing.

Now I've switched to 2 22 inch gateway screens. 3360x1050. Can really have all my crap layed out. I also do a lot of remote work so I can just run a remote desktop on one of the screens. I really like it.
 
HardwareGuru said:
Depending on the size of the screen, widescreen is good when tiling windows vertically. Widescreen is better on 20+ inch LCD than a smaller 19". However, the 19" WS would be ideal for watching dvds. But, not so good on web browsing. You would scroll more when viewing web pages or especially on spreadsheets due to its lower resolution. Here is my view on non WS and WS for LCDs

19" - best for web browsing, spreadsheets
19" WS - DVD viewing and some gaming. However, 19" non WS has the edge cause of the higher res 1280 x 1024 as oppose to 1440 x 900 on the WS
20" - best for graphic artist and people who use CAD because of the 1600 x 1200 resolution as oppose to 1680 x 1050 WS.
20" WS - good for gaming and DVD viewing. DVD are 16:9 and WS monitors at 16:10 are better for most DVDs because at least you don't see much of the black bars on the top and bottom.
21" - same as for 20" non WS because resolutions are 1600 x 1200
21 WS" - same for 20 WS because resolutions are the same 1680 x 1050.
22" - mainly in WS for these sizes and ideal for web browsing, dvd viewing and gaming because of the response times and low input lags. However, not recommended for graphic artist who demand image quality because of it being mostly 6 bit TN panels
24" - mostly in WS and you pretty much get everything at this size. Because of its high resolution 1920 x 1200 viewing multiple webpages is no problem. High resolution is ideal for graphic artists and that most likely will be 8 bit panels at this size. DVD vewing is good because you got the widescreen but standard dvds are only 720 x 480 so..it will more likely look pixelated stretching it to fit 1920 x 1200 resolution. PC gaming would be awesome on this because of its high resolution and because of high end graphics pushing it further you have more headroom to increase resolution down the road.
Click to expand...

Hey, this was just what I wanted! I know this isn't my thread but thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top