looking for a pic, 30in LCD, two vertical 20in widescreen LCDs

Y

yallknowho

Weaksauce
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
105
I've seen a few pics of a setup like this, a 30in lcd in the middle and a 20inch widescreen vertically placed on either side. I searched a bit but can't find it, if someone would post a pic of this set up i'd appreciate it.
 
Nite_Hawk said:
:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archive...n_dell_2001fp_action_8_megapixel_desktop.html
Click to expand...

Note, those are 2001FP screens on the sides, not wide screens as the original poster requested.

The 4:3 screens shown here are essentially the perfect match in vertical mode. They match in size and resolution is a perfect match 1600:1200

If you want the perfect match for the side panels it would be the 2007FP, not the 2007WFP with will be taller and slightly greater resolution than the 3007 in the vertical.
 
boy they sure look like 20" widescreens...an optical illusion?

i became aroused when i saw that setup...
 
It's possible that the op meant the widescreen displays, but I'm guessing the link I provided is what he is looking for. As you've stated, a 20" widescreen display would provide neither the correct dimensions nor resolution.

Nite_Hawk
 
East said:
boy they sure look like 20" widescreens...an optical illusion?

i became aroused when i saw that setup...
Click to expand...

The article says the monitors on the side are Dell 2001FP LCDs. They're 20.1" non widescreen LCDs but they sure do look wide.

I too believe this is what the OP is looking for. That's a very spiffy setup if I must say..
 
Definitely not vertical widescreens in that picture, I use a 2007WFP vertically and its noticeably taller than that one (also thinner.)
 


would a 19w<->27<->19w setup be a 20,1<->30<->20,1 equivalent?
same question for 19(classic)<->22wide<->19(classic)
 
dellsetup.jpg
 
Sgt_Strider said:
I meant the physical size wise. How much gap are there between your 3007 and 2007WFPs?
Click to expand...


The 4:3s are a better match in every way. The resolution is identical, The dot pitch is closer. The physical size is much closer. It is no contest: In the vertical:

Screen, Pixels, Pitch , Height
3007wfp 1600 .250 400mm
2007fp- 1600 .255 408mm (+ about quarter Inch)
2007wfp 1680 .258 433mm (+ over an inch )
 
Snowdog said:
The 4:3s are a better match in every way. The resolution is identical, The dot pitch is closer. The physical size is much closer. It is no contest: In the vertical:

Screen, Pixels, Pitch , Height
3007wfp 1600 .250 400mm
2007fp- 1600 .255 408mm (+ about quarter Inch)
2007wfp 1680 .258 433mm (+ over an inch )
Click to expand...

Do you have the WFPs or the FPs? Now that you mentioned it, I kind of wished I got the FPs instead as I want to eventually get the 3007 to complement my existing dual monitor setup. However, Dell had a deal on the 2007WFPs and not the 2007FPs. Even then, does the 2007FP use the S-IPS panels? Both my 2007WFPs have S-IPS panels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top