Where are all the 4:3 monitors?

[Shad]

My 7 year old ViewSonic 20.1" 4:3 monitor is starting to die so I need a replacement. It sits in between a pair of 19" widescreen monitors that were an irresistible bargain. I'm not a big fan of widescreen monitors (got an HD TV attached for videos) since they're the wrong shape for software development. And web browsing. And games. In fact, they're the wrong shape for everything apart from widescreen video

Anyway, where have all the 4:3 monitors gone? I've found 3 that are a similar size to my ViewSonic but they are ridiculously expensive compared to the dirt cheap widescreen versions of the same diagonal size.

Does anyone know of somewhere that has a decent range of 4:3 monitors?

Thanks

[Terbinator]

Aim for a 16:10 monitor rather than a 16:9 one instead ?

[Great Eastern]

I can't answer your question - but I have to agree. I currenty have a 17" monitor which displays at 1280x1024 at 5:3.

To get an equivalent vertical resolution on a widescreen you need to goto 21.5" or higher which is some cases is just not practicle

[snootyjim]

I can't answer your question - but I have to agree. I currenty have a 17" monitor which displays at 1280x1024 at 5:3.

To get an equivalent vertical resolution on a widescreen you need to goto 21.5" or higher which is some cases is just not practicle

Don't you mean 5:4?

[scaryjim]

Don't you mean 5:4?

Pedant

@OP:

Supply and demand, I'm afraid. Demand is increasing for 16:9 / 16:10, and decreasing for 4:3 and 5:4, as more pedople are buying computers for entertainment purposes. As a result supply of 4:3 ratio screens is dropping, meaning the ones that are out there are getting more expensive.

I'm intrigued that you think a widescreen monitor is "the wrong shape" for software development - as far as I'm aware there's no optimum shape of monitor for any task! On a 16:10 full screen you can stick your toolboxes to each side and still have plenty of space in the middle for your text editing: in fact I'd go so far as to say widescreen is, in many ways, better for software development than a "standard" aspect ratio...

[Great Eastern]

Don't you mean 5:4?

I do indeed

[shaithis]

And with 3 screens, you have PLENTY of real-estate space, surely?

[Shad]

Supply and demand, I'm afraid. Demand is increasing for 16:9 / 16:10, and decreasing for 4:3 and 5:4, as more pedople are buying computers for entertainment purposes. As a result supply of 4:3 ratio screens is dropping, meaning the ones that are out there are getting more expensive.

I'm intrigued that you think a widescreen monitor is "the wrong shape" for software development - as far as I'm aware there's no optimum shape of monitor for any task! On a 16:10 full screen you can stick your toolboxes to each side and still have plenty of space in the middle for your text editing: in fact I'd go so far as to say widescreen is, in many ways, better for software development than a "standard" aspect ratio...

Well I demand one, so where's my supply?

Regarding the inappropriateness of a squashed screen, it's simple for me. I have the main IDE window in front of me giving a fairly equal view of code in all directions. Coding horizontally (i.e. long lines) is pretty bad practice and widescreen only encourages it, otherwise necessitating more vertical scrolling. My toolbars live to the right on another monitor and the 'live' view of what I'm building lives to the left on another monitor.

Another important factor is physical space. As already mentioned, to keep the vertical space I have with a 1600x1200 resolution is going to need a massive widescreen monitor which isn't going to fit properly in between my smaller widescreens.

I've found some Dell monitors that might fit the bill - what is good these days with regards to brightness and response time ratings?

[Funkstar]

Just throwing this out there, might not be appropriate for you, but how about a large widescreen rotated 90 degrees?

then you have a 1600 of code instead of 1200. or with 16:9 monitors you can have 1980 pixels of vertical code.

[Terbinator]

just throwing this out there, might not be appropriate for you, but how about a large widescreen rotated 90 degrees?

Then you have a 1600 of code instead of 1200. Or with 16:9 monitors you can have 1980 pixels of vertical code.

1920 ?

[snootyjim]

Pedant

@OP:

Supply and demand, I'm afraid. Demand is increasing for 16:9 / 16:10, and decreasing for 4:3 and 5:4, as more pedople are buying computers for entertainment purposes. As a result supply of 4:3 ratio screens is dropping, meaning the ones that are out there are getting more expensive.

I'm intrigued that you think a widescreen monitor is "the wrong shape" for software development - as far as I'm aware there's no optimum shape of monitor for any task! On a 16:10 full screen you can stick your toolboxes to each side and still have plenty of space in the middle for your text editing: in fact I'd go so far as to say widescreen is, in many ways, better for software development than a "standard" aspect ratio...

Me? A pedant? Where would you get that idea from?

[scaryjim]

... Coding horizontally (i.e. long lines) is pretty bad practice ...

That's a bit of a horrendous generalisation isn't it? Sometimes there are reasons to code long lines, and having less distance to scroll to read them properly is beneficial.

Besides, maybe I'm jaded because I'm still working at 1280 x 1024: frankly any extra width would be a godsend to me...

[Pob255]

I'd agree with funkstar partly here, have you considered a wide screen turned 90 degrees.
Although I too mourn to loss of 5:4 monitors, it is still a better size for many uses.

there are a few 20" 5:4 about but they are hard to find and very expensive.

[Funkstar]

1920 ?

or that. you know what I mean

[scaryjim]

Just throwing this out there, might not be appropriate for you, but how about a large widescreen rotated 90 degrees?

That's not a terrible idea at all.

I once built a custom build for a mate who did a lot of DTP for portrait A4 leaflets. I got her a large rotatable monitor and she loved it. I'd do it with my monitor at work but, as mentioned above, I'm @ 1280 x 1024 and I'm not a sure I could hack going back to that narrow a monitor...

[bandsaw]

Took me a while getting used to 16:10 on a 24" (1920x1200) but I won't give it up now. Two A4 pages, full-size, side by side is champion!

Absolutely hate 16:9 though. Using a 1600x900 21.5" (IIRC) was like working through a letter box.