PC for net use only... widescreen or standard ?

[bigblue]

Yup, another question from me about widescreen monitors. Finally bought one monitor now I'm all indecisive again !

I'm cobbling together a pc from bits lying about the house, probably gonna end up in the kitchen ! It's only to give us somewhere to access the net downstairs, or for the missus to use when I'm hogging the main pc playing games

We're between 2 monitors, both 19", one wide and one standard. There's nowhere nearby that has both on display so we're kinda stuck.

So for use ONLY with the net, which would you pick ? I'm determined to go wide but the lady insists that web pages would display better with the "square" one ! Is standard ratio really better suited to web pages ?

Cheers for any advice

[Agent]

Stick with wide imo.
It makes pages look a lot less cramped.

[scrandman]

Agreed. For standard apps such as word processing and web browsing, a widescreen will be as good if not better than a "square" LCD screen. It's only when gaming that wide screen can be problematic (due to non-supported native resolutions and so on).

[Gohan]

I would opt for widescreen as well, if you have a res of 1680x1050 or above you can view two full pages side by side or one page and an office app etc..

[sawyen]

doesnt need to be 1680x1050.. 1440x900 is good enuf for 2 windows tiled horizontally.. I mostly open 4 as I have 2xWS.. works like a charm..

WS comes in handy with u have pages u need to scroll horizontally as well..

[teachmech]

I must disagree I think normal would be better as there are still lots of web pages that are a fixed width and on widescreen you'll end up with alot of scrolling.

[scrandman]

I must disagree I think normal would be better as there are still lots of web pages that are a fixed width and on widescreen you'll end up with alot of scrolling.

I'm struggling to get my head around that. If a webpage is optimised to display at 1024 or 1280 wide, why would you need to scroll sidewards with a widescreen display with 1440 or 1680 width

Edit: Oh, I get what you mean now - scrolling up and down because of the reduced verticle resolution.

[Funkstar]

i'd agree with teachmech. i have a 19" 4:3 LCD at work and it is great for browsing, you get a lot more on screen at one time. Actually much more pleasant than my widescreen laptop with the same horizontal resolution. You can also quite happily get two pages in a word doc on screen at the same time (71% zoom) and not loose out with toolbars etc.

[oshta]

I must disagree I think normal would be better as there are still lots of web pages that are a fixed width and on widescreen you'll end up with alot of scrolling.

Yeah. I dont have a widescreen, but i dont like the idea of it. Which is backed up by the few times ive used my mates laptop (dell widescreen)
- Its all taskbar and toolbar!!

Im vary happy with my std 19" tft (Samsung SM940T) which is mainly used for surfing the web.


Daniel

[PenguinJim]

I think the standard aspect monitor will be best for web surfing, personally - it helps avoid resolution problems (not that I've noticed any during the six months I've used this widescreen 2005FPW). Um. I know that was a contradiction.

To me, widescreen means multimedia. If you're going to use a PC to play games, widescreen makes them more immersive. It handles TV shows and movies better, too. And music is UNBELIEVABLE! (That last point was a joke) But for 'work' - web browsing, word documents, and other boring text-based stuff, I wouldn't see the advantage of widescreen. I imagine any advantages would be balanced by any potential disadvantages.

If it's going to end up in the kitchen, physical space might be an issue, too! So I'd recommend Standard Aspect for the scenario you have described. (Hope I was some help!)

[toolsong]

I'm struggling to get my head around that. If a webpage is optimised to display at 1024 or 1280 wide, why would you need to scroll sidewards with a widescreen display with 1440 or 1680 width

Edit: Oh, I get what you mean now - scrolling up and down because of the reduced verticle resolution.

Not really. The common 1680x1050 also has more vertical resolution than a 1280x1024.

[bigblue]

Thanks very much, that was a LOT of help guys

I think it'll a standard one then. Gotta keep the other half happy for now and hopefully she'll be understanding when I want to get a 24" Dell or similar in the not too distant future !

Cheers !

[mercyreaper]

Looking at getting a widescreen, but after a few days of shopping I am at a loss of which one of these to get. My choices are the dell 2405 or 2407 when its released, the 2405 retails for roughly $799, the other choice is something I ran into by chance, westinghouse digital, yeah its the same westinghouse, although a third party company actually makes these just licensed under their name of westinghouse digital. This one is 2 sizes 37" and 42", although the 42" is nice I think I prefer the 37", the cost on this one is roughly $1500.

Now that we have our players, the resolution capabilites are as follows, the dell runs at 1920x1200, the westinghouse for both sizes runs at 1080p which is 1920x1080. Yes I know that dell has a 3007 model that sells for $2200 with a higher resolution then both of these. My question is basically how would the 37" look with that rez for a computer monitor. My usage is mostly web apps, office apps, surfing the web and maybe a movie here and there with the occasional game thrown in.

I have read that the westinghouse is great with the xbox 360 so that is telling me for games this works fine. The refresh rate on the 37" is 8ms G-G.

So any thoughts on this?

[Nick F]

Go wide for sure, then you can have two windows next to each other or your IM software open.

Go for a Dell 20inch widescreen, I have had one for 8 months and they are fantastic.