Read more.Quote:
Company tries its hand at high-end LED-backlit panels.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Company tries its hand at high-end LED-backlit panels.
Hdmi but no display port???
Ive had faith in LG for many many years, always done good products and whenever i bought something by them its been rock solid. Now, im debating the new dell screens or do i wait and pray that LG release the 23Inch model at ~£200-£300... its very optimistic since its an IPS panel but maybe LG can do it :P.
NEED LESS 16:9. DIE ALREADY.
If you're going to buy an IPS monitor, you're not going to sit and watch films (all that 16:9 is good for)... you've bought it for working on something which requires half-decent colour reproduction hour after hour.
16:9 is completely useless for everything productive that I can think of.
So what they're doing is aiming this at a market which doesn't exist.
What's happened to LG? It wasn't that long ago they were bringing out such epic value monitors as the 915FT Plus (my first great monitor) and could do no wrong?
++ QFT.Quote:
Originally Posted by this_is_gav
It's bad enough ramming 16:9 down the throats of 'budget' customers for the sake of shaving a pound or two off the price of the panel.
One last time, COMPUTER MONITORS ARE FOR COMPUTING.. WATCHING MOVIES AND CRAP IS A NICE ADDED EXTRA YOU MAY USE FROM TIME TO TIME, NOT THE DAY IN DAY OUT TASK OF A COMPUTER USER. :wallbash:
Well I must say I prefer 16:9. The format just seems better, and games appear to fit easier.
Say what now?Quote:
Originally Posted by matty-hodgson
It's just a x to y pixel ratio. 16:9 instead of 16:10 means you lose 1 y pixel for every 16 x pixel, on a 24" monitor (assuming the x resolution is 1920), 230,400 pixels worth of screen height. How is that in any way better for my browsing the internet, or working on a *NIX box via PuTTY, or any number of a bazillion 'y' biased productive tasks?
16:10 gaming, oh no, some crappy console port game hard codes crappy aspect resolutions.. What's the worst that'll happen? The GPU will aspect scale the image and the bits that aren't drawn to are given black values instead. How does that not make the game fit on the display? Annoyed by black borders? Complain to the publisher/studio of game in question and tell them to do their engines right. Personally, I don't care about letterboxes in the slightest.
I didn't mean it to be so personal.Quote:
Originally Posted by aidanjt
But anyway, my resolution is 2048x1152, which is 48 less than 1920x1200, which overall really doesn't make that much difference.
If you want 16:10, buy 16:10, but personally, black borders do my head in.
My 20" 16:10 is only slightly smaller than my 22" 16:9, I was unimpressed by it. Feels like a way of making people upgrade without upgrading much.
For surfing and general document work, 16:9 cuts down on the one axis we have in limited supply, the vertical. No wonder software designers are trimming more off the top menu to compensate for these ratios.
16:10 is a nice balance, as you get a 4:3 work area with space for toolboxes like in Photoshop.
Personally I rock 4:3 at home on a 21" NEC 1600x1200 screen. I can't even contemplate running a screen with a vertical of 900px for a desktop, what a waist.
At least they aren't glossy as well...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HEXUS
Sorry but did you know that Dell's IPS monitors are actually LG panels? LG have been making IPS monitors for ages
Somewhat puzzled that they have HDMI on the monitor *without* speakers, but DVI on the one *with*. Since the main difference between HDMI and DVI (apart from the physical aspects) is the presence of audio on the HDMI, wouldn't it have been smarter to have the HDMI connector on the one with speakers? /puzzzled.
Personally I think not having DVI as well as HDMI is insane. In fact, for higher quality IPS, I would expect display port as well! Whilst we're on it, my old Dell 2405 (iirc model no - not posting from home) has 4 USB ports and multicard reader on the sides - extremely useful for webcams or quickly connecting as usb memory stick, mp3 player, camera sd card etc. In addition I like the ability to rotate to portrait. Rarely used it but if working on one document for long periods it's so much clearer.
As for the whole aspect ratio argument, it's purely personal - you can't say people don't use monitors for watching films because some do, including me. My dell is 16:10 (1920x1200), which I really like but 16:9 or 4:3 don't bug me much.
One thing that's interesting for gaming: it's staggering the number of times I've watched hot shots on counterstrike (after they've pwned me :p) miss seeing people on the edge of my screen and I've realised that they can't see them because they're playing on a 4:3 monitor (or 5:4). Despite more 'verticality' in games, most of the 'extra' tactical info you need is off to the sides still.
Personally a wider aspect ratio is also nice because it's easier to place windows side-by-side so you can source material from a browser one side and work on a document the other. Alt-tabbing is annoying as hell. So unless you want 4 windows in a 2x2 pattern (very rare), 16:9 or 16:10 helps a lot (i don't care which). At the end of the day though, for productivity, just having higher res and more screen real estate (eg multi monitors) is what helps regardless of aspect ratios. I used to work at an investment bank and had triple 4:3 monitors and traders would often have 2 rows of 3 monitors with a couple of others/tvs above for good measure - it's so much easier when you can see all or most of the docs/market info you need open in front of you simultaneously.
Another disgrunteled 16:9 user here. I do a lot of work in AutoCAD and vertical resolution is precious. Yes i can work in 16:9 but i wantz moreezzzz!
Actually many IPS monitors use panels made by "LG.Philips" (a joint venture between the 2 electronics companies); this includes Dell, HP and Apple!Quote:
Originally Posted by j.o.s.h.1408