01-22-2007, 05:51 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,041
|
|
30" Widescreen 'Reasonable'?
I bought a 20" widescreen LCD for my computing needs about a year ago. Although I've been happy with it's performance and much smaller space requirements from my old 19" CRT, I'm still left wanting more.
I thought the 20" widescreen would be good to have two apps open side by side. Not even a simple browser and Outlook will fit side by side. Yeah, I can switch between apps quickly enough... But you REALLY get better productivity by having apps open side by side.. I used to have a two monitor setup and just loved it... Which brings me to this question?
A 20" widescreen LCD is good for 1.5 open, viewable apps. I would think that a 24" widescreen CAN fit 2 apps on the screen, side by side. Can it? So upgrading to 24" would solve it. Wrong. I couldn't have my IM windows and other little utility apps viewable at the same time.
So I was thinking of getting a 24" widescreen and keeping my 20" widescreen. I'm not sure about having two different sized screens... Sure it's probably the best for the cost... But it would 'look' funky. I was thinking of going big-time with a 30" widescreen from Dell, but then if I was playing a game, I'd have to devote the entire screen to the game and not keep an eye on other things on the other screen. Plus, that's so darn BIG. I'd actually have to look up to view things!
Cost IS an issue, but I've been saving ;-)
What do you folks think?
|
| |
|
|
|
01-22-2007, 04:52 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Great topic!
I've been running dual screens on my main workstation for a long time now - probably five or six years (started with twin Samsung 17" LCDs that cost me $900 CAD each), but I also have several other single-screen PCs and laptops...so I think about this issue a lot. I ran with twin 20.1" Dell LCDs for three years, and recently have upgraded to twin Dell 24" widescreens (well, I'm TRYING to).
From my perspective, here's what I've learned:
1) Two medium-sized screens are better than one big screen. With the way Windows operates, it's easier to have two screens with one primary application open on each one. For me, that's Outlook on the right monitor and Firefox/Word/Graphics app on my left one. All it takes is one stupid Web site forcing your browser to fill the wonder for you to realize that two monitors are better than one. ;-)
2) Having two different sized monitors, or even two monitors from a different OEM, is hard visually to adjust to. I think visual duplication is an important part of a dual monitor setup, so I always get two matching monitors and make sure they're configured the same (brightness, contrast, etc.)
So my advice is to get two 24" Dell widescreens (though keep in mind my trouble with getting a dead-pixel-free monitor), or if you want to save some money get two of the Dell 22" widescreen monitors (they're a bit more "budget" though in terms of panel quality, might not matter to you).
|
| |
|
|
|
01-23-2007, 10:05 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,041
|
|
I'm sorry to hear about your Dell monitor woes... Sounds borderline nightmare quality. Other than yourself, no one has ever mentioned Dell monitor problems to me... I'm a Viewsonic man myself, but I think I can switch to the Dark Side..
Thank you for your information. I was thinking along those lines and your arguments confirmed them. Having a big 30" widescreen would just floor people, or make them think I'm insane ;-) But the two 24" widescreens I think is just BETTER ergonomically and for productivity. It still looks cool 
P.S. It will also give me some extra money to save for that biomorph desk too!
|
| |
|
|
|
01-23-2007, 06:19 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ricksfiona
Having a big 30" widescreen would just floor people, or make them think I'm insane ;-) But the two 24" widescreens I think is just BETTER ergonomically and for productivity. It still looks cool
|
2 x 24" = 48" inches of monitor insanity, so they STILL might think you're insane. :lol:
BTW, here's the happy ending:
http://www.jasondunn.com/dell-monitor-quest-over-164
|
| |
|
|
|
02-16-2007, 11:30 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 351
|
|
definitely go for bigger dual monitors...not one large one. i have a 40" lcd and my 17" laptop...use the laptop screen for all web browsing and the little bit of programming that i do and the 40" for torrents and gaming. if productivity is your #1 priority then forget the 30" for now. ohhh 2 24" are a lot more than 48" when counting the pixels on them. i always both people and tell them that my 40" is like 4 20", but in reality its not even close. even 1 20" is more than the 40" pixel wise.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-16-2007, 08:33 PM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 303
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ricksfiona
Having a big 30" widescreen would just floor people, or make them think I'm insane ;-) But the two 24" widescreens I think is just BETTER ergonomically and for productivity. It still looks cool
|
2 x 24" = 48" inches of monitor insanity, so they STILL might think you're insane. :lol:
BTW, here's the happy ending:
http://www.jasondunn.com/dell-monitor-quest-over-164 |
You'd need 4x24" to have a 48" diagonal :mrgreen:
|
| |
|
|
|
02-16-2007, 08:41 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Larson
You'd need 4x24" to have a 48" diagonal :mrgreen:
|
Someone with two 24" monitors has 48" inches of display space. It's pretty simple math. ;-)
|
| |
|
|
|
02-17-2007, 12:55 AM
|
|
Editorial Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,411
|
|
Actually if you have a 24" diagonal monitor in a 4x3 format, you have a 14.4 high by 19.2 wide screen. Two side by side, assuming negligible frames, is 14.4 high by 38.4 wide. That's 41 inches diagonal. 
__________________
Sometimes you are the anteater, sometimes you are the ant.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-17-2007, 08:32 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 351
|
|
this is the same argument i was talking about...its the pixels that count. sort of like a 2.8" vga ppc and a 4.0" vga screens. even though the size is larger the space is the same. my 40" res is only 1366x768...which ANY 20" will have more. hence more desktop room, more open windows and more PRODUCTIVITY.
no?
|
| |
|
|
|
02-17-2007, 08:41 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sven
Actually if you have a 24" diagonal monitor in a 4x3 format...
|
I know you're just being a smartass ;-), but we're talking about modern LCD monitors, none of which are 4:3 ratio...these are 16:10 ratio panels. Is this national nit-pick day or something? :?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
