dells's 24 inch widescreen lcd.

Mize said:
Fox5 said:
Shouldn't LCD screen parts be cheaper to produce than CRT parts? They have a plastic screen instead of glass, and are much lighter and smaller.

Cost of materials has virtually no bearing on a product's value.
End of story.

Holy crap...Mize said exactly what I was going to say. :oops: ;)
 
I've been eyeing the HP 23" and it costs around $1500.

My eyes are now looking at the Dell. :)

24" (1920x1200)
16ms response (or better)
Lots of ports (DVI, component, etc.)
4 port USB2
6-in-1 reader

My 6800GT should run many games at 1920x1200 (no FSAA). For those that don't support wide-screen 1600x1200 will do fine. I plan to run it at 1:1 so there isn't any stretch--the game will simply have black bars on the sides--no big deal. The key is to keep it running contently at the native resolution.

Best yet, when I'm doing .Net C# work I'll have a very nice time with the extra realistate for the IDE. :) This is actualy my primary driver.
 
Windfire said:
Best yet, when I'm doing .Net C# work I'll have a very nice time with the extra realistate for the IDE. :) This is actualy my primary driver.
I have a 20" at work that I turn portrait when coding.
1200x1600 means lots of lines of code.
 
RussSchultz said:
Windfire said:
Best yet, when I'm doing .Net C# work I'll have a very nice time with the extra realistate for the IDE. :) This is actualy my primary driver.
I have a 20" at work that I turn portrait when coding.
1200x1600 means lots of lines of code.

Yeah, that would be nice. At work we only get 19" tubes so we're pretty much stuck at 1280x1024. :( It's amazing, I can have two nice workstations, but the monitors are only 19". Cheap.

When working at home though, the 1920x1280 will be nice. With VS .Net you end up with a lot of docked windows (SQL, etc, etc.) that take up so much horizontal space. However, I'll also give Portrait a whirl. :) I can't imagine what it would be like with 1920 resolution in portrait!
 
Back
Top