CRT vs. LCD
- Started
- Last post
- 43 Responses
- auxillary0
Mmmm that IS sweet indeed!
- rafalski0
Ordered the 2007WFP last Friday.. why is it taking sooo loooong?
- auxillary0
Ka-bump!
- IRNlun60
" http://accessories.us.dell.com/s…
version4
(Jun 28 06, 11:57)"Nice v4. I've got this one at work and I'm loving it. I plan to get one for my home too because I'll actually get to use my desk again...
- komkrktprod0
$score = LCD++;
- auxillary0
I made the decision actually already but now I know for sure...
I am going LCD.Thanks for all the input guys!
E.
- ribit0
Isnt the Dell 1905FP 5:4 ratio? (i.e. with standard square pixels?)
- aka0
LCD. I design magazines, so the colour is an issue, and I think the LCD does quite well. Unless you get your CTR calibrated, its never going to be spot on for colour anyway. I find LCDs much easier on the eye and they don't have the glare and reflection problems CTRs do.
- skelly0
like i said, either a manufacturing mistake or just a bad decision.
- monNom0
I was talking about an LCD with non square pixles.
my dell 1905fp (and viewsonic VA912b), has a native
resolution of 1280/1024 == 5:4 ratio. not 4:3
but the screen itself is 4:3. therefore: squished pixelswhy they didn't make it 1280/960 is beyond me.
- fugged0
you're an idiot, i'm done with this conversation
version4
(Jun 28 06, 13:17)heh.
I think he was talking about an LCD display dude.
- ribit0
actually I'm not an idiot... I thought we were talking about a report of LCDs with non-square pixels
- ribit0
duh... you are talking about a CRT... I missed the switch from LCD to CRT discussion there......
- version30
you're an idiot, i'm done with this conversation
- ribit0
that cant be right... pixels are square and those are 4:3 resolutions...must match up.
Where did you buy this thing?!
- version30
settings adjusting:
size/center on crt screen
reset to default even have the same appearance.
crts have this issue because of the tube i would assume
- ribit0
actually...sounds like you were using it at non-native resolution (bad and blurry), and choosing resolution proportions that didnt match the screen proportion (even more badder)...
- version30
i'm talking about a 4:3 monitor set at 800x600, 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024(native), and 1600x1200
always looked a little squashed
it wasn't like i was trying to fit a 16:9 resolution on a 4:3 screen
- ribit0
um... what settings were you adjusting exactly?
- ribit0
but thats just your choice of what you want to put on it... same problem with wide-screen displays, you have to decide how you are going to display stuff on it... constrained proportion (which you would use for most stuff), or 'stretch to screen' (things like wallpaper)