Flat Panel Monitors
-
I use 17" TFTs and 19" CRTs, both of which give the same viewable display size*, and run at 1280 by 1024 resolution on all of them. Sometimes in VS.NET I will need to hide the solution explorer in order to work with documents containing long lines (I use the VC6 layout so it is on the left). Most of the time with a 9pt font and the solution explorer present I don't think to myself "gosh, this is too small". I am a religious #region person though so typically only the code I am actually working on with even be visible in the document. If you're not constantly moving things about onscreen to give you more space then IMO there isn't a lot of point in upgrading the size. I find anything over 1280 by 1024 to be too big and the detail too small, and anything on a different h:v ratio to be unusable. One thing I have noticed over the years though is that I use my display space very differently to almost every developer I have seen working. I am a desktop, task-bar and window-size control freak: my desktop icons must be arranged in correct groups around the screen, if there is an application on the task bar that I am not actively using then it will be closed, and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them (except Windows Explorer where the inverse is true). It's the only way I can be productive. * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Any brands you really like or do not like? My TFT experience is limited to one brand and one model - AOC LM720A 17" displays. My oldest is about two years old and works as well as the one I bought a couple of months ago. I cannot make comparisons to others though.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
I am similar to you in at least one respect : I am very particular about the desktop layout. Actually, My desktop has NO icons on it. All icons are on a custom toolbar and most are in subfolders which have shortcut icons to them that are on the toolbar. Also, the taskbar runs vertically along the far left side of the display. I should say - the left hand side of the left monitor. I have two monitors (both LCDs right now) that are connected to two video cards. 2560x1024 is a very nice resolution to work in. The size of the CRTs given is the size of the entire tube and, obviously, not all of that is usable. Regarding brands, at work I have a Viewsonic and Dell, both 17s, and both are very nice. At home I have a single Planar PL201M (20.1 inch, 1600x1200) and it is really amazing. Oddly enough, I got it in a great deal from Dell.
-
I am similar to you in at least one respect : I am very particular about the desktop layout. Actually, My desktop has NO icons on it. All icons are on a custom toolbar and most are in subfolders which have shortcut icons to them that are on the toolbar. Also, the taskbar runs vertically along the far left side of the display. I should say - the left hand side of the left monitor. I have two monitors (both LCDs right now) that are connected to two video cards. 2560x1024 is a very nice resolution to work in. The size of the CRTs given is the size of the entire tube and, obviously, not all of that is usable. Regarding brands, at work I have a Viewsonic and Dell, both 17s, and both are very nice. At home I have a single Planar PL201M (20.1 inch, 1600x1200) and it is really amazing. Oddly enough, I got it in a great deal from Dell.
I am the same with respect to the tools bars and submenus on my "auto-hide" task bar. However, I use the desktop heavily for a visual work space. More like a "my documents" folder but used for anything. Download folders, work folders, a few short term notes such as to-do lists and reminiders, short term check out folders for software I am looking into, and some URLs that I have to remember to check out. Until recently, I would have to work hard to find a place to add another icon to the desktops (both 19" monitors at 1280x1024) because they were used for quick storage of URLS and some of my most regular URLs. After getting FireFox ToolBox bookmark folders configured to all quick access to about everything I visit and a few temp folders on the bar for things I need to remember to check out, I seldom use the desktop for that any more. I guess I view the desktop as a replacement of C:\. Makes it handy when I move to a new machine though since most of the move consists of copying the desktop (and all the folders it contains) and the My Documents folder to a new machine. And since moving to VS.NET years ago, all my development trees are in the "My Documents/Visual Studio Projects" root. The only directory I use directly off the root now, is inetpub (and have a shortcut on my taskbar tools for that :) ). Everything else is in Desktop or My Documents. Of course, installed software not included. My desktop folder is already 10.3 gig and this is not including music files ;) Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
I use 17" TFTs and 19" CRTs, both of which give the same viewable display size*, and run at 1280 by 1024 resolution on all of them. Sometimes in VS.NET I will need to hide the solution explorer in order to work with documents containing long lines (I use the VC6 layout so it is on the left). Most of the time with a 9pt font and the solution explorer present I don't think to myself "gosh, this is too small". I am a religious #region person though so typically only the code I am actually working on with even be visible in the document. If you're not constantly moving things about onscreen to give you more space then IMO there isn't a lot of point in upgrading the size. I find anything over 1280 by 1024 to be too big and the detail too small, and anything on a different h:v ratio to be unusable. One thing I have noticed over the years though is that I use my display space very differently to almost every developer I have seen working. I am a desktop, task-bar and window-size control freak: my desktop icons must be arranged in correct groups around the screen, if there is an application on the task bar that I am not actively using then it will be closed, and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them (except Windows Explorer where the inverse is true). It's the only way I can be productive. * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Any brands you really like or do not like? My TFT experience is limited to one brand and one model - AOC LM720A 17" displays. My oldest is about two years old and works as well as the one I bought a couple of months ago. I cannot make comparisons to others though.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
David Wulff wrote: * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Exactly :-). Though a 17" TFT and 19" shouldn't quite be the same, the CRTs usually have a viewable area of around around an inch smaller than the quoted size so in most cases a 19" CRT will be slightly bigger than a 17" TFT, though I admit they look pretty similar to the eye, especially when you consider the black border you're pretty much forced to have with the CRT. Personally, I like TFTs best for their geometry, the geometry on a CRT is never right. -- Andrew.
-
David Wulff wrote: * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Exactly :-). Though a 17" TFT and 19" shouldn't quite be the same, the CRTs usually have a viewable area of around around an inch smaller than the quoted size so in most cases a 19" CRT will be slightly bigger than a 17" TFT, though I admit they look pretty similar to the eye, especially when you consider the black border you're pretty much forced to have with the CRT. Personally, I like TFTs best for their geometry, the geometry on a CRT is never right. -- Andrew.
I have 17" TFTs (AOC LM720A) and 19" CRTs (Hyundai Q910) standing next to each other and the screensize is identical - I just measured them to make sure and there is less than 1/16th of an inch between them. :~
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
-
I use 17" TFTs and 19" CRTs, both of which give the same viewable display size*, and run at 1280 by 1024 resolution on all of them. Sometimes in VS.NET I will need to hide the solution explorer in order to work with documents containing long lines (I use the VC6 layout so it is on the left). Most of the time with a 9pt font and the solution explorer present I don't think to myself "gosh, this is too small". I am a religious #region person though so typically only the code I am actually working on with even be visible in the document. If you're not constantly moving things about onscreen to give you more space then IMO there isn't a lot of point in upgrading the size. I find anything over 1280 by 1024 to be too big and the detail too small, and anything on a different h:v ratio to be unusable. One thing I have noticed over the years though is that I use my display space very differently to almost every developer I have seen working. I am a desktop, task-bar and window-size control freak: my desktop icons must be arranged in correct groups around the screen, if there is an application on the task bar that I am not actively using then it will be closed, and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them (except Windows Explorer where the inverse is true). It's the only way I can be productive. * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Any brands you really like or do not like? My TFT experience is limited to one brand and one model - AOC LM720A 17" displays. My oldest is about two years old and works as well as the one I bought a couple of months ago. I cannot make comparisons to others though.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
>and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them Apart from Shog9 from outer space I would think most people do this. Nothing worse than swinging a cursor top-right, clicking and finding you just closed something in the background because the current window was not maximised and at 99%. As for desktop icons I am the same though I keep a minimum of icons on my desktop. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
-
I use 17" TFTs and 19" CRTs, both of which give the same viewable display size*, and run at 1280 by 1024 resolution on all of them. Sometimes in VS.NET I will need to hide the solution explorer in order to work with documents containing long lines (I use the VC6 layout so it is on the left). Most of the time with a 9pt font and the solution explorer present I don't think to myself "gosh, this is too small". I am a religious #region person though so typically only the code I am actually working on with even be visible in the document. If you're not constantly moving things about onscreen to give you more space then IMO there isn't a lot of point in upgrading the size. I find anything over 1280 by 1024 to be too big and the detail too small, and anything on a different h:v ratio to be unusable. One thing I have noticed over the years though is that I use my display space very differently to almost every developer I have seen working. I am a desktop, task-bar and window-size control freak: my desktop icons must be arranged in correct groups around the screen, if there is an application on the task bar that I am not actively using then it will be closed, and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them (except Windows Explorer where the inverse is true). It's the only way I can be productive. * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Any brands you really like or do not like? My TFT experience is limited to one brand and one model - AOC LM720A 17" displays. My oldest is about two years old and works as well as the one I bought a couple of months ago. I cannot make comparisons to others though.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
I am the same way. I'm the only guy at work that doesn't keep his email program open, and everything needs to be maximized while I use it (except Explorer). I currently have a 19-inch CRT and will be ordering my 19-inch LCD (Viewsonic VP912B) tomorrow. Since I work/game at 1280x1024, and since the native resolution of the Viewsonic is 1280x1024, there shouldn't be much/any difference for me. ------- sig starts "I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
My test box's monitor is definitely on its last days. I am tempted to get a flat panel for my main unit and move the 19" Viewsonic over to the test. This monitor has a 18" viewable with some black boarder giving more like a 17.4 screen. I have a few questions. The price difference between a 17 and 19 is about 150USD so for cost the 17 really is the "best buy". Is the extra space for the 19 worth it? I actually program on this 10-15% so it is not a principally development. Any brands you really like or do not like? I am in Fort Worth and with Dell just down the street they are locally very popular. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that can think of.
I have almost nothing useful to contribute to this other than the positive re-inforcement of your decision that I always had assumed LCD monitors had crappy picture quality but just today I was in a store and they had LCD monitors set up (17'') and the quality was stunning, like you could put your hand into it (was showing an aquarium screen saver). I'm definitely considering it now, my old Viewsonic a90 looks pretty washed out by comparison.
-
>and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them Apart from Shog9 from outer space I would think most people do this. Nothing worse than swinging a cursor top-right, clicking and finding you just closed something in the background because the current window was not maximised and at 99%. As for desktop icons I am the same though I keep a minimum of icons on my desktop. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
Nothing worse than swinging a cursor top-right, clicking and finding you just closed something in the background because the current window was not maximised and at 99%. Agreed X|
"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower -
I have 17" TFTs (AOC LM720A) and 19" CRTs (Hyundai Q910) standing next to each other and the screensize is identical - I just measured them to make sure and there is less than 1/16th of an inch between them. :~
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
Hey, David How long have you had your AOC unit(s)? From your response I assume you are happy with them. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that can think of.
-
Hey, David How long have you had your AOC unit(s)? From your response I assume you are happy with them. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that can think of.
I'm not sure exactly, but I would have got the first around March 2003. I've never had any problems with it so I bought another two in August and September this year. I play games like HL2 on them and the picture is great. For writing they are better than my CRT.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
-
I use 17" TFTs and 19" CRTs, both of which give the same viewable display size*, and run at 1280 by 1024 resolution on all of them. Sometimes in VS.NET I will need to hide the solution explorer in order to work with documents containing long lines (I use the VC6 layout so it is on the left). Most of the time with a 9pt font and the solution explorer present I don't think to myself "gosh, this is too small". I am a religious #region person though so typically only the code I am actually working on with even be visible in the document. If you're not constantly moving things about onscreen to give you more space then IMO there isn't a lot of point in upgrading the size. I find anything over 1280 by 1024 to be too big and the detail too small, and anything on a different h:v ratio to be unusable. One thing I have noticed over the years though is that I use my display space very differently to almost every developer I have seen working. I am a desktop, task-bar and window-size control freak: my desktop icons must be arranged in correct groups around the screen, if there is an application on the task bar that I am not actively using then it will be closed, and all my windows must be maximised before I can work in them (except Windows Explorer where the inverse is true). It's the only way I can be productive. * any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Any brands you really like or do not like? My TFT experience is limited to one brand and one model - AOC LM720A 17" displays. My oldest is about two years old and works as well as the one I bought a couple of months ago. I cannot make comparisons to others though.
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
David Wulff wrote: any idea why TFT and CRT displays of different diagonal sizes have identical displays? With CRTs are they measuring the unusable bit of the tube that lives inside the case? That's it exactly, a "nineteen-inch" CRT display is actually 19" but part of the tube is hidden behind the monitor case. The reason that monitors are always listed in actual size followed by visible area is that monitor manufacturers got hit with a class-action lawsuit a while ago, claiming that they were being misleading by advertising 19" when you could only use 17.5". So a 19" LCD will be "larger" than an 19" CRT because the viewable area of the LCD is 19", while the CRT is less. --Mike-- LINKS~! Ericahist | 1ClickPicGrabber | CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ | You Are Dumb
