LCD monitors and resolutions (for a PC user I know)

[psmith2.0]

My mom is looking to replace her bulky, flickering 17" 4:3 Viewsonic (is that the one with the parrots?) CRT monitor with something a bit more modern, sleek and space-saving (and larger).

We were looking at various 19" and 22" (and a few 24") widescreen displays at Best Buy, from HP, Westinghouse and a few other brands (actually their computer monitor display area looked a bit wrecked, with holes and incomplete specs/pricing info...if the area could hold, for instance, 20 display models, only 10-12 were present). Not sure if they were redoing it, or getting new stock in at some point. It just didn't look as packed and complete as it has in the past.

Anyway, I was noticing that the resolution seems to run a bit lower (not that it's a bad thing...we're talking 57-year-old eyes). But I saw where the 22" displays were running at 1680x1050 (the size of the 20" iMac and Cinema Dispay) and the 19" were at 1440x900 (the size of the 17" iMac and previous 17" PowerBooks).

Is this about standard on the standalone LCD side of things? She seemed to gravitate toward the 19", but she kept bumping the resolution up (she does her current monitor at 1024x768, believe it or not). I'm wondering if she's used to such large, horsey icons and windows if going to an LCD - with its set, higher resolutions - might not sit well with her?

I tried explaining how when you go outside the optimum resolution that a certain LCD recommends, it gets fuzzier (and I showed her).

I guess I don't want her buying a nice 22" widescreen LCD and then running the silly thing at - you guessed it - 1024x768 and wondering why her clock is egg-shaped and not round, not taking full advantage of the working area/pixels available, etc. She's not terribly savvy on this stuff, and if I went over and she's running at that resolution (and has her Internet Explorer window opened up all the way to cover the entire screen (even if much of it is white), I'm afraid I'd just have to leap out a window or something.

:p

I showed her, on the 22" display, how Explorer can open up and that you can see a lot more of your working area, apps BEHIND it (and not having to necessarily "fill your screen" with Yahoo and eBay homepages). Making the window "bigger" won't show anymore of those pages, but that she could have her e-mail and greeting card programs (and iTunes) showing behind (I assume) the main, front window?

Or are we better off just trying to find a 4:3 LCD display at 1024x768 and just letting her enjoy the space savings and "flicker-free" aspect, and not monkey with what she's used to? It's like pulling teeth sometimes, this stuff. I'm thinking "go bigger, go wider, go higher resolution". But if she's not going to take full advantage of the physical size or resolution, what's the point?

Beyond all the above, what are decent, respectable manufacturers to look for in that 19-22" range? She's not a graphics/photo/video pro at all, so please don't be suggesting some $2,399 high-end, calibrated system (endorsed by Pantone and God Himself), etc. We're taking in that $200-250 "consumer" range. I know nothing about this because I've never really had to (iMacs and notebooks have been my computers of choice since early 2000).

She's got a fairly new Sony tower, and I'm thinking it might have both VGA and DVI on the back.

I'm flying blind here with all this...but I'm not about to turn her loose on her own because she'd go strictly by price (she's a bargain-hunter) and buy a 24" display for $119 that she found online (and knows nothing about because she wouldn't research it one bit), and then be all upset when it exploded in four months.

[ghoti]

My father, who is the same age, is also running an LCD screen at the wrong resolution because it's "easier on the eyes" - nothing I say or show him can change that. In that case, the screen is 4:3, but I'm sure you could find a resolution for a 16:9 screen that would produce large enough text without stretching the image. It's about time all those GUIs get resolution independent ...

[Chellovek]

Dell 19" Widescreen Ultrasharp for $214? (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-6138)

[psmith2.0]

Yeah. That 1440x900 on the 19" seemed to be a nice area, I thought. The display was physically a bit larger than what she has (which is all she goes by, but I tried to explain the resolution/pixel thing as well, a little bit).

It didn't seem too small.

I did notice that Windows doesn't always have the smooth fonts/type. It all looked like Windows 95 (Or Mac OS 8) on body copy...was that just a setting on that particular machine? I think it was Windows Vista, with all the gel buttons and glassy trim (Aero?).

:confused:

Or should I just bonk her over the head and get her a 20" iMac instead? That card program she uses, it's got a Mac (Universal, no less!) version.

:D

Honestly, she'd have no more trouble getting used to a Mac than she would what she's using because, like my Dad, she only surfs, e-mails, does iTunes and dabbles in a few other programs for greeting cards or writing. She's certainly not so "into Windows" (and knows all its inner-workings and underpinnings) that she'd be "unlearning" much at all. But she wouldn't have to worry about any virus stuff and all the rest. Sometimes I come *this close* to just doing that...

My dad, hard-head that he is, has taken wonderfully to the Mac in just five or so months (vowing to "never go back" to Windows).

:p

He's doing things now - photos, music, etc. - that he never dreamed of doing before; didn't even know it was possible, or didn't have a machine or OS that could support it (or that made it 3x harder than it needed to be), etc. I think about that same sort of thing for Mom (iPhoto, with its calendars and books, iChat with the built-in iSight, ease of maintenance/use, etc.). She gets into a pickle on her Windows machine and she's got to take it somewhere (ugh), or, worse, have some supposed "computer guru" (the stepson of a co-worker, a neighbor who read "Windows for Dummies" eight years ago, etc.) come over to "take a look at it", who, invariably, manages to fuck it up even more.

:rolleyes:

A recurring theme, for sure...

[zippy]

If you go with a larger monitor, I think the thing you need to do is to find that resolution where the icons and text are the same physical size as what she is used to. Grab a ruler and measure them on screen if necessary, and prove it to her. Of course they will be smaller relative to the new screen, but if you can demonstrate that they actually are the same size, at least you won't be going 'backwards'. And maybe you could even try to talk her into going 1 step higher in resolution and giving it a try (if there's anything to gain that is.)

If you can at least get her to use the same actual/physical sized icons/text, but with a larger monitor, she should still be able to enjoy some extra room around whatever application window she needs open as long as you can get her to stop maximizing everything. And in my experience, that's a little easier to do with widescreen monitors - all the extra, wasted space just looks so much worse on a widescreen than it does on the old 4:3 units.

[psmith2.0]

Very true.

I didn't think about the "ruler" thing. That might actually help...I just don't know if I can find a widescreen LCD with Word and IE icons .75" wide.

:p

[709]

I'd probably try to get her into a 19" LCD with a 1280x1024 resolution. Roughly the same icon size as her 17" and the familiar 4x3 aspect ratio. Shouldn't be too much of a shock to her system that way. ;)

I have a 19" BenQ hooked up to my testing PC and it's a nice little monitor with both DVI and VGA ports (actually, I have my OS9 'Marathon Mac' hooked into the VGA port at the same time and can just button-press between the two). This (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824014155) is the closest thing I could find on newegg that's similar to mine.

[psmith2.0]

I was thinking about that as well...I've seen some 4:3 models around, at 19" and with a 1280x1024 resolution (same as those older 17" silver/clear acrylic studio displays (http://www.onedigitallife.com/images/apple-17-studio-display-box.jpg) from Apple during the G4 tower era).

That might be a nice solution for her, sure enough.

A little bigger physically, a skootch more room to work in but without any noticeably smaller icons. And she'd still get the sleeker, cleaner look on her desk that she's wanting. And I really don't think she's hung-up on "widescreen" either way...it's just all they had at Best Buy for us to see.

Thanks!

19" @ 1280x1024...

[chucker]

This problem is why resolution-independent UIs can't come soon enough. ;) Then, you'd run it at native resolution, but increase the scale factor.

I was thinking about that as well...I've seen some 4:3 models around, at 19" and with a 1280x1024 resolution

Nitpick: that's 5:4, not 4:3 (4:3 would be 1280x960). Blame those crazy SGI goons.

[psmith2.0]

5:4, 4:3...yeah. Non-widescreen.

:)

If she got a decent one like 709 linked above (I e-mailed her about it, gave her the link), that certainly leaves her options open for the future (VGA and DVI connections). Why, she could easily get a Mac mini (if they don't get discontinued) at some point and already have a nice display to connect it to.

It's funny (this is just how she thinks)...I was telling her about the Mac mini and she just couldn't get her head around it being a "real computer", versus the bulky towers she's always had. I told her "yeah, but those towers are really only big because they've got space in them for you to add extra hard drives or CD burners or sound/video cards...have you done any of those? Will you? Ever? Of course not."

The Mac mini is made for someone like her, with a display and mouse they already like, and with no notions of expansion or hotrodding a big tower. I told her "Mom, this has a CD burner, USB 2.0, Ethernet, FireWire, a place for your speakers and Wi-Fi...it's everything you have on your tower, minus the bulk, weight and expansion space that you're never going to tap into anyway. Why not have something small and cute on your desk, and that actually works all the time (like it's supposed to), right next to your new flat monitor...minus the virus worries and all that crazy stuff?"

That Sony tower she has is somewhat sleek and small. But she doesn't maintain it (or really know how), so, at less than a year old, it's already dragging and running at a crawl. Shit popping up everywhere, notices, etc.

That seemed to click with her a bit more, realizing that "a bigger tower" didn't automatically mean "better, faster computer" vs. something like a Mac mini. I'd love to see her with a Mac mini someday soon, sitting next to that 19" BenQ display (or something close to it).

She's funny. Love her to pieces, but getting into these types of discussions...just have the Excedrin on standby. But I'm also the guy who a) got her off AOL dial-up and onto cable modem four years ago, and b) pushed her to consider a digital camera (when I realized how many pictures she was taking and how much she was paying for developing, and being stuck with pictures she didn't like or need), so I like to think my input carries some weight with her (she loves her cable modem and Canon S45). I've not been wrong about this kind of stuff yet, as it pertains to her and her usage. She's much nicer off now than 4-5 years ago (56k dial-up/AOL, and constantly running to Walgreens to drop off film), and she's even told me as much. Just gotta get her using the right OS...

;)

[zippy]

5:4, 4:3...yeah. Non-widescreen.

:)

If she got a decent one like 709 linked above (I e-mailed her about it, gave her the link), that certainly leaves her options open for the future (VGA and DVI connections). Why, she could easily get a Mac mini (if they don't get discontinued) at some point and already have a nice display to connect it to.

It's funny (this is just how she thinks)...I was telling her about the Mac mini and she just couldn't get her head around it being a "real computer", versus the bulky towers she's always had. I told her "yeah, but those towers are really only big because they've got space in them for you to add extra hard drives or CD burners or sound/video cards...have you done any of those? Will you? Ever? Of course not."

The Mac mini is made for someone like her, with a display and mouse they already like, and with no notions of expansion or hotrodding a big tower. I told her "Mom, this has a CD burner, USB 2.0, Ethernet, FireWire, a place for your speakers and Wi-Fi...it's everything you have on your tower, minus the bulk, weight and expansion space that you're never going to tap into anyway. Why not have something small and cute on your desk, and that actually works all the time (like it's supposed to), right next to your new flat monitor...minus the virus worries and all that crazy stuff?"

That seemed to click with her a bit more, realizing that "a bigger tower" didn't automatically mean "better, faster computer" vs. something like a Mac mini.

She's funny. Love her to pieces, but getting into these types of discussions...just have the Excedrin on standby.

:)
Open up her old computer for here and show her how much dead air space is in there too. That's a bit of an eye opener for some people.

[psmith2.0]

Oh yeah. I'm sure it would be.

"It's all air, silly!" :)

If you're not actually putting things in those available spaces (drives, cards, etc.), why not go with something smaller and sleeker (and cheaper)? My philosophy, anyway.

I asked her to e-mail me the model of her Sony tower...I was going to look it up and see how it shook-out, spec-wise, to a Mac mini. I'm just curious...

I want to say she paid just over $800 for it, and I think it was at Circuit City? I think it has FireWire, but I'm not 100% certain. She doesn't have any FireWire devices, but she talks about getting a digital camcorder at some point, so...

At which point I'd have to insist she got onto a Mac (and iMovie), otherwise...ugh. I don't think she'd have much fun with it. I don't think there's anything in that free/consumer space on the PC side that's as slick and easy as iMovie (and that yields such nice results).

[Luca]

20-22" LCDs are all 1680x1050. 17-19" ones are all 1440x900. That's just how they're all made.

FYI, I picked up a 20" Acer (1680x1050 resolution) for $190 a few weeks ago and it's amazing. Great deal, wonderful looking display. But I might also recommend a 19" non-widescreen just because it's familiar to her. She doesn't watch movies on her computer, does she?

[psmith2.0]

No, I don't believe she does. She's got a TV and DVD player in her living room (and bedroom as well, I think). It's funny though, because she saw all those 19-22" widescreens at Best Buy and said "hey, I could watch movies on something like this!"

:)

So she might, but she doesn't now.

[Luca]

You know, I did see a deal on a 24" Westinghouse with lots of AV inputs at BestBuy.com. It was $350, which is already a good price for a screen that big, but with those inputs, you can also hook up a DVD player (and probably some speakers as well).

[Koodari]

Or should I just bonk her over the head and get her a 20" iMac instead? That card program she uses, it's got a Mac (Universal, no less!) version.Quite possibly you should. iMac with the internal webcam, speakers, mic and the lack of cables is really something different and striking, the full Mac experience. A Mini plugged into a random display and crappy keyboard isn't. The mini is a great machine for some uses, and great value when your existing peripherals are top notch, but when you have an opportunity where a display needs to be bought anyway then I'd seriously consider the iMac. On paper, iMac doesn't bring so much to the table that a compulsive bargain hunter would buy it without some nudging. But it sounds like it would be perfect for her.

With my tech-phobic parents, them having an iMac has been a relief for *me*. Going from video chat to screen sharing (to show them how something is done) and back to video chat, and so on.

[psmith2.0]

Very true. I actually just became aware of this "screen sharing" thing in iChat less than two weeks ago, and it's already come in handy on three occasions (Dad).

:)

BTW, I found out which computer Mom currently has. A Sony VGC RB50. It's a "3.2GHz Pentium 4(?)" machine...is that good, bad or indifferent? How does that compare to the current Core Duo 2 offerings on a Mac mini or iMac at ~2.0GHz, I wonder?

It's no longer made, of course, but from what I've seen online, here are the specs (seems to be some sort of "digital entertainment/multimedia type of deal, at least in all the stuff I'm reading about it). I'm just copying/pasting from a site I found (and I colored red the stuff that I know she's never used, isn't using and/or never will use):

Summary:
Sony VGC-RB50 VAIO Desktop Computer - This Sony desktop is ready for your growing digital entertainment and multimedia needs right out of the box, with Sony's premiere software bundle. Organize and share digital photos with PictureGear(TM) Studio. Download and manage your tunes with SonicStage. Burn DVDs with just one click with Click to DVD, and speaking of DVDs, you'll be able to create your very own with the included Double Layer DVD Writer! But that's just the beginning of what this desktop can offer you and your family...
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 with 128MB of shared video memory[/b] (memory is taken from the main system's RAM)
Double Layer DVD Writer* - (write speeds) up to 4x Double Layer DVD+R, 16x DVD+R, 16x DVD-R, 8x DVD+RW, 6x DVD-RW, 40x CD-R, & 24x CD-RW Double Layer DVD Writer - (read speeds) up to 16x DVD-ROM & 40x CD-ROM *she does burn the occasional CD, but never a DVD
56k v.90 Fax Modem
Multimedia Card Reader - supports Memory Stick, Memory Stick(R) PRO, Memory Stick(R) Duo, Compact Flash, SmartMedia, Secure Digital (SD), MultiMediaCard, & xD Picture Card Ports
10/100 Ethernet
1 VGA
2 PS/2
1 Parallel
1 Line-In
6 USB 2.0 (2 front)
2 Firewire (1 front 4-pin / 1 rear 6-pin)
Slots
1 x16 PCI Express (available)
1 x1 PCI Express (available)
2 PCI (1 available)
Bays
Two 5.25 (0 available)
One External 3.5 (0 available)
4 Internal 3.5 (3 available)

Seems like, as I'd suspected, she just bought way more machine than she truly needed. Didn't know the specs until just now, tonight.

:)

[thegeriatric]

If it helps, i am using a 19" widescreen by LG at 1440x900 through 55 (almost 56) year old eyes, and it's fine. :)

[Koodari]

BTW, I found out which computer Mom currently has. A Sony VGC RB50. It's a "3.2GHz Pentium 4(?)" machine...is that good, bad or indifferent? How does that compare to the current Core Duo 2 offerings on a Mac mini or iMac at ~2.0GHz, I wonder?Just a guess, but 2.0GHz C2D = 150% the speed of the P4 or a bit better. The Vaio's performance is about the same than an older 1.6GHz Core Duo mini would have. The graphics chip is a tad worse, which is sorta amusing.

Unless the Vaio is a Pentium D instead of a Pentium 4, in which case the C2D only slightly beats it.It's no longer made, of course, but from what I've seen online, here are the specs (seems to be some sort of "digital entertainment/multimedia type of deal, at least in all the stuff I'm reading about it). I'm just copying/pasting from a site I found (and I colored red the stuff that I know she's never used, isn't using and/or never will use):
...
Seems like, as I'd suspected, she just bought way more machine than she truly needed. Didn't know the specs until just now, tonight.

:)Most of that stuff, expansion space, ports, etc. are pretty much included in every consumer tower these days. If they could be dropped, that might make the machine like $20 cheaper.

The FW ports, a fast CPU, Sony brand and software, and (probably) a large HD are what make this as a "multimedia" oriented computer and have upped the price tag.

[colivigan]

I recently bought a Hanns-G 19" LCD from Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824254009) for the family PowerMac G5. It's really a pretty nice monitor for the price, which is dirt cheap.

I did debate about widescreen, because things are obviously trending that way. But we don't really watch movies on the computer, and, if you do the math, the 19" widescreens actually have fewer pixels than the old-fashioned format (1280x1024 > 1440x900). I decided I'd rather have the vertical space - scrolling drives me batty.

Anyway, I'm pretty happy with it. It's certainly not the fanciest flat-panel out there, but probably a big improvement over a 17" CRT. :)

[psmith2.0]

She wound up getting a Westinghouse 19" widescreen @ 1440x900. She loves it. It was on special at Target this week for $169 (down from $199). It's in the Sunday circulars (and their website) if you're curious. I don't know the model number...

Funny, it's no longer shown on Target's site. Other 19" models are, and other Westinghouse sizes...but not the 19" she got. :confused:

Anyway, she really seems to love it. And it looks nice and sharp. She noticed that right away, as well as the "flicker-free" aspect of it. And she likes how the desktop goes "all the way to the edge".

:)

It had both VGA and DVI inputs (only came with a VGA cable). But her computer supported the 1440x900 just fine and it looks really nice. A definite step up from her old one (and her desktop is so much nicer now, because I re-routed her cables, concealed them, connected her speakers and placed them beside the display, etc.).

She seems okay with the 1440x900 at that size.

I went to Apple's site and played the Indy 4 trailer for her, and she was saying "that looks so good on here...so crisp and sharp! And the colors...!"


Slightly off-topic, but still interesting:
I do have to say, while I was there I was using the thing (her computer) and I despise Windows even more now. And no, this isn't a "Mac cheerleading" thing at all. I'm not even looking at it from a "pro Mac" angle; but strictly from a "can I just %$#!@% sit down and get something - anything - done in a timely, efficient manner?" standpoint, it sucks. It just bugs you, non-stop. And you can't understand - no mortal can - any of the onscreen warnings or notifications. Some lameness about "resources for the video layer need to be used elsewhere...quit your process" or something like that. What normal person - my mom or your mom - would ever truly understand that, and know what to do? Non-stop. Every 3-4 minutes, it seemed. McAfee alerts and stuff popping up. System alerts and messages. Speakers. Mouse driver. Printer. Every $#@$%^ thing you can imagine. I was there 30 minutes and I thought I was going to lose it.

I hope she considers something else one day. I don't think Windows is made for people like this. If you're not going to be savvy and somewhat diligent about maintenance and upkeep (and understanding what is actually going on), I think you're just at the mercy of that OS...