Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Graphics Software

Small, High-Resolution LCD Monitors? 370

Posted by samzenpus
from the making-the-best-use-of-space dept.
An anonymous reader writes "I'm a veteran user of an old 17" Dell Trinitron CRT monitor. I run it at 1400x1050 with an 80Hz refresh rate — about as high as it goes before it'll go out of the monitor's scan range. More recently I've been looking to finally upgrade to an LCD monitor but found that, for the most part, every 17" monitor on the market runs natively at 1280x1024, as does every 19" monitor — I have to go for a 20" to go higher. Now yes, I know I'm complaining about just 120 pixels horizontal and 26 pixels vertical, but my laptop's 15" display runs natively at 1400x1050. Is there any standalone monitor on the market that'll natively do higher than 1280x1024 without killing my desk space?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Small, High-Resolution LCD Monitors?

Comments Filter:
  • by winterphoenix (1246434) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @07:59PM (#28630247)
    When I upgraded from my CRT to an LCD I gained tons of desk space. Just push your monitor back and take whatever stuff you would have had to the side of the monitor in front of it. In my opinion, desk real estate has more to deal with footprint area than length, but maybe I'm crazy. (Crazy like a fox)
    • Yeah, just get a nice big widescreen LCD (like 24"+) and you'll wonder what you were worrying about.
      • This. If you get a 17", you'll regret it. I squint at my little 20" and wonder, why oh why didn't I get a 24"?
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by fodi (452415)
          or glasses :)
          Most people work 8 hours a day on monitors <20" ...(you insensitive clod)
    • It depends on the desk. I put my 21" CRT monitor in a corner, so it really takes not a lot of space on the desk. However, since the monitor is in the corner, there is not much space to the sides of it. Someone suggested to me that I buy two LCD monitors and put them on my desk - I could do that, but only one monitor behind the other.

      In any case, I'm happy with my CRT monitor and won't change it (I'll but another CRT someday (yes, it will have to be a used one) just to have a second spare - I have one now, b

      • And that's why 4:3 is still better than widescreen, and CRT is still better than LCD. I'm getting a 22" soon that can do 2000x1500 @85hz, if the text ever gets too small I'll just override font sizes.

        • That may be difficult.

          My father bought a Fujitsu U810 laptop. It has a ~6inch screen and a resolution of 1024x600. It would be OK for me, but my dad is not nearsighted and cannot see such small letters, so I increased the DPI, increased font size everywhere I could, but it still left some parts where the text is of its original size (=barely readable).

    • by vivian (156520) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @09:17PM (#28630967)

      The other option of course is to get an LCD and a wall bracket or a desk bracket that allows you to have the monitor off the desk alltogether. You can also get brackets that allow two or three monitors to be mounted to it, but still have just the one upright pole that comes off your desk ( or bolts onto a wall.
      http://www.megamounts.com.au/shop/lcd-desk-mounts.htm?gclid=COGlvZK5x5sCFcEtpAod-U9fLg [megamounts.com.au]

      There are many many similar products out there - this is just the first I came across with a quick google search.

      I used to think I needed nothing more than a 17" LCD, but after going to 2x24" monitors @1920x1280 theres no way im ever going back. Virtual desktop space is a lot more valuable to me than real desktop space. if I ever go to 3 monitors though, Im getting myself one of these brackets.

      • by vivian (156520) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @09:21PM (#28631013)

        I forgot to mention - if you use a desk bracket, and you really value your vertical resolution, you can also mount your monitors on it sideways, so you the monitor(s) are in portrait mode. most video cards support rotating your monitors, so this gives you an excellent way for looking at single page portrait documents, or more code than you should ever have in a single function all at once.

      • Mod Parent Up! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by W. Justice Black (11445) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @11:47PM (#28632143) Homepage

        Aah, if I only had mod points.

        I set up some labs with bench space a while back and used exclusively 19" monitors with VESA arms. The space under the monitor becomes usable (since there's no stand in the way) and the adjustability (and ability to just shove the monitor to the side when not in use) is invaluable. This gets even better with 2x stands.

        Oh, and with many brackets, you can mount them from above instead of below, too.

  • check newegg (Score:4, Insightful)

    by steak (145650) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @07:59PM (#28630249) Homepage Journal

    seriuosly. that power search link on the right hand side of their site isn't there for nothing.

  • One thing I hate (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Icegryphon (715550) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @08:02PM (#28630299)
    Is most all new Monitors are Widescreen, I hate that 16:9 aspect ratio.
    My next new one will have to be normal width 4:3 aspect ratio.
    Maybe I am old school, but it just looks right,
    besides I like to have a good resolution on more then just horizontal axis
    • by zerocool^ (112121)

      For me, it's not the widescreen part of it that I hate. It's the 16x9 part.

      I want a 1920x1200 monitor. I've been in the market for one for 4 years, and they've been $600 for four years, with no or minimal drops in price.

      If you want a 1920x1080 monitor, those are way cheap! But if you want those extra 120 vertical pixels? Sorry, screw you, pay TWICE AS MUCH!!!!LOL.

      I don't get it. I really don't. I want the widescreen aspect ratio (16x10, thankyouverymuch). But I want to be able to use windowed applica

  • by Shag (3737) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @08:02PM (#28630309) Homepage

    Your 17" CRT probably had a visible area of about 16" and a case of 18-19". A nice 20" widescreen 1680x1050 LCD really won't eat up all that much space on your desk. :)

    • by mariushm (1022195)

      That's true.. I'm looking right now at a 17" Dell monitor and it says Dimensions (HxWxD) 16.4" x 15.9" x 16.5"

      You can get now a 19" Asus VW198T [asus.com] LCD running natively at 1680x1050 that has the dimensions Phys.Dimension(WxHxD): 444x368x210 which in inches means roughly 17.48" x 14.48" x 8.26". So, you get higher resolution, you don't damage your eyes so much, only for an extra inch in width, but I guarantee you when you see the space that was once lost because of the CRT's depth, you won't regret it.

      The only d

  • by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @08:07PM (#28630351) Homepage Journal

    Being thin, LCD's don't take much desk space. Go for a 20". My Dell 2007WFP has a native resolution of 1680x1050, for example. and uses a little more than 24 sq. inch of desk space. That's less desk space than the 17" Dell Trinitron it replaced. :)

  • my VS11979 is 19" and has a native resolution of 1680*1050, which exceeds your needs. It also has a very high response rate and insanely high contrast ratio. The colors are simply fantastic; I almost fainted when I first watched Big Buck Bunny on it. I also got it dirt cheep at Fry's. And everyone knows ViewSonic displays are the best. Just ignore the fact that it has built-in speakers - they're predictably terrible.
    • by dave562 (969951)
      It has been a LONG time since Viewsonic displays were the best. Back in the days of CRT tubes when they were one of the few vendors using Trinitron tubes, they were among the best. They make average LCD screens. I'm using two of their VP2030b displays right now. They aren't anything special.
    • by toddestan (632714)

      Besides the Viewsonic, there is also an Acer and and Asus 19" monitor at 1680x1050 resolution. I'm not sure, but I think they all use the same panel, which sadly is a TN panel (though fairly decent as TN's go). This is about the best you can get in terms of DPI in the desktop LCD world right now.

  • by Above (100351) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @08:25PM (#28630501)

    Apple's 17" MacBook Pro can be had with a 1920x1200 17" LED backlit panel, so clearly the technology is out there, and being mass produced.

    Still, no one has a desktop display of the same specs, at least that I can find. I suspect a large part of the reason is you're generally expected to be sitting further from the display at your desktop, and the further you are from the display likely the larger the pixels you want.

    I wold like higher DPI displays in all resolutions though. IBM used to make 200DPI displays, but I think they stopped.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tepples (727027)

      the further you are from the display likely the larger the pixels you want.

      That's true for television, where the input is assumed to be a photographic image no bigger than 1920x1080 pixels. But for text on a PC, you want a higher DPI screen, and then you can use the operating system's DPI setting to put more pixels in each point. The text doesn't get smaller; it just gets sharper, much like the text on a device with an electronic paper display.

  • I located three 17" widescreen monitors in a couple of clicks on Newegg.com.

    • by maxume (22995)

      I don't see a single 17" that does better than 1280x1024. The 19" top out at 1280x1024 or the vertically similar 1680x1050.

  • This guy is using a CRT and he is concerned about desk space??? A 26 inch LCD will use less desk space than his present screen.
    • This guy is using a CRT and he is concerned about desk space??? A 26 inch LCD will use less desk space than his present screen.

      I gather that he's concerned about sideways desk space, not front-to-back desk space. A high-DPI CRT takes less sideways desk space than a low-DPI desktop LCD of the same pixel count.

  • Maybe a Projector? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Excaliburszone (70838)

    You can forgo the monitor and set up a projector instead. Just use your wall as the monitor and mount the projector to your ceiling. Then you should be able to have all your desk space and a ginormous screen that can double as a movie projector as well.

  • by pwnies (1034518) * <j@jjcm.org> on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @08:43PM (#28630689) Homepage Journal
    The answer is no if you're looking for stock monitors with those resolutions. I've looked long and far but to no avail. However, what I was able to do was buy replacement laptop screens with those resolutions. You have to get an adapter kit as well, but it's well worth it if you're looking for density.
    • by swb (14022)

      That sounds cool. How did you get the adapter kit to make it into a desktop display?

      I've always thought it would be useful if laptops had a sort of "reverse" mode for their VGA interfaces that would allow you to use the laptop screen as a display for another device.

      It would certainly keep the price of otherwise unusable P3 laptops up as they could continue life as LCD displays.

  • some of you guys need to find a tech forum to call home. to me, these kinds of questions always seem out of place on the front page here. places like arstechnica or anandtech have good forums with tech users and sub forums for information on various technology, hardware, peripherals, networking and general OS help.

  • Aim Big (Score:2, Insightful)

    by spqr0a1 (1504087)

    I have two 2048x1536 20 inch CRTs on my desk right now. You can get them dirt cheap ($100) if you look around. Even with their age, size, and proximity to each other the only real problem I've had is a bit of a convergence issue; usually nothing you can't fix with in a weekend with a little tinkering. For quality a good CRT is still the way to go, at least until SED and FED displays hit the market.

  • Sounds like you want a monitor with a high PPI (pixels per inch).
    Your original monitor was 17" 4:3 (16" viewable), which at 1440x1050 is 109 ppi. You won't get that in an LCD monitor even if you get something large.

    Here are some common LCD monitor sizes (>= 17") that have >= 95 PPI:
    17" (5:4) 1280x1024 - 96 ppi
    17" widescreen (16:10) 1440x900 - 100 ppi
    20" (4:3) 1600x1200 - 100 ppi
    21.5" widescreen (16:9) 1920x1080 - 102 ppi
    30" widescreen (16:10) 2560x1600 - 101 ppi

    So if you want something close in size t

  • I just recently got myself a LG W2053TQ-PF monitor with 1600x900 resolution. The colors are pretty bright, and the sharpenss is quite good too. I got it for US$149 at Fry's Electronics.

    It should be noted the W2053TQ-PF has both 15-pin VGA and DVI-D inputs, and does support HDCP so you can use it with a computer that can play back [i]Blu-ray[/i] movies.

  • by itomato (91092) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @09:02PM (#28630849)

    I have been on this search for three or four years, and all I can come up with is that there's a conspiracy in effect, in order to promote this 'HD' thing the commoners are obsessed with lately.

    I'm posting this from a four year old Thinkpad T43, with 15" display, at 1400x1050. As long as I've had it, I've been searching for a complimentary display for my desk. Nothing comes close. I don't want a 19", 24", or 30" monitor to get this pixel count, and I sure don't want to dodge the reflections on one of those glossy, color pop displays. If I have to move my head, there's a serious ergonomics problem.

    I have been doing some research, and I can't find anything satisfactory. Samsung doesn't make a panel capable of what I want, nevermind a finished display.. I thought surely IBM would provide an engineering-quality display @ > 116 PPI, but if they do, I can't find it.

    What I may do, and some others may explore as well, is to follow in the tracks of the homebrew projection TV people, and rig up an old laptop display with a converter and new backlight.

    Some light reading on the subject:

    An interesting paper [veritasetvisus.com] on high pixel density LCD panels from 2005; why there likely are none, and why there likely won't be any.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density [wikipedia.org]

    Manufacturers, listen up; For every one of those business class notebooks you've been selling for 5 years, you have changed the work habits of at least one person. Sell them a capable desktop display for a third to half the cost of the notebook, and garner a tidy profit. Just don't put one of those stinking shine panels on the front. Stick it in the box with some double-sided tape, if the focus group says you have to.

    • ThinkPads have great pixel density. I upgraded from a 14" 1400x1050 screen (ThinkPad T43) to... ...a 12" 1400x1050 screen! The X61 Tablet is a fantastic little computer; I can't recommend it highly enough. When I bought mine (about nine months ago), those things could be purchased for about $1050.

      IBM/Lenovo stopped making screens that high-resolution, but I bought mine used on eBay with nearly the full three years of warranty.

      IBM/Lenovo calls this SXGA+, and you can find ThinkPad T40, T41, T42, or T43 compu

  • by Shadow of Eternity (795165) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @09:08PM (#28630905)

    Do you keep your LCD further away from you than you would a crt? Do you put things behind your LCD? If the answer to those is "no" then you could use a 100lb trinitron and you wouldn't be "killing any space" more than you would with a 5lb LCD.

    If you want a decent resolution you're not really going to find it without getting a CRT or a VERY expensive LCD. The widescreen virus has infected everyone and shutdown their brains and now people think that they're better off with lower resolutions that old giant CRTs had in 1998.

  • by Seth Kriticos (1227934) on Wednesday July 08, 2009 @09:12PM (#28630939)
    Did not consider this question before, but you really made a point: nobody gave a satisfiable answer to 'I look for a 17" LCD with resolution beyond 1280x1024, and hopefully 4:3".

    The technology is definitely out there, my handhald with 9" has 800x480 which could be easily scaled up to 1400 + in your desired form factor (4:3).

    There were even monitors with this kind of attributes a few years back. About 4 years ago I bought my which has the minimal DPI resolution you mentioned. I'm a bit astonished that time stood still in this sector for this amount of time. Not "Moor-ish" at all.

    Guess the answer is, that mainstream did not want it, and niche markets are not asked any-more. Also there is a specific OS that can't handle scaling of wigdets very well, that mostly catalysed this non-development.

    Your answer is: no, there is probably no such thing you are looking for.. Sadly.
  • I have this monitor at work and at home. It has excellent color and is comfortable on the eyes.

    Samsung 2342BWX: 23" LCD Monitor with 2048 x 1152 [displayblog.com]

  • It's silly to run at 80Hz. You will get more video bandwidth by running at 72Hz. This could be enough to improve the performance of an aged CRT. You may also be able to do 1600 x 1200 although that gets a little blurry on 17". This is why I stick with a 21"CRT for my primary display since I can get the flexibility of a wide range of resolutions and the high resolutions are better than what you can get in an affordable LCD.

  • Your old CRT was a 17 inch. Understandable... 17s/19s were affordable, 21s and larger got expensive.

    If your issue's price - volumes of sale mean you'll likely get a 20ish widescreen that they sell huge numbers of for the same price or less than a quirkly 17 inch with high res that's only for very, very niche user groups.

    If your issue's desktop width - A 20ish inch LCD with a thin bezel is likely to be smaller than a the 17 inch CRT you're replacing.

    If your issue's desktop depth - That 17 inch CRT you're rep

  • Get a larger monitor and push it further back on your desk. It's better for your eyes, because they work harder when focusing on objects that are closer. I run my 24" Apple monitor at a high resolution, (higher then 1680x1050,) and keep it at least four feet from my eyes.

    The current Apple 24" monitor can do 1920x1200: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB382LL/A?fnode=MTY1NDA5OQ&mco=NDE4NDE5Nw [apple.com] If you're at least 27 years old, it's really worth going to a larger monitor and pushing it as far away as p

  • Stick the desk in a corner, diagonally.
    Put an old stool in the corner behind it. Adjust height A/R with a saw, a 2x4, & some nails.
    Put tube monitor on the stool.
    Free desk space.

    Look, if you're jonesin' for a shiny new monitor, just buy the damned thing and enjoy it.

Science is to computer science as hydrodynamics is to plumbing.

Working...