S
Shiranui Gen-An
Tim said:
In the US they still sell one model, but it's a professional graphics
monitor and is priced out of the range of most consumers:
http://tinyurl.com/4udrm
In the US they still sell one model, but it's a professional graphics
monitor and is priced out of the range of most consumers:
http://tinyurl.com/4udrm
M
McGrandpa
johns said:
I have an Envision 19" with VGA and DVI inputs. It's response time is
24ms. That doesn't seem to matter much when using it with DVI. Its
native res is 1280x1024 and that is razor sharp. I use it in 1024x768
for the desktop, and that is also very sharp. Using DVI, it has about
as much 'ghosting' as my NEC Multisync 70.
I play Far Cry in 1280x1024-32 bit with everything on VeryHigh, Machine
spec set to Very High and it's beautiful. I was stunned with the
clarity and realism. I get the same kind of results with my NEC 17"
TFT. It's response time is 16ms, but it has only VGA input. No
ghosting at all with it. I play Halo in 1280x1024-32 bit and it's
great. I'd buy another Envision monitor based on how well this one
performs.
MCG.
M
McGrandpa
Paul said:
No they're not, but some of them do it very well.
McG.
R
Rob G
I have this exact monitor and I'm on the second replacement in 5 months.
However NEC customer
service has been excellent and they have paid the shipping both ways every
time. I don't think
they normally do that, but my case was special I guess. The original
monitor had faded colour
on the left side of the screen that I could not eliminate through
adjustments or demagnetizing. I
didn't notice the problem until just after 30 days of ownership so I
received a refurbished monitor
as a replacement. I wasn't happy about that, but they promised me if there
was a problem with the
replacement then they would replace it again with a brand new one. After 5
months the replacement
started making internal popping noises and the screen would jump. They kept
their word and sent
me a brand new replacement last week. This one again had a noticeable
colour deficiency in the top left
corner, but I was able to correct it with the screen purity controls. The
naviset software makes setting
up the monitor very easy. Even though I have had some problems with the NEC
monitors, I'd still buy
and reccomend them.
It weighs 77lbs
However NEC customer
service has been excellent and they have paid the shipping both ways every
time. I don't think
they normally do that, but my case was special I guess. The original
monitor had faded colour
on the left side of the screen that I could not eliminate through
adjustments or demagnetizing. I
didn't notice the problem until just after 30 days of ownership so I
received a refurbished monitor
as a replacement. I wasn't happy about that, but they promised me if there
was a problem with the
replacement then they would replace it again with a brand new one. After 5
months the replacement
started making internal popping noises and the screen would jump. They kept
their word and sent
me a brand new replacement last week. This one again had a noticeable
colour deficiency in the top left
corner, but I was able to correct it with the screen purity controls. The
naviset software makes setting
up the monitor very easy. Even though I have had some problems with the NEC
monitors, I'd still buy
and reccomend them.
It weighs 77lbs
J
juha
I'd be surprised to find such (new) LCD monitors to this day and age,
as my cheap & old does very good job in scaling too. I guess they
still exist then?
J
J. Clarke
Historical reasons. 1280x1024 was common on engineering workstations prior
to the existence of the IBM VGA standard. IBM went with 640x480 in order
to have square pixels on the monitors they were selling at the time, then
800x600 and 1024x768 grew out of that standard. Instead of taking the next
step to 1280x960 and having two different "standard" resolutions in that
range, the display vendors apparently decided to stay with the old
standard.
N
nice
Recommend a crt, specifically the Nec/Mitsubishi diamond pro 930sb 19"
N
Nick Vargish
If you get a DVI, you can tell the driver that you have a flat
Does anyone have instructions on how to do this? I'm guessing there's
more to it than whether or not your card and display use DVI. For
example, I have an ATI 9800 Pro and an NEC 17" flatpanel. I can't find
anything in the ATI drivers settings that would let me crop non-native
aspect ratios. (Admittedly, my ATI drivers are from way back in
March...)
I'm back on a Diablo2 kick (after having put down the pipe for two
years) and it would be nice to scale and crop the display. The 3D
games I play all have native 1280x1024 modes, so it's not a big deal
for them.
Nick
Does anyone have instructions on how to do this? I'm guessing there's
more to it than whether or not your card and display use DVI. For
example, I have an ATI 9800 Pro and an NEC 17" flatpanel. I can't find
anything in the ATI drivers settings that would let me crop non-native
aspect ratios. (Admittedly, my ATI drivers are from way back in
March...)
I'm back on a Diablo2 kick (after having put down the pipe for two
years) and it would be nice to scale and crop the display. The 3D
games I play all have native 1280x1024 modes, so it's not a big deal
for them.
Nick
S
Stoneskin
nice left a note on my windscreen which said:
My last two monitors came from eBay. Around £100 for an Ilyama 21" and
the same for one I bought more recently - HP1100 22".
My last two monitors came from eBay. Around £100 for an Ilyama 21" and
the same for one I bought more recently - HP1100 22".
C
chrisv
Just get a 19" CRT. They cost less and work better, for games, for
the above reasons.
B
Bob Myers
johns said:
I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying here -
an LCD monitor gives you precisely the "resolution"
advertised. It is a fixed-format display, and each
pixel on the screen is clearly resolved - there are no
issues of spot size, etc., to confuse that issue. So if
you buy an LCD that claims to give you, say, 110 ppi
and a 1280 x 1024 image, in what way is the "resolution"
to be considered "crappy"?
Bob M.
B
Bob Myers
juha said:
For gaming, perhaps not. But since the question was
"for any purpose," please refer to my earlier, lengthier post
in another thread. The LCD current has advantages over
the CRT in size (depth), weight, brightness, contrast,
linearity, geometry, clarity, flicker, susceptibility to ext. fields
(and emissions from the product), and recently in color
and luminance unformity in the higher-end products. This
year, they will also achieve an advantage in color gamut.
The CRTs primary advantages at this time are in cost, and
for a few very high end applications, resolution capability.
Specifically for the gaming market, it has an advantage in
flexibility, being able to accomodate and easily switch between
multiple input formats/timings.
Bob M.
B
Buffalo
Perhaps you have a speaker or something with a magnet in it too close
to the monitor.
That can cause the problem you speak of.
to the monitor.
That can cause the problem you speak of.
R
Ryan E.
Good riddance. My 21" Sony CRT only lasted about six years.
M
magnulus
Nick Vargish said:
If you have a DVI monitor, there should be an option in the driver for it.
"Let monitor scale image" or somesuch. You should choose to let the card
scale the image.
I don't have DVI, so I can't do this, but its my understand it works (I
use alot of registry hacks for most games to get 1280x1024, for other games
I just live with it).
"Crop" isn't the correct term. "Maintain aspect ratio" would be a better
description.
M
magnulus
juha said:
Most LCD's don't have alot of problems with scaling. They use some kind
of bilinear filtering, which is basicly they will blur the image slightly.
This is better than the alternative, though.
The blurred image looks very "CRT like", certainly nothing to get worked
up about.
The number of games a person would need to scale is getting smaller and
smaller. The only games that might be affected are strategy games, as the
overwhelming majority of shooters support 1280x1024.
M
magnulus
David Segall said:
They are cooler. If you live in a hot climate, they will help save money
on cooling costs.
Also, when you go to dispose of the monitor, there are far fewer nasty
environmental pollutants in an LCD compared to a CRT.
They produce less eyestrain for most people than a CRT.
The geometry on an LCD is perfect. You don't ever have to calibrate the
geometry. Most CRT's, on the other hand, have trouble with the geometry,
especially the short neck designs where it can be impossible to get perfect
geometry. The screen on an LCD is also totally flat.
Their resolution is pure. Too often a CRT will not be delivering the high
resolutions gamers are thinknig they are getting, because of the shadow mask
on most CRT's. The number of scanlines isn't really the same as the
resolution (dot pitch).
The only real weaknesses for LCD's are that they sometimes are too slow to
show fast motion well, and their color and contrast are still not quite as
good as a CRT. LCD's also cost more than a comparable CRT. But in every
other way, the LCD is a better display.
T
tholen
Their resolution is pure. Too often a CRT will not be delivering the high
Indeed, I've seen many a CRT advertised as supporting 1600x1200 resolution,
and indeed it will take such a signal from a video card and display the
image, but when you take the physical size of the CRT, the dot or stripe
pitch, and work out the number of physical light elements available to
display the image, you'll discover that you don't really have 1600 sets of
color stripes or dot triples horizontally across the tube, until you get
up to about the 21-inch size range.
LCDs do not suffer from pincushion, barrel, or trapezoid distortion.
They do not suffer from image size pumping as some cheap CRTs with
not-very-stiff high voltage power supplies can as the amount of white
in the image changes significantly.
I have an older CRT monitor whose image would start to oscillate slightly
every time the outdoor security lights came on around sunset. I actually
had someone from Facilities come to measure the magnetic field being put
out by the security light outside my office window, and he claimed it was
less than that put out by a pencil sharpener. And that was a fairly high
end Mitsubishi monitor that was so sensitive to magnetic fields.
LCDs do have their drawbacks, but they have a lot going for them.
Indeed, I've seen many a CRT advertised as supporting 1600x1200 resolution,
and indeed it will take such a signal from a video card and display the
image, but when you take the physical size of the CRT, the dot or stripe
pitch, and work out the number of physical light elements available to
display the image, you'll discover that you don't really have 1600 sets of
color stripes or dot triples horizontally across the tube, until you get
up to about the 21-inch size range.
LCDs do not suffer from pincushion, barrel, or trapezoid distortion.
They do not suffer from image size pumping as some cheap CRTs with
not-very-stiff high voltage power supplies can as the amount of white
in the image changes significantly.
I have an older CRT monitor whose image would start to oscillate slightly
every time the outdoor security lights came on around sunset. I actually
had someone from Facilities come to measure the magnetic field being put
out by the security light outside my office window, and he claimed it was
less than that put out by a pencil sharpener. And that was a fairly high
end Mitsubishi monitor that was so sensitive to magnetic fields.
LCDs do have their drawbacks, but they have a lot going for them.
K
Kevin Miller
Speaking of 1600x1200, I just got a Viewsonic VP201B LCD monitor
yesterday. Compared with my Viewsonic A90F+ CRT, 1600x1200 on the LCD
monitor is *so* much easier to read. It seems to scale pretty well,
too. The screen has one dead subpixel (I think I have the right term
here), but I never really notice it except on a completely black
background. I'm really happy with it so far.
Kevin Miller
"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
N
Nick Vargish
magnulus said:
Yah, you right. I still don't see the option, but I'll keep looking and
report if I find it.
Nick