Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

This has always puzzled me.
I have a T23 (14.1-inch screen) and an X31 (12-inch), both at
1024x768.
I find the 14.1-inch quite comfortable for text reading while images
are OK.
Images look better on the 12-inch, but text gets kind of smallish,
harder to read.
I remember reading once about the 600 IBMs and how "perfect" its
13.3-inch screen was claimed to be.

So now I'm considering getting an external LCD monitor for a more
comfortable viewing. Again, there are different size choices, and it 's
a difficult decision for me: going to a store and see them is not a
choice, and I'm afraid of making a mistake since LCDs must use their
native resolution.

Since I'm going for something bigger than the 14.1-inch display, I've
made my mind to start using sXGA (1280x) and I would like to get one
sized to best match that resolution, ie, both acceptably readable and
still good looking with images.
So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:

> So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
> some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.

IMHO, for desktop LCD displays 15" = XGA, 17" = SXGA, 19" = SXGA+, 20" and
larger = UXGA.

For laptops, the resolutions are completely different as we sit so much
closer to the displays, to wit;

XGA is best on a 13.3", SXGA+ is best on a 14.1" (looks good on a 15" as
well), UXGA is absolutely stunning on a 15" laptop, especially if you have
an IPS display like on some Thinkpads or an Xbrite display like on some
Sonys.

Regards,

James

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

There's no "best" or quality issue that directly relates resolution to
screen size, but basically, in terms of commonly available stuff, you
have a choice of 17" or 19" screens. Prices are WAY down, I see lots of
17" LCD monitors at under $200 (down to $159), and quite a few 19"
monitors under $300 (down to about $269). Look for:

-Brighntness ideally somewhat over 250 nits
-Response time ideally under 25 msec
-DVI input
-Contrast ratio of 400:1 or more
-Warranty

Other things being equal, larger is usually better unless you are space
constrained, but smaller displays are, other things being equal, a bit
brighter and faster.


visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:
> This has always puzzled me.
> I have a T23 (14.1-inch screen) and an X31 (12-inch), both at
> 1024x768.
> I find the 14.1-inch quite comfortable for text reading while images
> are OK.
> Images look better on the 12-inch, but text gets kind of smallish,
> harder to read.
> I remember reading once about the 600 IBMs and how "perfect" its
> 13.3-inch screen was claimed to be.
>
> So now I'm considering getting an external LCD monitor for a more
> comfortable viewing. Again, there are different size choices, and it 's
> a difficult decision for me: going to a store and see them is not a
> choice, and I'm afraid of making a mistake since LCDs must use their
> native resolution.
>
> Since I'm going for something bigger than the 14.1-inch display, I've
> made my mind to start using sXGA (1280x) and I would like to get one
> sized to best match that resolution, ie, both acceptably readable and
> still good looking with images.
> So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
> some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> made my mind to start using sXGA (1280x) and I would like to get one
> sized to best match that resolution, ie, both acceptably readable and
> still good looking with images.
> So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
> some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.
>

At minimum, at 17" if not larger LCD panel. At 1280x... you're
really talking about small if you go any lower than 17" panels. 19"
prefered. That Microcenter.com $999 30" LCD panel would be very nice!

---

But gosh, no 9MP 3840x2400 22.2" Viewsonic? <grin>

http://www.viewsonic.com/support/d [...] s/vp2290b/

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

le 15/03/2005 01:49:
>> made my mind to start using sXGA (1280x) and I would like to get one
>> sized to best match that resolution, ie, both acceptably readable and
>> still good looking with images.
>> So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
>> some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.
>>
>
> At minimum, at 17" if not larger LCD panel. At 1280x... you're really
> talking about small if you go any lower than 17" panels. 19" prefered.
> That Microcenter.com $999 30" LCD panel would be very nice!
>
> ---
>
> But gosh, no 9MP 3840x2400 22.2" Viewsonic? <grin>
>
> http://www.viewsonic.com/support/d [...] s/vp2290b/
>
I'm working at this resolution on a 18" display (Nokia).
Very comfortable !
I also have a laptop (for my business) with a 15" display and a
resolution of 1400x1050. It's a too high resolution, very hard to use
even if, with a laptop, you sit nearer from your display than with a
desktop.

I agree that 17" is a minimum size to not kill eyes.
Patrice

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> What is the best LCD size for 1280 resolution ?

IMHO anything your eyes can bear.

There's not only the resolution and screen size but also most OSes can tune
font size and/or magnification. If you've got a screen and you cannot read
anything whatever resolution and font size you select then you're in
trouble. Otherwise...

Vince C.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

>17" = SXGA, 19" = SXGA+, 20" and larger = UXGA.

Let's see two Samsung models of a recent line:
173p : 17-inch 1280 x 1024 Dot Pitch .264 Mm
193p: 19-inch 1280 x 1024 Dot Pitch .294 Mm

> For laptops, the resolutions are completely different as we sit so
much
> closer to the displays, to wit;

Good point. An external monitor would be at least twice as far as a
laptop screen, which I guess would make small icons and characters even
smaller ...

There are very few wide-aspect (16:9) LCD monitors. In fact, I haven't
found any such thing smaller than 20-inch that isn't either a TV or has
built-in speakers.

Anyway, what happens if a X31 is plugged to a 16:9 panel (if one can
be found), does the image gets stretched sideways ?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

David Chien wrote:

> At minimum, at 17" if not larger LCD panel. At 1280x... you're
> really talking about small if you go any lower than 17" panels. 19"
> prefered.

In 1280x1024, between a 17-inch and a 19-inch of the same brand, what
to you gain or lose with either ? Do images get any blurry in the
bigger ? And should I have a hard time with text in the 17-inch if I'm
used to 14/1 XGA in my laptop ?

I guess no widescreen 17s or 19s around ...

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

There's nothing wrong with 18", but it's not a widely available common
size. 17" and 19" are much more common.


sifot wrote:

> le 15/03/2005 01:49:
>
>>> made my mind to start using sXGA (1280x) and I would like to get one
>>> sized to best match that resolution, ie, both acceptably readable and
>>> still good looking with images.
>>> So, has any one compared the 16, 17, 18, 19 LCD flat panels to share
>>> some opinion about this? Greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>
>> At minimum, at 17" if not larger LCD panel. At 1280x... you're
>> really talking about small if you go any lower than 17" panels. 19"
>> prefered. That Microcenter.com $999 30" LCD panel would be very nice!
>>
>> ---
>>
>> But gosh, no 9MP 3840x2400 22.2" Viewsonic? <grin>
>>
>> http://www.viewsonic.com/support/d [...] s/vp2290b/
>>
>
> I'm working at this resolution on a 18" display (Nokia).
> Very comfortable !
> I also have a laptop (for my business) with a 15" display and a
> resolution of 1400x1050. It's a too high resolution, very hard to use
> even if, with a laptop, you sit nearer from your display than with a
> desktop.
>
> I agree that 17" is a minimum size to not kill eyes.
> Patrice

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

There isn't any inherint difference in sharpness. However, other things
being equal, 17" monitors tend to be a bit brighter and have slightly
faster response time than correspondingly priced 19" monitors.


visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:

> David Chien wrote:
>
>
>> At minimum, at 17" if not larger LCD panel. At 1280x... you're
>>really talking about small if you go any lower than 17" panels. 19"
>>prefered.
>
>
> In 1280x1024, between a 17-inch and a 19-inch of the same brand, what
> to you gain or lose with either ? Do images get any blurry in the
> bigger ? And should I have a hard time with text in the 17-inch if I'm
> used to 14/1 XGA in my laptop ?
>
> I guess no widescreen 17s or 19s around ...
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Barry Watzman wrote:
> There isn't any inherint difference in sharpness. However, other
things
> being equal, 17" monitors tend to be a bit brighter and have slightly

> faster response time than correspondingly priced 19" monitors.

What about text reading ? For one like me who finds it hard with text
in a 12-inch laptop, will the farther-than-laptop-distance 17-inch be
bearable ? Would it compare to reading my 14.1 laptop's XGA ?
Thanks for helping, and BTW do you know any 16:9 flat panel in the
17-inch/19-inch range ?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Would my X31 support this one ?

http://tinyurl.com/6999d

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:
> Would my X31 support this one ?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6999d

WSXGA+? Not a chance!

Regards,

James

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

JHEM wrote:

> visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:
>> Would my X31 support this one ?
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/6999d
>
> WSXGA+? Not a chance!

Why not? It's got a Radeon Mobility with enough RAM to buffer the whole
screen at 32 bit, and the Mobility should have enough bandwidth to handle
full res at 60 Hz or more. Might have to take Powerstrip to it to get the
res, but there's no reason why an X31 shouldn't be able to display on it at
its native res.

> Regards,
>
> James

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Hi John,

J. Clarke wrote:
> JHEM wrote:
>> visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:
>>> Would my X31 support this one ?
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/6999d
>>
>> WSXGA+? Not a chance!
>
> Why not? It's got a Radeon Mobility with enough RAM to buffer the
> whole screen at 32 bit, and the Mobility should have enough bandwidth
> to handle full res at 60 Hz or more. Might have to take Powerstrip
> to it to get the res, but there's no reason why an X31 shouldn't be
> able to display on it at its native res.

From the X31 specs: "External monitor support via analog DB-15 connector /
up to 1280x1024x16.7M at 85Hz".

From the specs for the subject monitor: "To optimize this monitor's
performance, your system must be able to support WSXGA+ resolution (1680 x
1050)".

Regards,

James

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

The link below shows specifications for the X31 and mentions several
resolution modes which I don't know how to interpret.:

http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/ [...] MIGR-58212

If indeed it's a no-go with the widescreen Dell, could I possibly add a
second video card to the X31 so to be able to drive that monitor ? The
X31's Dock has additional USB 2.0 slots, as well as two extra PC card
slots and a "mini-PCI" slot. Wonder if there is a better graphics card
that would fit any of those.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

The only issue there is size, and you can change size independently of
resolution, although most people don't know the right way to do it.


visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:

> Barry Watzman wrote:
>
>>There isn't any inherint difference in sharpness. However, other
>
> things
>
>>being equal, 17" monitors tend to be a bit brighter and have slightly
>
>
>>faster response time than correspondingly priced 19" monitors.
>
>
> What about text reading ? For one like me who finds it hard with text
> in a 12-inch laptop, will the farther-than-laptop-distance 17-inch be
> bearable ? Would it compare to reading my 14.1 laptop's XGA ?
> Thanks for helping, and BTW do you know any 16:9 flat panel in the
> 17-inch/19-inch range ?
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

JHEM wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> JHEM wrote:
>>> visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:
>>>> Would my X31 support this one ?
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/6999d
>>>
>>> WSXGA+? Not a chance!
>>
>> Why not? It's got a Radeon Mobility with enough RAM to buffer the
>> whole screen at 32 bit, and the Mobility should have enough bandwidth
>> to handle full res at 60 Hz or more. Might have to take Powerstrip
>> to it to get the res, but there's no reason why an X31 shouldn't be
>> able to display on it at its native res.
>
> From the X31 specs: "External monitor support via analog DB-15 connector /
> up to 1280x1024x16.7M at 85Hz".
>
> From the specs for the subject monitor: "To optimize this monitor's
> performance, your system must be able to support WSXGA+ resolution (1680 x
> 1050)".

Try again. It goes up to 2048x1536.


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:

> The link below shows specifications for the X31 and mentions several
> resolution modes which I don't know how to interpret.:
>
> http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/ [...] MIGR-58212

According to that link the machine can go as high as 2048x1536, but at any
resolution above 1280x1024 it has to run at reduced color depth (64K or
256).

The resolution of the Dell is clearly within the capabilities of the video
processor, so that by itself should not be an issue. The correct
resolution will probably not show up on the menu without tweaking, so you
may have to use Powerstrip <http://www.entechtaiwan.com/util/ps.shtm> to
set the display resolution. Whether you can get it going at 16 million
colors is another story--I wouldn't bet on it.

> If indeed it's a no-go with the widescreen Dell, could I possibly add a
> second video card to the X31 so to be able to drive that monitor ? The
> X31's Dock has additional USB 2.0 slots, as well as two extra PC card
> slots and a "mini-PCI" slot. Wonder if there is a better graphics card
> that would fit any of those.

No. If you had a full PCI slot you might be able to but the video
processors that are available for PCCard or mini-PCI slots are less capable
than what you have.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)