Widescreen or Regular LCD?

I just bought a new 19" LCD last night and therefore had to also
scratch my head about widescreen versus regular.

Although my TV is a widescreen TV, I chose a regular LCD screen for my
computer. There is very little computer content (WEB pages, games,
etc.) designed to be seen on widescreen at this point in time. My
guess is that my next LCD (in 5 to 7 tears if they last that long) will
probably be a widescreen because, by then, widescreen will be
mainstream and therefore content will be optimized to take advantage of
it. But not not and not for the next couple of years, IMHO...

Andre
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

>From what I saw in the store last night, it depends if your video card
supports widescreen (16:9 or 16:10) resolutions. At the store, they
had the LCD hooked up to a cheap computer and we couldn't find a
resolution supporting the widescreen (like 1440 X 900). Therefore,
things looked all stretched out including the icons on the desktop.

Needless to say I wasn't impressed with the poor setup in the store ans
walked out pretty quickly. This was also one more reason why I chose
to go with the regular size (at a differnet store). Andre
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

"chrisv" <chrisv.TakeThisOut@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:0u9cv1dt0r7868ambllbhd81diak0cigef@4ax.com...
> QZ wrote:
>
> >I am trying to determine what shape LCD to get.
> >
> >We don't watch movies, play games, or photo edit, just web browsing. I
did
> >some reading, and I agree with one person's assessment, that it is easier
to
> >read text close to the center of the screen. So, I am thinking a
'regular'
> >5:4(?) LCD is the way to go.
> >
> >Is there any reason why I would want a 16:9 LCD? Even if not now, but
> >consider that we keep our monitors for 5-6 yrs.
>
> Well, the obvious answer is that a widescreen may allow you to
> "multitask" better, allowing two applications to each have half of the
> screen.

Well, I am usually fine switching between windows, but I will have to think,
if I had more real estate, would I want to multitask on one screen. The only
trouble with that is, I would still have to position the windows side by
side.

Another Q, is it true that on widescreen monitors the desktop uses the
entire screen without stretching?
Same thing if I choose to open a window at full screen?
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

"Melandre" <melandre.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140213746.688012.203530@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I just bought a new 19" LCD last night and therefore had to also
> scratch my head about widescreen versus regular.
>
> Although my TV is a widescreen TV, I chose a regular LCD screen for my
> computer. There is very little computer content (WEB pages, games,
> etc.) designed to be seen on widescreen at this point in time. My
> guess is that my next LCD (in 5 to 7 tears if they last that long) will
> probably be a widescreen because, by then, widescreen will be
> mainstream and therefore content will be optimized to take advantage of
> it. But not not and not for the next couple of years, IMHO...

Since the content of an Internet windows adjusts when the window is
re-sized, I wonder if a 16:9 or 16:10 monitor will ever be needed,
regardless if it is preferred.
How exactly could a window's content be optimized for widescreen?
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

QZ wrote:
> Another Q, is it true that on widescreen monitors the desktop uses the
> entire screen without stretching?

yes, nothing is stretched on a widescreen as long as you've set the
resolution to widescreen, which all modern and even most older graphics
cards support. whether games run stretched depends on if they support
widescreen resolutions.

if all you do is browse the web then maybe a 4:3/5:4 monitor with
firefox browser would be ok, you get multiple tabs which makes life
easy, but still i would never give up my widescreen for gaming and DVDs.
even if you don't use full screen mode its cool to be able to write a
doc or browse the web and have a lil' TV window in the corner with no
overlap
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

"gimp" <anonymous.DeleteThis@smeg.com> wrote in message
news:dt5tf2$inu$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> QZ wrote:
> > Another Q, is it true that on widescreen monitors the desktop uses the
> > entire screen without stretching?
>
> yes, nothing is stretched on a widescreen as long as you've set the
> resolution to widescreen, which all modern and even most older graphics
> cards support. whether games run stretched depends on if they support
> widescreen resolutions.
>
> if all you do is browse the web then maybe a 4:3/5:4 monitor with
> firefox browser would be ok, you get multiple tabs which makes life
> easy, but still i would never give up my widescreen for gaming and DVDs.
> even if you don't use full screen mode its cool to be able to write a
> doc or browse the web and have a lil' TV window in the corner with no
> overlap

Thanks for the info. One thing I particularly like about widescreen monitors
or TVs is that they more closely resemble our natural field of vision. The
more I think about it, I do like the added space of a widescreen LCD.
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

> QZwrote:
I am trying to determine what shape LCD to get.
>
> We don't watch movies, play games, or photo edit, just web browsing.
I did
> some reading, and I agree with one person's assessment, that it is
easier to
> read text close to the center of the screen. So, I am thinking a
'regular'
> 5:4(?) LCD is the way to go.
>
> Is there any reason why I would want a 16:9 LCD? Even if not now,
but
> consider that we keep our monitors for 5-6 yrs.
>
> Thanks,
> QZ

I don't know, like you, I like the idea of having multiple apps
running in different windows. And, like you, I like to look to the
center of the screen.

I run a 19 on the bottom, and a 17 right above it. Works for me.
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD? 

"chrisv" <chrisv.TakeThisOut@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:ogqt029smt7qb9h0i76mcc9cp450l6sq3u@4ax.com...

> Of course you know that a 19" widescreen is significantly smaller than
> a 19" 4:3 monitor...

Shorter, but not a whole lot smaller in area.

A 19" 4:3 screen would have H x V dimensions of
roughly 15.2" x 11.4" (about 383x 290 mm), or 173.3
sq. inches (1110 sq. cm). A 19" 16:10 would be about
16.1" x 10.1", or 162.6 sq. in (409 x 256 mm, or 1047
sq. cm). 10% shorter (which some people like as it may
fit better under a bookshelf or some such), but with almost
95% of the screen area.

Except...19" "standard" LCD monitors generally aren't
4:3; they're 5:4 (SXGA format, or 1280 x 1024 pixels),
with an active screen of about 376 x 301 mm, or
1131 sq. cm and 1.31 Mpixels. The 16:10 version
gives you 1440 x 900 pixels, or just under 1.30 Mpixels,
in 93% of the active area - and about 2" shorter in
overall height.


Bob M.
 >> Stay informed about: Widescreen or Regular LCD?