|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Exactly! A 17" monitor has roughly 140 square inches of viewing area and a
21" has roughly 220, meaning a 21" monitor has roughly 60% more viewing
area. For that 60% to be truly efficient, it should buy 60% more pixels. Put
simply if a 17" monitor provides sharp viewing at 1024x768 then a 21"
monitor should provide similar sharp viewing at 1600x1200. Anything less and
the manufacturer is simply spreading the pixels over a larger area thereby
making the picture more coarse.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Phair <ericrogers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, March 08, 1999 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: 21 inch monitors
>I remember when 21" tv's came out and they were a big improvement from the
>smaller sets. A 21" monitor will be great for watching a good tv movie.
>Big is not necessarily better. If you get over 35 inches on a tv quality
>suffers. Same may be true with a monitor. Wait for them to improve
>before you jump in.
>
>Norman
>
>"Richard C. Fredette" wrote:
>
>> I'm in the process of buying a new Dell computer and am interested to
>> know whether the 21" monitor is superior to the 19". I've heard it is
>> not as clear as the 19". And then there is the choice of the Trinitron
>> over the standard Dell model. Also, it was indicated that the 8 megs on
>> the standard video board is not good enough for the 21" monitor and that
>> if you upgrade to 16 megs, resolution may be better.
>>
>> Anyone out there with a 21" monitor that can give some advice based on
>> your experience, rather than the hearsay I've been getting? Am I better
>> off with the tried and true 19" or is it worth it to go with a 21''.
>> What I intend to use it for primarily is to keep several realtime charts
>> up and plotting simultaneously using Metastock Pro. Many thanks.
>>
>> Dick
>
|