Are you using CRT or LCD flatscreens?

[ricercar]

Originally Posted by joffe

So that's (18-3)x2 LCDs at home... thirty screens in total

Actually I own 8 LCD displays and some KVMs. The household has 11 displays including laptops and broadcast TV/DVD machines.

Why?

Because I can.

We have two primary users of dual-display machines, I have two primary LCDs at my desk, ditto for my spouse. Additionally I built numerous dedicated machines located throughout the house, for which remote displays are required. For example, a music server, kid's machine, file server, guest room TV/DVD/PVR, bedroom TV/DVD/PVR, and the recipe server are not near the home office, and each needs its own display.

[LubosD]

Well, now I have an LCD and subpixel hinted antialiased text rendering is really slow.

[gnutux]

i got a LCD screen because it's better for my eyes, and pictures looks clearer and sharper. I don't see those flickers that other gamers tell me. Games runs fine on my monitor.

gnutux

[Xevious]

I am running off a 22 inch CRT 95% of the time from my laptop at home, when I am out-and-about then I am using the 17" LCD that the laptop has.

My only beef with LCD's is because they have a set resolution pretty much no LCD makers make LCD's at decent resolution.

I am thinking about getting one of the new Dell 30 inch LCD's when they are avaliable on january 5th if they are affordable.

But even then it is a downgrade in resolution.

My other problem is LCD's are much more expensive than CRT's if you are looking for something that actually runs at decent resolution.

[fhj52]

I have a 19" SuperScan and a 17" SENergy.
I use both.
The LCD was off during the last ~ 6 months which is a good indication of which I prefer.
In addition to the difficulties in cleaning the LCD screen(a major PITA), it just is not large enough. People who have stated that 17" LCDs are about equal to 19" CRTs are full of it. (I fell for it...)
As you pointed out, one of the best parts about the LCD is the desktop space it does NOT consume and the corresponding decrease in weight is pretty nice too.
The colors look really good too but I don't find it to be responsive enough and the fonts are too hard to read. They look like they are made of dots that are not connected. The anti-aliasing is terrible, especially in Linux.
I read a LOT so the quality of the font display is of utmost importance, far exceeding ghosting issues in fast graphical displays.

Don't get me wrong - I want LCD to surpass CRT's with their(LCD) lower power and less space requirements . Both are good things.

So please, if nVidia can fix it, DO!

Thanks for the poll.

[fhj52]

Originally Posted by Xevious

I am running off a 22 inch CRT 95% of the time from my laptop at home, when I am out-and-about then I am using the 17" LCD that the laptop has.

My only beef with LCD's is because they have a set resolution pretty much no LCD makers make LCD's at decent resolution. [...snip...]

NEC Display Solutions LCD2170NX-BK Black 21.3" 8ms G-to-G LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 1000:1 0.27mm Pixel Pitch
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824002118
Native/recommended resolution is 1600x1200.
It ain't cheap but high quality 22" CRTs cost a lot too initially and even more to run. Its real estate should be equal to a 22" flat screen CRT's viewable area.
It needs to drop >200USD for me to buy it(but I'm cheap..., )

[Xevious]

Originally Posted by fhj52

NEC Display Solutions LCD2170NX-BK Black 21.3" 8ms G-to-G LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 1000:1 0.27mm Pixel Pitch
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824002118
Native/recommended resolution is 1600x1200.
It ain't cheap but high quality 22" CRTs cost a lot too initially and even more to run. Its real estate should be equal to a 22" flat screen CRT's viewable area.
It needs to drop >200USD for me to buy it(but I'm cheap..., )

most of the specs on it are nice except the resolution is crap, my 17" laptop does higher than that, and so does my dad's 15.4 inch. obviously the technology is there but nobody wants to make high resolution displays. I can barley stand doing a downgrade to 2560x1600 on that dell 30 inch LCD if I get that. I would only do it because the advantages of it being an LCD.

[JanR]

Hi,

I'm using both and my observation is that most good LCDs are better than most "normal" CRTs and that even very good LCDs are worse than a highend CRT. At home I use a Iiyama VM Pro 510 (A201HT) which is among the best CRTs ever made. Flickering etc. is no problem at all.

But... in many cases of "bad" CRT images the problem is the graphic board, not the CRT. If I drive that Iiyama with a bad video source I will get a bad image due to very high frequencies that are only delivered with lowered quality. For an LCD, even driven analog, this is not a big problem due to much lower frequencies.

That's why I used this as main decision point for the graphic board and followed the tests of analog signal quality at displaymate.com and bough a Quadro NVS 280 which is among the best cards in this category.

The difference to the previously used Matrox G450 (which has also a very good signal quality) can be seen at ths Iiyama-screen...

Greetings,

Jan

[wnd]

Nokia 445Xpro (21" CRT) until I can find reasonably-priced LCD suitable for gaming, capable to 1600*1200 resolution. Either they're way too expensive (over 1000 €), or the pixel response time is somewhere around 16 ms.

[Dr Hotdog]

Hmmmmmm... I notice here people preferring CRT's because LCD's are low resolution and the fonts are hard to read.

I've got a Dell 2405FPW 24" widescreen LCD. The 1920x1200 native resolution gives plenty of desktop space, at least for the sort of work I do on it. When driven over DVI the fonts are beautifully sharp and readable, however you really need to select sub-pixel smoothing (in Gnome it's under the Preferences->Font menu) to get the best of them (particularly with DVI, less so with VGA which is less sharp anyway).

I appreciate some may need even higher resolution, but I reckon 1920x1200 is plenty for most users, and if you look out for the special offers you can pick one up for less than 1500 Australian.