lcd monitor manufacturer recommendation request

[spellberg_robert]

i thank you, sir, for your thoughts.



Oliver Fromme wrote:
> spellberg_robert wrote:
>  > i need to get some new monitors, but, it has been a_while.
>  > 
>  > when i was buying "crt" monitors i would get sony [ love that "trinitron" tube !!! ].
>  > nec was frequently recommended, although i never got around to trying any.
>  > however, time marches on.
>  > the "lcd" technology seems to be the current rage.
>  > 
>  > q:  if reliability was your only concern, which manufacturers [ 1, 2, 3 maybe ] would you recommend ?
>  > 
>  > i like to tweak.
>  > the kind of manufacturer i want is one whose manual gives h & v frequencies and sync timings
>  >    [ thank you, mr. lehey, for your excellent explanation of "mode_lines";
>  >        my first attempt, so many years ago, worked on the first try
>  >    ].
> 
> When I used CRT monitors I also used to tweak mode lines,
> but I haven't done that in ages.  It's best to forget about
> them alltogether.  In today's world of digital monitor
> signals (DDC, DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, whatever), the
> graphics card and the monitor will negotiate the values
> themselves.

hmmm, some of the moboes that i recently purchased have something called "dvi-d" on them,
   right next to the 15_pin d_sub "vga" port [ all have vga ].
i guess i've got a new play_toy.
i'll have to look into this.



 > You don't have to do anything.

[ slow burn, then, sigh ] that's the problem with the world, today.
when people don't --have-- to do anything, people don't --learn_how-- to do anything.
oops, i digress.



> You should also note that the refresh rate is pretty much
> irrelevant for LCD displays.  While 85 Hz did make sense
> for CRT monitors in order to avoid flickering, that's not
> necessary with LCD monitors.  They won't flicker with
> 60 Hz which is a very common refresh rate for LCD.

this is useful to know.
while i --have-- seen some that claim a f_vert up to 85_cps,
   75 seems to be a popular top_end.



> I can't recommend a certain manufacturer, though.

no worries; other thoughts are good, also.



> My recommendation is to go to a shop, look at several
> monitors and take the one you like best, irrespective
> of the manufacturer.  Do *NOT* buy an LCD display that
> you haven't seen with your own eyes before.  I'm serious.

holy moses !!!

you are reinforcing my long_held belief that lcd is a downgrade from crt.



> By the way, back in the CRT days, my favourite was EIZO.

not familiar, but, i've heard the name.
maybe, i saw some in grad_school.
i --know-- i saw the name on a retailer's web_site, yesterday.



> I disliked Sony.

freedom_of_choice is good [ that'll get the secret_police after me ].



> My EIZO F563-T is still standing in a
> corner of my desk and is being used occasionally.  Must
> be at least 12 years old now, but still working fine.

today's world is a "throw_away" world, my friend.



> Well, my > 20 years old Commodore 1084S is also still
> working fine and being used to playback DVDs.  It's
> not useful as a computer monitor by today's standards,
> though.  :-)
> 
> Sorry for the digression ...

no need to apologize; digression is good [ i'm over here, officer ].
i'm a big fan of stream_of_consciousness.
that reminds me of a story ... .



> Best regards
>    Oliver

in the course of researching this topic, i have learned much about the technology.
what i don't get, else_where, are the useful tid_bits like "refresh_rate is not such a big_deal, anymore".

i remain convinced that crt is superior to lcd.
however, my options are few
   [ yes, i --have-- started researching the used_crt market;
       ya pays your money, ya takes your chances
   ].

i think much of this has to do with my "fear of the missing pixel".
i guess it's not so major to the action_movie crowd, but, i do text_editing, which is --very--, --very-- static.
[ for the record, i do --not-- watch video on a computer monitor; but, that's me.
   most of the product that i am seeing seems to be targeted at this market.
   at home, i have a dvd_player, a crt_ntsc_tv and a very_easy_chair.
   i do not mix myrna_loy with matt_drudge.
}
remember what i said about backing_off my pixel_count from 1600_h to 1440_h ?
characters were mal_formed and distinctly dim [ i do yellow foreground, dark_blue background ].
it is as if the electron_beam was "clipping" the sides of the "holes" in the shadow_mask.

i am the kind of person who, once he has found something that works "well" [ let alone "very well" ],
   tends to stick with it, because it is a "solved problem".
also, i tend to buy several copies of something, so that i have spares [ think "sump pump" ].
third, i like to get, at least, one from the top of the product_line
   [ so that i have it, when i really need or want some feature ] and
   several from the middle of the line
   [ because they are "good enough", "most of the time" ].

with this in mind, i am familiar with the dis_satisfaction with the "twisted nematic" technology.
iirc, i was aware of this previously, but, had forgotten.
this will guide my thinking.

[ further research has defined the middle_of_the_line:
     i need 1642_h at a minimum; 1680_h seems to be popular, so, i may get some of these.
   with 1920_h, however, i can put a narrow window on the side [ about 45 chars ].
   another app requires 2092_h, so, 1920_h leaves me short; however, this app is less critical.
   it looks like i want to avoid tn.
   this brings me back to choice_of_manufacturer.
]



the next time i drive into town, i'll have to stop into the big_box_store to have a look_see.

sorry to go on at such length; once my brain gets going, my fingers tend to follow.

rob