Does This Monitor Exist Yet?
- Thread starter Evoss
- Start date
No need for that kind of reply. If you have nothing better to add, please don't post!!
Not dumb at all really. People looking for 1920x1200 screens are minimal and 120hz 1920x1200 is even less. Small market means high prices which means low sales which means no profit which means no monitor.
Are you really put off by 180 pixels?
Bad maths is bad.
@ Katsumoto
Monitor manufacturers are moving away from 1920x1200 monitors and now mostly concentrate on 1920x1080.
1920x1200 is pretty much a niche market now so I consider it unlikely that manufacturers will be producing 120Hz versions.
It would be a niche within a niche, very low volume sales.
So would you care to explain what's so dumb about my reply?
Monitor manufacturers are moving away from 1920x1200 monitors and now mostly concentrate on 1920x1080.
1920x1200 is pretty much a niche market now so I consider it unlikely that manufacturers will be producing 120Hz versions.
It would be a niche within a niche, very low volume sales.
So would you care to explain what's so dumb about my reply?
16:9 sucks, that is all. Especially for work purposes. I use two 22" 16:9 monitors at work and hate them with a passion, it's like trying to work in a letterbox.
I'm totally in love with my 1920x1200 3x28" setup, it's fantastic for work and handles games well as well.
Unfortunately though, we are a niche, us 16:10 lovers! It'll never be worthwhile for a company to start putting them out again so we'll just have to get used to it.
I'm totally in love with my 1920x1200 3x28" setup, it's fantastic for work and handles games well as well.
Unfortunately though, we are a niche, us 16:10 lovers! It'll never be worthwhile for a company to start putting them out again so we'll just have to get used to it.
Last edited:
Yeah, my work monitor is a 24" 16:9 monitor which compared to my 24" 16:10 feels totally restricted.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Edinburgh
This.
1080 16:9 panels are pushed by manufacturers so that they can get economy of scale by producing panels to HD standard only for all purposes.
For proper work you want more height on the screen to avoid excessive vertical scrolling. IMHO all PC monitors should be 1200 high minimum, preferably 1440. Whats wrong with having wide AND high FOV? Not going to happen though until consumers demand not to be force-fed "HD" resolution panels.
Last edited:
Not to be a pedant but why does less vertical pixels give you a better FOV? If anything it gives you less FOV.
I'm moving away from 1200 to 1080 for 120Hz. Not TOO fussed though as recording game footage has to be done in 1080 for upload purposes otherwise one must suffer letterboxing or cropped video.
I'll still have a 1200 secondary monitor for when I need the extra height.
It's more about the wider field of view. There are plenty of examples like this around.
More on comparisons
http://www.wsgf.org/article/aspect-ratio
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Edinburgh
Not arguing that 16:9 is a better FOV, just that we're being fed 1080 when it's not the best solution for computing in general - nothing wrong with running games at 1080P on a 1900x1200 panel.
My only hope is that 4K starts to make inroads into home cinema so that panel suppliers start to make screens with that resolution, as it'll bring ~2000 vertical resolution with it.
My only hope is that 4K starts to make inroads into home cinema so that panel suppliers start to make screens with that resolution, as it'll bring ~2000 vertical resolution with it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 3,974
- Location
- By the sea, West Sussex