A
Andy Axnot
I am considering buying a new monitor, perhaps a 17" lcd, mostly for text
use, with some picture viewing, still and video; no games.
I note that most 17" LCD monitors have a native resolution of 1280x1024.
But Staples has a Norcent 17" lcd on sale that has a resolution of
1024x768, native resolution. This brings up two questions: 1) anybody
have an opinion of the Norcent LM-730? (I think that's the model #)
And, perhaps more importantly, why are most 17" lcd monitors 1280x1024? I
think I would prefer 1024x768 at 17", it should be more readable I think,
as long as we're dealing with different *native* resolutions. I guess I'm
not as eagle-eyed as I used to be.
So why do most manufacturers market the higher resolution 1280x1024 17"
displays? Is there an inherent advantage to one resolution over the
other, and would the optimum for text be different for graphics or games?
Sorry, I've asked more than 2 questions, but TIA.
Andy
use, with some picture viewing, still and video; no games.
I note that most 17" LCD monitors have a native resolution of 1280x1024.
But Staples has a Norcent 17" lcd on sale that has a resolution of
1024x768, native resolution. This brings up two questions: 1) anybody
have an opinion of the Norcent LM-730? (I think that's the model #)
And, perhaps more importantly, why are most 17" lcd monitors 1280x1024? I
think I would prefer 1024x768 at 17", it should be more readable I think,
as long as we're dealing with different *native* resolutions. I guess I'm
not as eagle-eyed as I used to be.
So why do most manufacturers market the higher resolution 1280x1024 17"
displays? Is there an inherent advantage to one resolution over the
other, and would the optimum for text be different for graphics or games?
Sorry, I've asked more than 2 questions, but TIA.
Andy