Best 17" LCD Resolution?

[Thunder9]

What's the best native resolution for a 17" LCD monitor? I read that
a lot of people who have 15" monitors like that to be 1024 X 768. But
then I read that most people with 17" monitors also like that
resolution. That kind of doesn't make sense to me...

If a person likes 1024 X 768 for a 15" monitor, then a 17" monitor
should be just about the same at 1280 X 1024, shouldn't it? I mean,
you have better resolution but also have a larger screen area... so
its mostly an extension of pixels. Or in other words, your 16 X 16
bit icons will be about the same *physical* size, won't they?

On a related note - let's say I get a 17" lcd monitor at 1280 X 1024.
Can that display a 1024 X 768 resolution by simply using a 1024 X 768
grid of pixels? Instead of awkwardly streaching the screen? Would
this be useful? Then you could have your 17" screen at 1280 X 1024
and your smaller screen at 1280 X 1024. I guess I'm confused on this
whole issue so any insights would be appreciated.

Regards,
Thunder9

 

[Khuli]

What's the best native resolution for a 17" LCD monitor? I read that
a lot of people who have 15" monitors like that to be 1024 X 768. But
then I read that most people with 17" monitors also like that
resolution. That kind of doesn't make sense to me...

If a person likes 1024 X 768 for a 15" monitor, then a 17" monitor
should be just about the same at 1280 X 1024, shouldn't it? I mean,
you have better resolution but also have a larger screen area... so
its mostly an extension of pixels. Or in other words, your 16 X 16
bit icons will be about the same *physical* size, won't they?

On a related note - let's say I get a 17" lcd monitor at 1280 X 1024.
Can that display a 1024 X 768 resolution by simply using a 1024 X 768
grid of pixels? Instead of awkwardly streaching the screen? Would
this be useful? Then you could have your 17" screen at 1280 X 1024
and your smaller screen at 1280 X 1024. I guess I'm confused on this
whole issue so any insights would be appreciated.

The answer is yes you can display 1024 x 768 centered (and not
scaled), as long as your monitor is capable of 'it.

On a 17" monitor 1280 x 960 would be a much better reolution
(letterboxed) if you normally use 1024 x 768.

 

[Martin Eriksson]

On a 17" monitor 1280 x 960 would be a much better reolution
(letterboxed) if you normally use 1024 x 768.

Why? Really?

/M

 

[Khuli]

Why? Really?

Because they both have the same aspect ratio?

 

[Alien Zord]

Because they both have the same aspect ratio?

Applies only to CRT monitors with 4:3 aspect ratio. AFAIK all 17" LCD
monitors have a native resolution of 1280 x 1024, that's 5:4 aspect ratio.

 

[Martin Eriksson]

Because they both have the same aspect ratio?

17" inch monitors have a physical 5:4 aspect. But you apparently already
know that saying to run letterboxed. That's why I don't really know what
your point is? That he should run with black borders so he won't see the
extra pixels because.... xxx???

It's not like anything will look squished anyhow, and the extra 84 lines are
most welcome.

/M

 

[Khuli]

Applies only to CRT monitors with 4:3 aspect ratio. AFAIK all 17" LCD
monitors have a native resolution of 1280 x 1024, that's 5:4 aspect
ratio.

Yes, but the original post was referring to people with 15" monitors
who liked 1024 x 768 (and later changed to a 17" monitor).....

15" LCDs have an aspect ration 4:3 as well as CRTs, hence the
suggestion to use 1280 x 960 on a 17".

I can't see that anyone would want to use 1024 x 768 *full screen* on
a 17" LCD.

 

[Alien Zord]

What's the best native resolution for a 17" LCD monitor? I read that
a lot of people who have 15" monitors like that to be 1024 X 768. But
then I read that most people with 17" monitors also like that
resolution. That kind of doesn't make sense to me...

If a person likes 1024 X 768 for a 15" monitor, then a 17" monitor
should be just about the same at 1280 X 1024, shouldn't it? I mean,
you have better resolution but also have a larger screen area... so
its mostly an extension of pixels. Or in other words, your 16 X 16
bit icons will be about the same *physical* size, won't they?

On a related note - let's say I get a 17" lcd monitor at 1280 X 1024.
Can that display a 1024 X 768 resolution by simply using a 1024 X 768
grid of pixels? Instead of awkwardly streaching the screen? Would
this be useful? Then you could have your 17" screen at 1280 X 1024
and your smaller screen at 1280 X 1024. I guess I'm confused on this
whole issue so any insights would be appreciated.

AFAIK all 17" LCD monitors have native resolution of 1280 x 1024 pixels,
that's 5:4 aspect ratio. You can run them at lower resolutions but the
display will not be anywhere near as sharp and on top of it most other
resolutions are 4:3 aspect ratio making the display distorted.

15" and 19" LCD monitors have pixel sizes around 0.3 mm. On 17" monitors its
0.264 mm. Therefore text and icons will be a bit smaller.

 

[Alien Zord]

I can't see that anyone would want to use 1024 x 768 *full screen* on
a 17" LCD.

Many games cannot be set to resolutions higher than 1024 x 768 (apparently)
so the user may have no choice.

 

[Bishoop]

<snip>

| 15" and 19" LCD monitors have pixel sizes around 0.3 mm. On 17" monitors
its
| 0.264 mm. Therefore text and icons will be a bit smaller.


I have a 17" panel, 1280 X 1024 and for my eyes the standard Windows 96dpi
is just a bit small. I increased the dpi to 120% of 96 or 115dpi which is
much better for me.

Just a thought.

 

[J.Clarke]

Yes, but the original post was referring to people with 15" monitors
who liked 1024 x 768 (and later changed to a 17" monitor).....

15" LCDs have an aspect ration 4:3 as well as CRTs, hence the
suggestion to use 1280 x 960 on a 17".

That would make sense if there were any LCDs available with a native
resolution of 1280x960.

 

[Thunder9]

<snip>

| 15" and 19" LCD monitors have pixel sizes around 0.3 mm. On 17" monitors
its
| 0.264 mm. Therefore text and icons will be a bit smaller.


I have a 17" panel, 1280 X 1024 and for my eyes the standard Windows 96dpi
is just a bit small. I increased the dpi to 120% of 96 or 115dpi which is
much better for me.

Just a thought.

How do you do that? Can it be done with Win98?

 

[Thunder9]

AFAIK all 17" LCD monitors have native resolution of 1280 x 1024 pixels,
that's 5:4 aspect ratio. You can run them at lower resolutions but the
display will not be anywhere near as sharp and on top of it most other
resolutions are 4:3 aspect ratio making the display distorted.

15" and 19" LCD monitors have pixel sizes around 0.3 mm. On 17" monitors its
0.264 mm. Therefore text and icons will be a bit smaller.

Well damn my 10.4" Sony Vaio 505tx screen is 1024 X 768 and I figure
that means its a .20 mm dot pitch! (I measure horizontal size is 21.2
cm and vertical is 15.8 cm). And I've been happy enough with this
size for years so the 17" monitor will be an upgrade! In fact, if I
got a 16.3" lcd monitor that would do 1600 X 1400 then I'd have the
same look and feel (in terms of dot pitch) as my Sony!

Thank you so much for your post this has been a real eye opener! (Pun
intended!)

Regards,
Thunder9

 

[Alien Zord]

Well damn my 10.4" Sony Vaio 505tx screen is 1024 X 768 and I figure
that means its a .20 mm dot pitch! (I measure horizontal size is 21.2
cm and vertical is 15.8 cm). And I've been happy enough with this
size for years so the 17" monitor will be an upgrade! In fact, if I
got a 16.3" lcd monitor that would do 1600 X 1400 then I'd have the
same look and feel (in terms of dot pitch) as my Sony!

Thank you so much for your post this has been a real eye opener! (Pun
intended!)

The difference is the viewing distance. Notebook screens are generaly viewed
from about 18" whereas desktops from around 26". That 10.4" at 18" is
equivalent to 15" at 26" or your .2 mm dot pitch is equivalent to .3 mm. So
the display objects on a 17" LCD with .264 mm dot pitch will appear smaller
to you than on your current 10.4" notebook's screen.

 

[Khuli]

That would make sense if there were any LCDs available with a native
resolution of 1280x960.

*Sigh* If you read further up you'll see I mentioned this is
'letterbox' mode (i.e the top & bottom 42 lines are black, so the
picture is not distorted).. In a game like BF1942 you have to use this
resolution as it doesn't support 1280 x 1024.

 

[chrisv]

How do you do that? Can it be done with Win98?

Yes. This is just another way of saying "large font mode".

 

[Thunder9]

The difference is the viewing distance. Notebook screens are generaly viewed
from about 18" whereas desktops from around 26". That 10.4" at 18" is
equivalent to 15" at 26" or your .2 mm dot pitch is equivalent to .3 mm. So
the display objects on a 17" LCD with .264 mm dot pitch will appear smaller
to you than on your current 10.4" notebook's screen.

Very helpful analysis there! Its so true... as I was reading your
note, I had a tape measure next to me and sure enough, I was right
about 18" away from the monitor!

However, that doesn't prevent me in the least from using the 17"
monitor at a relatively close distance. This is because I plan on
creating a pole and manuverable arm to position the monitor exactly
where I want it in the air, as close to my face as I want. Actually
I'll probably use it the most sitting on my couch, with the arm
holding the monitor coming over the arm of the chair on my side,
positioning the screen right in front of my face so I can watch tv and
browse the web at the same time.

Ahhhh heaven...

So while I don't doubt you regarding the typical desk setp up, my set
up will be different...

Regards,
Thunder9

 

[Brandon]

Yes. This is just another way of saying "large font mode".

And this i changed where?
Thanks
Brandon

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption

=---