(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-17 04:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] deliberateblank.livejournal.com
1280x1024? It looks like 19" LCDs have come down to less than I paid for my 19" Iiyama a few years back. The problem (apart from lack of cash) is that that seems to be the maximum resolution at the moment, whereas the two 19" CRTs I'm using both do 1600x1200, which I make pretty full use of.

Bah.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-17 04:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dennyd.livejournal.com
I never ran my 21" CRT above 1400x1050, so I guess I'm the perfect market for the relatively low resolutions that TFTs can cope with.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 01:34 am (UTC)
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
iiyama do a 19" 1600x1200 LCD. I have two. I wouldn't swap them for anything less.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 02:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dennyd.livejournal.com
Oooh, nice. And the price tag for that much shininess?

(mine were ~£350 each, inc VAT and delivery)

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 02:42 am (UTC)
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
Ah, well, that was the downside. I paid upwards of £700 for each of mine. In my defence, (a) I had been patiently waiting for 1600x1200 LCDs to come down from £4000-odd, and (b) I would probably pay that again if I really had to because I like them so much.

That was in early 2003; a quick search of iiyama's website suggests that their current 19" LCD doesn't do 1600x1200 any more, but that they have a 20" one which does for somewhere around £600. So they still don't seem to be dropping very fast...

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-17 04:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] azekeil.livejournal.com
*lust* Nice pair. (sorry, someone had to)

You're not a great gamer are you? Do you know if those are much cop in terms of image persistence?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 02:30 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dennyd.livejournal.com
I did have Alice running on one of these a few days ago and nothing was bad enough to catch my eye, although I wasn't explicitly looking for it.

I chose these particular TFTs in the end because they have 16ms response time, as opposed to the normal ~25ms, so hopefully they should be better for DVD playback, and gaming too I imagine.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 12:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] azekeil.livejournal.com
Aha, woohoo, etc :)

I also worry about colour reproduciton, but I am quite happy with my Toshiba laptop for everyday stuff.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-17 04:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] djlongfella.livejournal.com
So the MAtrix wasn't just a film then ?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 02:32 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dennyd.livejournal.com
No, sadly it was three films... they'd have been better off stopping at one, I think :)

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 03:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] duranorak.livejournal.com
But then there'd have been no Twins! and that's just wrong.

Love you.

E.
x

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-17 04:59 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 12:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] world-of-skin.livejournal.com
Ohh yes, those are very pretty

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-18 02:33 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dennyd.livejournal.com
Nice username. Why the change?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-19 04:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] djlongfella.livejournal.com
Most jealous..... hrmph....

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-20 12:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nevla.livejournal.com
drooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool....

May 2020

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728 2930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags