[clug-talk] Monitor / TV selection thoughts
terr at terralogic.net
terr at terralogic.net
Thu Dec 15 19:03:07 PST 2011
I found an LG LCD 37" for $400. It is a 1080p system. As I understand it the only diffence is one system uses the older backlight system while the new uses a new LED backlight system. They are BOTH LCD in front. The guys over at memory express seem to know their stuff a lot better than the guys at best buy. I have not gone to any other shops.
The only 32" LED/LCD TV's at 1080p were from Sony and I believe Panasonic and both were $500 and the Sony seems to have much better colour.
For me I think I like the 32" better than the 37"
Next I found one unit and I forget the make and it was either 32" or 37" and it has a DVD in it. I suspect a PC cannot access the DVD even though what they should have done is put a slimline R/W interfaced through the USB interface. Maybe that one is a Toshiba. It was $430.
It seems to me the extra few bux to get the much better sound system, remote control capability and so forth of the TV as well as all the functionality of a monitor means that TV is the better way to go.
I see we have 3-D TV systems out. The LG is polarized so if you turn your head 45 degrees it goes wonky. The Sony is a shutter system. Now here is the thing. I wear glasses. They HAVE to provide this in prescription lenses before I become interested.
Also I am interested in programming the 3-D side of it. Does anyone know where to find information on the API one needs to use and especially from Linux?
Next the 720p VS 1080p at this junction is a moot point. I'll likely drive it from VGA if from my desktop because its still PIII dual CPU tualatin core and it does the job and supports my SCSI equipment. When I buy a netbook and I do think it will be an ASUS eeePC and will probably cost under $200 then that can't support past about 1300x600 anyways so that is well within 720p range. For the current light duty field type work I need the netbook for I can't justify even $200 bux.
But at least support for a strong laptop which can support say 1920x1080 will be there and for $30 bux maybe its worth it. I think 720p is rather poor.
I currently run dual 1024x768 so I really have 2048x768. Am I correct to think that they are actually quoting true pixels as I know them from the VGA days? Also I was told that there is no 1280x1024 but I think the old MATROX MILLINIUM VGA cards I still use will support 1280x1024.
I was told that USB is plenty fast enough to drive a big monitor and even a pair.
If I want to use say a simple ASUS eeePC netbook worth under $200 to drive a monitor at full 1080p and I'm not sure how many pixels left to right... does anyone know? Then do we have drivers to do this? I'll be looking at text 99% of the time or pics which are stills. I rarely look at video on the desktop. Also I don't play games.
I just checked... 1080x1920 is 9:16 so this is typical for wide screen TV land.
Is the 720p design really 720x1280? This is still 9:16 and if so then I clearly do not want to be in this because it is about close to 1/2 what I have now in width.
How can anyone easily test this? The guys at Memory Express didn't know how to set fonts in windows and I've forgotten and at best buy forget it. They don't want to do any tests. So right there they have lost the business and $50 bux won't change my mind!
Do we have say AGP cards which can drive a 1080p HDMI TV monitor and I guess this needs to combine video and sound. Do we have the drivers?
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 05:16:26PM -0500, simon at mungewell.org wrote:
> > So why would I want to buy the monitor?
> The performance of the LCD panel is usually better in a 'Monitor' vs. a 'TV'.
> clug-talk mailing list
> clug-talk at clug.ca
> Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
> **Please remove these lines when replying
More information about the clug-talk