Re: Monitor question

[Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net>]

On 12/30/2010 12:58 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Johan Kullstam put forth on 12/29/2010 11:25 PM:
>
> > Good for you.  My gripe is that one can no longer choose.  It's
> > shortscreen or nothing.
> >
> > I had an old thinkpad t42 with a 14" 1440x1050 and it rocked.  It
> > weighed only 4.5 lbs even with cd drive.  For me, it was an optimal size
> > and weight.  The current offerings are all inferior - they are heavier,
> > have less vertical screen dimension and worse resolution.
> You're a member of a super-minority Johan.  The majority of the
> marketplace wants wide screen, which is why you're finding little or
> nothing else but widescreen.  Even the little toy netbook computers all
> have widescreen LCDs.  That's very telling about the market.
I don't think so.  But the whole bunch of us who have no use for 
wide-screen
have been basically ignored by the vendors. I don't have room for a 23" 
wide-
screen that would have the same screen height as my 19" old-fashioned
monitor. How many people watch movies on their computers? That's
what TVs are for. Just before the "standard" monitors disappeared, I bought
another.

Well, let's face it--the mfrs sell a lot more TVs than computer monitors, so
that's what they make.  The computing public be damned!

--doug

--
Blessed are the peacemakers...for they shall be shot at from both sides. --A. M. Greeley