Question About LCD Screens. (sorry if in wrong section)

[Laurana]

I have a Question about LCD Screens... Well ... Not really a question, but I'm wondering about the pros and cons about an LCD screen. I'm wondering if an LCD screen is bad to have, and would be a waste of money. I know the screen is like a Calculator screen (I suppose) but I would really like opinions about an LCD screen.


Reason being is my mother wants to own an LCD screen. I think its because it gives out more space or might look "cooler" but I want to save my mother 200 bucks and stuff from things she doesn't need. So could anyone please tell me if or if not an LCD screen is worth the hassle?

Thanks.

[NooNoo]

The best reason ever for an LCD screen is space.

LCDs are more expensive and can suffer from the dreaded dead pixel. What you need to ask yourself and then your mother is: Does the budget outweigh the space and coolness?

If your mother has her heart set on an LCD you question should be, which is the most cost effective in terms of price and warranty and the known failure rate of the various brands.

Sometimes some people just want, I would never presume to tell my mum to save money UNLESS I came up with another solution that included the reasons for the wanting....

P.S. XP is the best os to use LCD with since it "understands" them and has the cleartype utility which makes a good LCD look great.

[TechZ]

LCD Pros:

• Nice look
• Saves Space
• You get the advertised size (15" means 15")
• Easier on the eyes
• Light
• Low Power Consumption

CRT Pros:

• Cheaper (therefore larger size screen for less money compared to LCD's)
• High Resolution Screens
• Great for gamers

LCD Cons:

• Have a Life(I dunno anyone who has exhausted it though)
• Expensive (though reasonable ones can be found)
• Not so good for gamers (Though I game and I love my LCD )
• Dead pixel Issue

CRT Cons:

• Bulky
• Ugly
• Suck power
• Not good for people with glasses

Links:

http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/Pub/LCD_vs_CRT_AH.pdf

http://www.geek.com/htbc/buy/monitby.htm

[confus-ed]

If you are spending $200 then you are in budget LCD terrority, at this end of the scale, CRT {a conventional style monitor} will indeed give more bang for buck feature wise, if you ignore the 'coolness' factor {though I think space saving is an important practical consideration so more than cool }..

So you need to know what to look for in 'budget' LCDs as you need to be careful still buying these as many are old models which are really pretty poor performance wise, with things like 'lag & blurr' {all monitors rely on a thing called persistence of vision based on refresh rate, LCD's don't really have this measure directly, but if they did many budget LCD monitors would come out 'piss poor' - some can be good, but others ... !}

The 'magic numbers' are 'response time' (think of this as refresh rate, it isn't, but its an equivalent measure) & you want a number of 16ms or less here (16 is 'ok', 12 is 'good' 8 or less 'brill'), contrast ratio (how bright it can make one thing against another, not the 'luminosity', at least 300:1 for 15", 400:1 for 17", 600 for 19" & 'lots' for 21"+) & whether the LCD is analogue or digital (how its connected & to what {analogue or digital video card?} comes into play also) - this is a wide subject, warranty & whatnot comes into play also ! - Try reading This or 'highlights' ..

This is a 'vfm' question, if its worth $200 to your mother then it is, & if it isn't, then it isn't ! - I don't think you can 'see' the difference for the money generally ..