Re: Help OT: Recommend 19" LCD

Maybe you are looking at crap cheap monitors (they do exist ... cheap and crap are not the same thing, but do happen together ... as do, by the way, crap and name brand).

I don't argue that the things that you mentioned (some of which you did not mention in your earlier post) do contribute to image quality; but they are not lacking the the cheap (low cost) monitors I've bought.

I've been in the display industry, as well as the TV industry (since 1965), I'm a degreed Electrical Engineer, I know what I'm talking about.

All I'm saying is that you cannot AUTOMATICALLY equate price with image quality, and that there are some very good monitors that are not "name brand" and that are very inexpensive (say $99 for a 19" monitor with both VGA and DVI inputs).

But if you want to pay $150, $200, $250, that's your choice.


Christopher Muto wrote:
that is just one mans opinion, and a wrong one, on several counts, in my opinion.
pixel refresh rate, contrast, brightness, viewing angle, and other things contribute to the overall perceived image quality, clarity, and sharpness. if you don't see a difference between the cheap monitors and the expensive ones then you either you are amoung few that feel this way or you are sugesting that as a group lcd buyers are stupid and paying too much for the high end monitors that offer no real difference. i think you know better and are just being argumenitive for some reason.

"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:46ab940c$0$30602$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
They don't lack any of those things.

They have a 1-year warranty (which I have never needed), the contrast ratio is fine (equal to name bran warranties), refresh rate doesn't apply to LCD monitors, and sharpness is purely a function of resolution [particularly when using a DVI interface]. [your terminology as regards refresh rate and sharpness suggest you really don't know much about the underlying technologies].

Color accuracy is fine for uncalibrated applications, it might be an issue if I was doing critical work, but in fact, like 99% of all computer users, none of my components (monitor, printer or scanner) are color calibrated.

One thing that they do lack is extremely fast response times, but this doesn't really matter unless they are to be used for gaming. MOST "name-brand" monitors lack this also.

These monitors are, on average, about $100 per monitor less than "name brand" monitors. It's a significant difference, for which I don't feel that I've given up ANYTHING.


Christopher Muto wrote:
i think that you get what you pay for with the off brand monitors. they lack the warranty, the contrast, the refresh rate, and the sharpness of most big name monitors. often the colors are also way off the mark. understandably if money is the top concern then they are a viable alternative, but i don't fond them to be significantly cheaper than the brand name counterparts, or at least not enough of a difference to make them atractive to me. they are not the same quality as the big names and should you have a problem who knows how deftly a repair or replacement will be handled.

"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:46ab7cbe$0$29633$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have been buying 19" dual input (VGA/DVI) monitors for about $100. Actually, I have two here that I paid LESS than $100 for. However, getting the rebate in this case was a real hassle (a REAL hassle, there was outright fraud involved, but I did finally get both of them .... when the importer defaulted on the rebates, the two different retailers (Woot.com and PC Connection) both ultimately made good on the rebates themselves).

Seriously, the price on 19" LCD monitors has fallen to just a bit over $100 (say $120-$140). It's not necessary to pay anything like $300, for $225 my son bought a Samsung 22" widescreen monitor from Newegg.

Personally, I have had very good luck with low cost no-name monitors, I've bought a dozen or so of them, have not had one failure and the quality is about as good as for higher-cost (a LOT higher cost) name-brand monitors. Personally, I only buy monitors with DVI inputs, and I myself do not like "widescreen" monitors (note, a "xx-inch" widescreen monitor has fewer square inches of LCD AREA than the same "xx-inch" size monitor in a normal (4:3 or 5:4) aspect ratio, and is therefore usually cheaper).

tyro wrote:
My Dell 17" LCD died last. You can't imagine how hard it was to type this request w/o a monitor ;-)
Would like to spend <$300.
TIA

.

Relevant Pages