Need a new LCD monitor. :(

[Cleveland Metal]

Don't you use surge protectors?

On a lot of stuff. THIS one was just plugged in to the wall. Figured since it was turned off it shouldn't have been bothered. Guess not...

I'm in an old area (this house is from 1885!) and the power infrastructure in the neighborhood is not all that. I usually see about 108 volts... But ranges from 100-120s...

The big issue I have here is brownouts which are particularly a bummer, and it takes a nice UPS to deal with that stuff. I've seen 80 volts here and that certainly stresses motors and everything... Hard to justify a UPS on a fridge, furnace or sump pump, but I've had motors start to smoke here.

I probably need a whole house solution. I am not sure cheap surge protectors are enough and I have enough stuff where even they could get pricey I guess. I'd be happy with something that would just shut off under a certain voltage.

[Vass]

Response from my brother. Did I mention he's mentally ill? I mean that in a good way. All quotes below are from him:


http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Touch-...0574738&sr=8-1

cannot stress enough that the one I bought was this one exactly, and NOT the Samsung T220 HD. The HD one has enough lines to be considered a true 1080p TV screen, but due to the difficulty in RTA technology being applied to any monitor about the T220's size, the response time is MUCH slower on the T220 HD (Sometimes it's called the T220p). The same applies to the 24-inch version of the same monitor.

In other words, if you're a gamer, the T220 is the only real option to consider. The response time is rated 2ms, which means the average is more like a little under 5ms under normal use conditions.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mon...z_7.html#sect0

There's the best review I found. Money quote:

Although the number is close to 5 milliseconds, you should not think that the monitor’s Mode2 is comparable to models with a specified response time of 5 milliseconds. It is actually far faster. The difference is in the Gray-to-Gray method of measuring response time. The response time of 5ms monitors is measured using the less accurate ISO 13406-2 method and, as I wrote above, corresponds to the T220’s RTA Off mode. When measured according to the GtG method, the monitor has a response time of 13 milliseconds in that mode.

In other words, even under the more stringent Grey-to-Grey test, this thing is insanely fast.

Here's the same analysis for the 24-incher:

The T240 does not have response time compensation and its speed is rather low as the consequence. Its response time average is 14.6 milliseconds (GtG) with a maximum of 28.2 milliseconds. This is quite enough for office applications, movies and not-very-dynamic games, but devoted gamers may want to prefer a faster monitor.

[DonP]

I like my 22" HP widescreen.

I do too, but the inlaws had one die in just over a year (19")

[Cleveland Metal]

Thanks for sharing the email

I don't game. I'll prolly be happy with a lesser unit. But, the 22" stuff would be nice. I have a lot of stuff that I like to keep up on the screen really, (IM progs, email etc)

I guess I'm just wanting one that will hang a while. I know they're not like expensive, but man, I' just sick of buying stuff.

All this technology that takes a crap gets expensive to replace when you start adding it all up.

Guess I can be thankful it isn't a 40-50" tv that crapped out like I have seen friend's units do.

[Hellbat]

I picked up an LG W2452T 24" widescreen today with a bestbuy gift card I got for christmas. I haven't calibrated it yet but damn 24" monitor is huge. I have to sit further back than before.

[bibz]

24's are massive, and fairly cheap. My Benq is a soso entry unit, but more then enough. Prior was a 19" samsung and they (and the expensive dells) are the way to go. 22" is heaps, dunno if I'd pay the money for the extra 2" if I went through it again (getcha minds out of the gutter )

[Spivonious]

Just a note about response times...the monitors refresh at 60Hz, which means once every 16ms. Anything less than that and you're not going to see it.

[Newc]

I picked up an LG W2452T 24" widescreen today with a bestbuy gift card I got for christmas. I haven't calibrated it yet but damn 24" monitor is huge. I have to sit further back than before.

See, this is one thing that confuses me, particularly with TVs. You buy a bigger screen and sit farther away. Why?

Sit in front of a 32" tv and hold your hand out in front of you. The screen will be about 3-4" wide. Replace it with a 50" or bigger and sit further away. Hold your hand out again and the screen will be 3-4" wide

I mean, yeah if you got a couch full of people crowding around a small TV in the middle of the room, sure, upgrade to a bigger set, but to me the purpose of a bigger screen is to have a bigger screen, not so I can sit across the room and have all that empty floor

[Spivonious]

The reason you should sit farther away is because even though the TV screen size increased, the number of pixels on it didn't. If you sit too close, you start seeing all of dots, and it just doesn't look good.

e.g. 720p = 1280x720. On a TV that is 30" wide, you get 42 dots per inch. On a TV that is 50" wide, you get 25 dots per inch. My general rule of thumb is 2 feet for every 10", so you'd want to be at least 10 feet away for a 50" TV.

[Carbuff]

Have a look at this.

http://www.buy.com/prod/acer-ferrari...53&dcaid=17653