#1 ·
We all know the drill: manufacturers pushed the transition from 4:3 monitors to 16:9 or 16:10 (8:5) formats because they claimed it was more "natural" for the human eye to look at... fine... we survived that shift...
But let's be real—LCD panel manufacturers just wanted to cut more individual panels out of their raw materials. The old 4:3 format was incredibly inefficient; there was way too much wasted material. By cutting more widescreen panels from the same sheet of raw material, they can sell them cheaper, which actually benefits us... You can still find 4:3 panels today, though they're rare and significantly more expensive for the exact reasons I just mentioned...
Even though this hasn't been that long and we aren't exactly begging for more changes, it doesn't save us any money. Again, the panel makers claim it's not their fault, but rather that the "entertainment" and "consumer electronics" segments of the market—which, if you ask me, is basically just us—aren't happy with widescreen panels because they don't meet their needs anymore... Translated into plain English: some idiot gets annoyed by having tiny black bars around the edge while watching a movie... which is just unused screen surface that you already paid for... what a joke...
So now, here we go again. Manufacturers have been trying to force these "new" resolutions and formats on us that are basically just variations of 16:9 or 16:10. They slap labels like "HD" or "HD Ready" on them, claiming they're perfect for enjoying HD and Blu-ray movies... We’re talking about resolutions like 1366x768, which is really just scaled 720p (1280x720), or Full HD at 1920x1080... Oh, and then there's that forgotten 1600x900 resolution used for DVDs... It's "almost 16:9," and it's making a comeback in the monitor market because they killed it off a few years ago saying it wasn't good enough...
Dell, which most of us mostly know for their laptops but is actually a much bigger player, has been pretty much dictating the trends in those "entertainment" and "consumer electronics" sectors lately. They were the first to roll out those Gemstone Blue laptops featuring these early HD or near-HD LCD panels.
Now, looking at monitors... the selection in the US has been pretty timid. They arrived without much fanfare—I think it was LG or Apple—and they're roughly split into two tiers: the budget stuff for the masses and the premium gear for the enthusiasts...
The mass-market models are dirt cheap, giving us unprecedented resolution for very little cash, provided you're willing to give up DVI and HDMI ports (meaning you're stuck with analog VGA). Meanwhile, the enthusiast models—you guessed it—are definitely not cheap, and they include everything the budget ones "forgot"...
Here are examples of both classes from the current catalog:
See that? Have you noticed why this whole mess is happening? It's because of a measly 0.4 inches. We used to have 22" screens, now we have 21.6". We had 24", now it's 23.6". And then they have the nerve to tell us size doesn't matter...
They probably have similar setups in other catalogs; I haven't looked everywhere. But what prompted me to write this is the arrival of these new Dell monitors in both categories. The budget ones are actually quite affordable, so some people might actually like them 😁... Unfortunately, I couldn't find a single decent review online, probably because they're too new... maybe you'll have better luck...
Of course, they all use TN matrices paired with a protective film to boost color perception and contrast. They come with a 3-year warranty, response times ranging from 5ms to 2ms for the top model, a decent 72% color gamut, 6-bit color, and they're extremely efficient with standby power staying under 1W...
So, we have one 20" model with that forgotten 1600x900 DVD resolution for a really low $325:
Then there’s this wannabe 22" Full HD model, aimed at the likes of $375:
And finally, a 24" squeezed down into a 23" frame, packed with all the ports you’d actually need and built-in speakers: perfect for people like $567. I won't even get started on that hideous piano black finish...
There, now you know (though I'm sure most of you already did... 😁)
edit: just so we're clear, I haven't actually touched any of these or tested them out yet... so I can't say a damn thing about the actual image quality or color accuracy...
But let's be real—LCD panel manufacturers just wanted to cut more individual panels out of their raw materials. The old 4:3 format was incredibly inefficient; there was way too much wasted material. By cutting more widescreen panels from the same sheet of raw material, they can sell them cheaper, which actually benefits us... You can still find 4:3 panels today, though they're rare and significantly more expensive for the exact reasons I just mentioned...
Even though this hasn't been that long and we aren't exactly begging for more changes, it doesn't save us any money. Again, the panel makers claim it's not their fault, but rather that the "entertainment" and "consumer electronics" segments of the market—which, if you ask me, is basically just us—aren't happy with widescreen panels because they don't meet their needs anymore... Translated into plain English: some idiot gets annoyed by having tiny black bars around the edge while watching a movie... which is just unused screen surface that you already paid for... what a joke...
So now, here we go again. Manufacturers have been trying to force these "new" resolutions and formats on us that are basically just variations of 16:9 or 16:10. They slap labels like "HD" or "HD Ready" on them, claiming they're perfect for enjoying HD and Blu-ray movies... We’re talking about resolutions like 1366x768, which is really just scaled 720p (1280x720), or Full HD at 1920x1080... Oh, and then there's that forgotten 1600x900 resolution used for DVDs... It's "almost 16:9," and it's making a comeback in the monitor market because they killed it off a few years ago saying it wasn't good enough...
Dell, which most of us mostly know for their laptops but is actually a much bigger player, has been pretty much dictating the trends in those "entertainment" and "consumer electronics" sectors lately. They were the first to roll out those Gemstone Blue laptops featuring these early HD or near-HD LCD panels.
Now, looking at monitors... the selection in the US has been pretty timid. They arrived without much fanfare—I think it was LG or Apple—and they're roughly split into two tiers: the budget stuff for the masses and the premium gear for the enthusiasts...
The mass-market models are dirt cheap, giving us unprecedented resolution for very little cash, provided you're willing to give up DVI and HDMI ports (meaning you're stuck with analog VGA). Meanwhile, the enthusiast models—you guessed it—are definitely not cheap, and they include everything the budget ones "forgot"...
Here are examples of both classes from the current catalog:
See that? Have you noticed why this whole mess is happening? It's because of a measly 0.4 inches. We used to have 22" screens, now we have 21.6". We had 24", now it's 23.6". And then they have the nerve to tell us size doesn't matter...
They probably have similar setups in other catalogs; I haven't looked everywhere. But what prompted me to write this is the arrival of these new Dell monitors in both categories. The budget ones are actually quite affordable, so some people might actually like them 😁... Unfortunately, I couldn't find a single decent review online, probably because they're too new... maybe you'll have better luck...
Of course, they all use TN matrices paired with a protective film to boost color perception and contrast. They come with a 3-year warranty, response times ranging from 5ms to 2ms for the top model, a decent 72% color gamut, 6-bit color, and they're extremely efficient with standby power staying under 1W...
So, we have one 20" model with that forgotten 1600x900 DVD resolution for a really low $325:
Then there’s this wannabe 22" Full HD model, aimed at the likes of $375:
And finally, a 24" squeezed down into a 23" frame, packed with all the ports you’d actually need and built-in speakers: perfect for people like $567. I won't even get started on that hideous piano black finish...
There, now you know (though I'm sure most of you already did... 😁)
edit: just so we're clear, I haven't actually touched any of these or tested them out yet... so I can't say a damn thing about the actual image quality or color accuracy...