Which 20 inch monitor are you buying and why. I can't decide between the widescreen and the normal aspect and I was just wondering what other people are thinking.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dell 2005FPW vs. 2001FP
- Thread starter macbaseball
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not buying either, since I decided to opt for the 1901FP when a great deal came my way...
But I would get the 2005FPW, no question. Once you go widescreen, it's hard to go back. I had widescreen for a time when I had the iMac G4. I still miss it a year later, but circumstances keep me from getting a widescreen LCD. I'll just have to wait a bit longer I guess.
But I would get the 2005FPW, no question. Once you go widescreen, it's hard to go back. I had widescreen for a time when I had the iMac G4. I still miss it a year later, but circumstances keep me from getting a widescreen LCD. I'll just have to wait a bit longer I guess.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't like using a widescreen display on a computer. Think about it; when you're reading a web page, or writing a document, are you ever hurting for horizontal space? Since I find myself scrolling up/down a lot more than I scroll left/right, I value the vertical real estate more. I think the only exception is when watching a movie. Maybe there are other uses for a widescreen display, but it seems to me that woudn't be the case for most people.
therevolution said:
I certainly prefer widescreen. I want to get more applications side by size. If you always maximize your window, like Windows users tend to do (I should know having used Windows for years) then 4:3 makes sense, for the reasons you listed. However, once you think outside the maximize, I sure do like widescreen. I can see this browser window, itunes, and my mail all on my screen, setup perfectly.
Another note on the 2 Dell 20 inchers in particular, the widescreen model is somewhat newer, so I think some of its specs are a little better (reponse, brightness, etc.)
Oooh Yeah. Anyone who uses Photoshop, Quark, Dreamweaver, Illustrator etc. knows that there are so many palettes, tools, Information boxes, and overlapping document windows that you need as much horizontal room as possible to get them offa your working document.therevolution said:
There will apparently be pivoting support in Tiger, so you will be able to use the 2005FPW as a very long Portrait display.
I think it comes with special software that allows the user to use the horizonal mode, but I'm not positive. It's probably not supported by Macs anyways.
By reading the responses I've come to this conclusion. This is the question I have to ask myself: Do I want a slightly bigger screen (Slightly shorter but taller) with slightly worse graphics or do I want a longer but shorter display with better graphics, but many games don't support it's resolution? Also the 2005FPW is the newest technology and DVD's look better on it so that's also a plus. Tough question, I'm still not sure.
By reading the responses I've come to this conclusion. This is the question I have to ask myself: Do I want a slightly bigger screen (Slightly shorter but taller) with slightly worse graphics or do I want a longer but shorter display with better graphics, but many games don't support it's resolution? Also the 2005FPW is the newest technology and DVD's look better on it so that's also a plus. Tough question, I'm still not sure.
Also I have some video at both 720x528 and 720x480. These videos are encoded in MPEG-4. How do I figure out which one will be better on which screen. The 720x528 looks a lot better on my current Powerbook screen [1280x854 (15 inch)] so I considering converting all of it to 720x528. Also will the video become all pixelated when it is blow up to 1600x either 528 or 480.
I have the 2005fpw and I highly recommend it: it is the best value on a widescreen monitor by far. The 20" size is actually perfect for practical usage.
I must warn however about the portrait mode on the monitor. Yes, it does ship with software for windows XP that allows you to rotate the monitor and use it as a very long screen, but the practicality of this is lacking. It is possible to tilt the monitor initially, but as soon as you have 4 USB cords hooked up to it, along with the USB out to the computer, the power and the DVI, it becomes impossible to turn. The strain on the mechanism by the cables makes it very jerky, especially if you make use of the rubber piece on the back that collects all the cables neatly.
I must warn however about the portrait mode on the monitor. Yes, it does ship with software for windows XP that allows you to rotate the monitor and use it as a very long screen, but the practicality of this is lacking. It is possible to tilt the monitor initially, but as soon as you have 4 USB cords hooked up to it, along with the USB out to the computer, the power and the DVI, it becomes impossible to turn. The strain on the mechanism by the cables makes it very jerky, especially if you make use of the rubber piece on the back that collects all the cables neatly.
Mmmmmm, widescreen *drools*
I love my 2005FPW. Although it developed 1.5 stuck pixels after two or three weeks, I really don't notice them (green subpixel, and red/blue subs, which almost cancel each other out). A little sad, but still a great deal for 20 inches of widescreen bliss.
I didn't think I would do this, but now I often have multiple windows up at once, which is nice when surfing and chatting. The browser takes up 2/3 of the left, and chat window and mp3 player on the right.
To macbaseball:
Almost all newer games have a widescreen option. Even Counter Strike 1.6 is able to do widescreen. The newest game that doesn't seems to be AoE II, which is relatively old. Doom 3 for the PC doesn't natively support it, but it will work with a few tweaks in a config file.
Yes, the 720x528 movie will be pixelated, but it will on anything bigger than that res. 720x528 res is 1.36:1, which is close to 4:3 (1.33:1). The 720x480 is 1.5:1, which is close to 16:10 (1.6:1). I'm surprised you say the first res is better on your 15" widescreen. The 20" widescreen ratio will be a little wider than your LCD now.
I love my 2005FPW. Although it developed 1.5 stuck pixels after two or three weeks, I really don't notice them (green subpixel, and red/blue subs, which almost cancel each other out). A little sad, but still a great deal for 20 inches of widescreen bliss.
I didn't think I would do this, but now I often have multiple windows up at once, which is nice when surfing and chatting. The browser takes up 2/3 of the left, and chat window and mp3 player on the right.
To macbaseball:
Almost all newer games have a widescreen option. Even Counter Strike 1.6 is able to do widescreen. The newest game that doesn't seems to be AoE II, which is relatively old. Doom 3 for the PC doesn't natively support it, but it will work with a few tweaks in a config file.
Yes, the 720x528 movie will be pixelated, but it will on anything bigger than that res. 720x528 res is 1.36:1, which is close to 4:3 (1.33:1). The 720x480 is 1.5:1, which is close to 16:10 (1.6:1). I'm surprised you say the first res is better on your 15" widescreen. The 20" widescreen ratio will be a little wider than your LCD now.
Thanks, do you think it will become pixalated or do you think it will just add black bars on the sides. I just thought of that. It will probably get a little fuzzy from being blow up, but if there are black bars, maybe it won't be that bad.
I guess it'll depend on the software, but it will probably natively just show black bars. I've never seen otherwise so far.
