17" Viewsonic. Has the most stunningly accurate colors (after calibration of course).
Yeah, the eyestrain of this one is killing me when I try to play CoH for a couple of hours, then my mom gives me shit about bloodshot eyes as if it really matters.jsnipy wrote:
not anymore, i miss being able to switch between resolutions ... i don't miss the eyestrain
What the hell is a pebble?Airwolf wrote:
15" packard bell.
I shappy with it thoguhm bit Iam piseed
I had liek 5000 baekcs.
So but i am getting a 22" pebble soon once my p;aychecl comes in.
Will be good.
a river-bourne rock, usually smooth and less then 1/2 inch in diameter, seen here as the two white objects near the centre of the image:_j5689_ wrote:
What the hell is a pebble?
i have a Compaq MV740 17" with the shittest built-in mic ever. I use it anyway though.
Last edited by Trigger_Happy_92 (2007-12-29 20:05:05)
One of these sexy-looking things:_j5689_ wrote:
What the hell is a pebble?
I have a 22 inch widescreen one, and I'm in love with it .
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
looks ugly tbhUzique wrote:
One of these sexy-looking things:_j5689_ wrote:
What the hell is a pebble?
http://img.systemaxdev.com/productmedia … 0-main.jpg
I have a 22 inch widescreen one, and I'm in love with it .
Agreed.TSI wrote:
CRTs are better for gaming: faster response, less eyestrain, and more contrast.killer21 wrote:
I don't see why people would still use a CRT. LCD monitors are extremely cheap nowadays. I got my 18.1 inch monitor for 100 dollars and that was back in 2004.
Plus, they're harder to steal/damage.
(One of the nice new 17" TFTs at my school had someone poke a pen through it. Big hole, kinda funny )
But i prefer CRTs myself, although I have ready access to the new stuff.
However, I play on a 118" projector screen, so not too much of an issue.
I prefer CRTs due to their better colors, LCDs are to washed out and bright for me, that and Im not a fan of stuff going pixelly on me, nor the dead pixel issue(though not as common now)
The eye strain issue I have never noticed, I run at 72hz, and have no issue staring at this thing for hours, just fine.
lol, crt
Iiyama cheap crap?rh27 wrote:
Yes and happy with it.
21" iiyama (I don't know it's some cheap crap, works though).
Are you mental? The Iiyama visionmaster CRTs are amongst the best monitors available - they were legendary and that monitor will still provide a much better quality image than ANY LCD. No wonder you're happy with it. I still have a 19" Iiyama lying around, it's still awesome (except it sometimes makes high pitched noises when you push the refresh too far).
Iiyama have gone a different direction in the LCD market, making cheap, yet still astonishingly good value LCDs.
I've got a 19' LCD screen for my PC, BenQ.
And a BANG & OLUFSON 32' for my PS3, which I can hook my PC up to.
And a BANG & OLUFSON 32' for my PS3, which I can hook my PC up to.
#rekt
Nope but I'm still using a 15" LCD from 2001
Still running pristine
Still running pristine
Last edited by Mek-Izzle (2007-12-30 04:49:06)
I am still using my 19inch IBM P72
Had it for 8 years now and there's nothing at all wrong with it.
Had it for 8 years now and there's nothing at all wrong with it.
I'm using a diamond view 17" crt, works just fine but i got a 32" LCD TV for xmas and now when i come in here and look atTSI wrote:
CRTs are better for gaming: faster response, less eyestrain, and more contrast.killer21 wrote:
I don't see why people would still use a CRT. LCD monitors are extremely cheap nowadays. I got my 18.1 inch monitor for 100 dollars and that was back in 2004.
Plus, they're harder to steal/damage.
(One of the nice new 17" TFTs at my school had someone poke a pen through it. Big hole, kinda funny )
But i prefer CRTs myself, although I have ready access to the new stuff.
However, I play on a 118" projector screen, so not too much of an issue.
the CRT i start feeling all inferior an shit and want a 22" LCD. SO......do i get therapy or a new LCD monitor? ( not worried about $$$)
Any brand best?
Eizo are particularly good if, as you say, you're not worried about $$$. The CG241W is an outstanding monitor. If you want to see what an image can look like on an LCD, this is the one to get.velocitychaos wrote:
I'm using a diamond view 17" crt, works just fine but i got a 32" LCD TV for xmas and now when i come in here and look atTSI wrote:
CRTs are better for gaming: faster response, less eyestrain, and more contrast.killer21 wrote:
I don't see why people would still use a CRT. LCD monitors are extremely cheap nowadays. I got my 18.1 inch monitor for 100 dollars and that was back in 2004.
Plus, they're harder to steal/damage.
(One of the nice new 17" TFTs at my school had someone poke a pen through it. Big hole, kinda funny )
But i prefer CRTs myself, although I have ready access to the new stuff.
However, I play on a 118" projector screen, so not too much of an issue.
the CRT i start feeling all inferior an shit and want a 22" LCD. SO......do i get therapy or a new LCD monitor? ( not worried about $$$)
Any brand best?
19" CRT here.
Planning on gettinga 22" Flat in January sales.
Planning on gettinga 22" Flat in January sales.
17" Samsung. When LCDs do 85Hz at a reasonable price, I'll look into them.
You're damn right about that. I used to have a 17" Visionmaster back in '97. Top of the range at the time. It could do 1600x1200.Bertster7 wrote:
Iiyama cheap crap?
Are you mental? The Iiyama visionmaster CRTs are amongst the best monitors available - they were legendary and that monitor will still provide a much better quality image than ANY LCD. No wonder you're happy with it. I still have a 19" Iiyama lying around, it's still awesome (except it sometimes makes high pitched noises when you push the refresh too far).
Iiyama have gone a different direction in the LCD market, making cheap, yet still astonishingly good value LCDs.
Last edited by Fat_Swinub (2007-12-30 06:56:44)
17" Philips 107E6
I really like it because it can handle diffrent resolutions... I'd only wish it could go over 1280*1024
I really like it because it can handle diffrent resolutions... I'd only wish it could go over 1280*1024