Stupid developments in IT
Jan. 7th, 2008 01:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
king_pellinorMy monitor has died.
I've stolen LadyofAstolat's spare 19" LCD for the moment, while I'm looking into getting it repaired, but it's not the same as my nice 22" CRT :-( Even if it does take up a fraction of the desk space and have pretty much the same visible area (ahem).
In the meantime I thought I'd look at the state of the art of PC monitors. I'm pleased to find that one can get big monitors with good specs at very reasonable prices.
But they're all widescreen! Why?? The only point of having a wide screen is to watch DVDs, but why on earth do they assume that absolutely everyone wants to do so, as their most pressing reason to have a computer? Most of what one uses a screen for is text - for which one wants height, not width (my work monitor is in portrait orientation for that very reason). Maybe pictures... which again don't need the extra width.
I ran through the maths. If I were to buy a new monitor, to get the same screen height as the 19" LCD I'd need something like a 22" widescreen. That means paying for a great chunk of screen that will simply sit off to the right and be entirely pointless, except that when reading web pages the lines will be longer and harder to read than they currently are. So I'm paying more for less utility.
And all the marketing is "Don't get a normal 19" screen, get a 19" Widescreen! It's wider!". Whereas what they actually mean is "Don't get a full-size 19" screen, get this one where we've chopped the top of the screen off so you're acually able to see less, and what you can see is squished into an awkward shape".
Why can I not find a 4:3 monitor for sale *anywhere* (apart from some little 15" ones being sold off cheap)? :-(
Oh, and you can't get CRTs anymore. Now I know they take up a lot of space, but it is nice being able to muck about with resolution without it looking as if you have butter smeared on your glasses (Hearts of Iron II, I'm looking at your fixed 800x600...), and you'd think someone would still want them. Me, for example!
So if the CRT is beyond economical repair, what I'd want is a 22" 4:3 CRT to replace it. But I can't get one.
So as a fall-back a 20" 4:3 LCD would be OK. But I can't get one.
So I'd have to get a 22" Widescreen LCD. Which doesn't do what I want, but is close. I might need to get used to reading things in windows rather than full-screen, to avoid having the PC using the excess width.
In other words, as technology progresses its products become less fit for purpose.
Again :-(
I've stolen LadyofAstolat's spare 19" LCD for the moment, while I'm looking into getting it repaired, but it's not the same as my nice 22" CRT :-( Even if it does take up a fraction of the desk space and have pretty much the same visible area (ahem).
In the meantime I thought I'd look at the state of the art of PC monitors. I'm pleased to find that one can get big monitors with good specs at very reasonable prices.
But they're all widescreen! Why?? The only point of having a wide screen is to watch DVDs, but why on earth do they assume that absolutely everyone wants to do so, as their most pressing reason to have a computer? Most of what one uses a screen for is text - for which one wants height, not width (my work monitor is in portrait orientation for that very reason). Maybe pictures... which again don't need the extra width.
I ran through the maths. If I were to buy a new monitor, to get the same screen height as the 19" LCD I'd need something like a 22" widescreen. That means paying for a great chunk of screen that will simply sit off to the right and be entirely pointless, except that when reading web pages the lines will be longer and harder to read than they currently are. So I'm paying more for less utility.
And all the marketing is "Don't get a normal 19" screen, get a 19" Widescreen! It's wider!". Whereas what they actually mean is "Don't get a full-size 19" screen, get this one where we've chopped the top of the screen off so you're acually able to see less, and what you can see is squished into an awkward shape".
Why can I not find a 4:3 monitor for sale *anywhere* (apart from some little 15" ones being sold off cheap)? :-(
Oh, and you can't get CRTs anymore. Now I know they take up a lot of space, but it is nice being able to muck about with resolution without it looking as if you have butter smeared on your glasses (Hearts of Iron II, I'm looking at your fixed 800x600...), and you'd think someone would still want them. Me, for example!
So if the CRT is beyond economical repair, what I'd want is a 22" 4:3 CRT to replace it. But I can't get one.
So as a fall-back a 20" 4:3 LCD would be OK. But I can't get one.
So I'd have to get a 22" Widescreen LCD. Which doesn't do what I want, but is close. I might need to get used to reading things in windows rather than full-screen, to avoid having the PC using the excess width.
In other words, as technology progresses its products become less fit for purpose.
Again :-(
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-07 03:16 pm (UTC)I don't like resizing windows, I like having things full-screen - the spare space distracts me :-(
So away with you and your implicit suggestions that my own idiosyncracies may not be universal, and that I should change my habits to make better use of new design features! Fie, I say, fie!