Double Your Fun with DoubleSight 344
Lothar writes "If you are looking for another reason to throw out that old CRT and upgrade to LCDs here it is. The
DoubleSight DS-1900 packs two 19" LCD panels in a neat package and will take up less total space than that cathode ray tube whic has created the permanent bow in your desk. You will end up with 2560x1024 pixels of screen real estate, enough to increase productivity substantially, but you won't have to sacrifice too much space due to the reasonable size of the display's footprint. Just another reason to go LCD..."
LCD's (Score:5, Insightful)
What aboud the dead pixel policy?
Re:LCD's (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, there's people that will poo-poo LCDs until they render every itty-bitty thing perfectly at 100hz... As if their "super high quality" CRTs have phosphors that react fast enough to make a difference, and their eyes are from the planet Krypton....
Truthfully, I don't notice that much of a difference between this and my old CRT, except text is sharper, and I swear that colors in the magenta range seem more vibrant. The price was more than reasonable too--$360. You can find the 12 ms screens for around that now, but I needed mine in a hurry and couldn't find a place that carried them locally.
Re:LCD's (Score:2)
Re:LCD's (Score:3, Funny)
Re:LCD's (Score:2)
Re:LCD's (Score:3, Interesting)
The bit that gets me is, it takes up more space, not less. My desk space is limited by width rather than depth. Moving from a CRT to an LCD doesn't give me extra room at the sides, it gives me more room behind or in front of the monitor. Unless these LCDs are going to be in front of each other, it's not taking up existing CRT space.
Re:LCD's (Score:5, Informative)
As far as your space problem, my personal recommendation (having a similarly small desk) is to wall mount your LCDs.
I picked up a mount for about $40 not too long ago, and I can extent the monitor out from the wall, tilt and pivot it, et cetera. Combined with a wireless mouse and an easily stored keyboard, I can regain use of my entire desk fairly quickly.
Can't recommend it highly enough.
Re:LCD's (Score:4, Interesting)
Another technology that makes this expecially usefull is USB mice and keyboards. I actually have an extra set on my desk in just the right position so my coworker can do input when they're looking at my swiveled display. Ever have someone try to reach accross you so they can use your mouse to show you something? Ever switch chairs so someone else could "drive" and then realize you have stuff you need to show them too? Dual displays keyboards and mice are amoung the best investments I've ever made to enchance teamwork in our workplace.
TW
Re:LCD's (Score:4, Informative)
ISO 13406-2 (Class II) states that you can roughtly have 2 dead pixels per million pixels. So for a native resolution of 2560*1024, you will get nothing more than 4 dead pixels.
You can get better, of course, if the pannels are rated to Class I, they must be perfect, i.e. no dead pixels.
NeoThermic
Re:LCD's (Score:2)
My HP laptop(P2 400mhz 128mb ram just to age it for you) at work blurs when viewing images, and browsing pages. My Apple Powerbook, and NEC 18" (both brand new)displays work beautifully, for playing quake, HL2, etc.
So why don't you try it out. Technology is always changing, and improving. Last year's model might of sucked, but this year's might be great.
Re:LCD's (Score:3, Informative)
Long answer:
There are 3 lcd panel technologies: TN, *VA (MVA, PVA) and IPS. TN panels have achieved a very fast response time last year. My viewsonic vx912 has a response time of ~12ms, which is fine not only for movies, but for fast paced fps as well. The downside of TN panels is the smaller viewable angles, especially the vertical ones, and 6 bit panels (that achieve 16.2 million colors with a 'trick'). Contrast ratio is average.
*VA panels had an average of 25ms - that
Re:LCD's (Score:2, Informative)
What he's talking about is response time, which is the amount of time it takes an individual pixel to fully change from one color to another.. It's usually measured as the time between going from white to black, or from one grey to another grey... There is a defi
CRT can do this too (Score:2, Interesting)
But I can't argue that real desktop real estate will be better with CRT.
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:2)
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:2)
Indeed. I'm all for multiheaded setups. But until the quality of LCDs improves substantially, I'll be sticking with CRT. Yeah, so it requires more desk real estate. But I care more about my eyes[1] than I do about saving space. I'ts much cheaper, too.
[1] Many people claim that LCDs are better for your eyes than CRTs. All I can say is that my experience is the opposite. LCDs cause my eyes to strain, and give me a headache with prolonged use. And they're too low resolut
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:2)
Today's cheap LCD's don't suffer from most of those problems. Dead pixels is another story, but even then if a certain number are bad the manufacturer exchanges it for you.
Of course if you consider 1280x1024 at 18" dia. to be low resolution then you need your eyes checked anyway.
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:2)
Below this ratio, I agree, is inadequate.
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:2)
Perhaps you are comparing high-end CRTs to the LCDs that could be bought a few years ago? If you can get "high resolution" CRTs without eyestrain... I must assume you're talking about at least 1600x1200 at 85Hz or more. That's a damned expensive CRT, and until recently you had to pay about that much (if not more) to get an entry-level LCD doing 1024x768.
Modern LCDs have improved significantly... The worst LCDs of today outstrip most LCDs of a couple years ago. A good LCD that does 1600x1200 and doesn't
Re:CRT can do this too (Score:4, Informative)
Another problem I have is that most affordable LCD's have a 1280x1024 (aspect 5:4) resolution. In a world where widescreen TV is promoted as being more "natural" for the human brain (something I actually tend to agree with), why go from 4:3 to a narrower 5:4 resolution?
For now, I'm staying with CRT's, and I'm re-evaluating once 1600x1200 LCD's with a wide viewable angle are affordable.
No, it isn't. (Score:5, Informative)
Unless you are into digital editing, or watching TV on your PC, this dual monitor bit is nothing more than a rich man's folly.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:5, Informative)
Having a second monitor isn't all that expensive -- what like $150 for a 17" crt? Also, many people I know who program, including myself, find having two monitors much more productive. There is so much more desktop real estate. eg, if you are working in java, you can have the api open on a monitor as you are working on code. Or, have some code on one monitor, and test it on the other. etc etc. All the people I know who have had two monitors never go back.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:3, Funny)
Same thing can be said about a woman with no teeth.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
All the people I know who have had a Mac have never gone back.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
General office work too (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't tell the number of times I've had a spec open in one monitor, and whatever it was I was working on open in the other. Glancing back and forth between screens is a lot faster than grabbing the mouse, clicking on the taskbar icon, absorbing as much as possible, clicking back, and repositioning your cursor.
In my particular field, this lets you have the game you're working on open in one monitor, and an editor open in the other, so that you can change values / setups on the fly and see how that effects gameplay. Sure, I could click over, but this is much, much faster. For Midi work I've had the current detail window open in one monitor, and a broad overview of where you are in the song and detail on the vocals you are trying to sync to in the other. For web work, it's great to have Dreamweaver open in one monitor and either a spec or the actual rendered HTML in the other, set to a 1 second refresh. Or a Word Doc open in one monitor, and an Excel Spreadsheet open in the other. Anywhere you have to compare data, a dual-setup is much, much nicer. I'd even like to get a 3rd monitor as basically a dedicated chat/e-mail window, as most of the communication at my company happens over that medium.
Old CRT's are so plentiful these days that it doesn't make sense not to. I've found 4 free monitors in the past 2 weeks without even looking. If something is going to speed up your workflow, there is no reason not to do it.
If you've never used a dual-monitor setup, I can see how it would look frivilous. But nearly everyone who uses it loves it, and finds it helps them in their daily tasks. And with monitors basically free and all video cards shipping with two outputs anyway, it doesn't cost a thing to try it out.
Re:General office work too (Score:3, Interesting)
Faster, and less error prone.
For years, people have been talking about paperless offices, but that can't happen until computer displays are as convenient and as pervasive as paper already is.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Once you realize exactly how much information you can keep visible and how long it takes t
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Of course, the poster may have been referring to the particular setup described in the article... which is expensive, and LCD, so any videophile will go "ick".
Personally, 2 widescreen LCD's sounds like heaven to me. The only thing that gets me down to 1 monitor these days is my notebook, and I considered buying a dual screen notebook.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Granted, some people might have aesthetic sensibilities which are offended by the look of a rotting-yellow colored beige-box monitor on the desk, but I've never been one to get hung up on look when the usefulness/price factor is so good.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
So in the end I did away with dual head, bought a $600 20" monitor that does 2048x1532, and haven't looked back.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:5, Funny)
In my experience there are two types of people, those who have two (or more) monitors, and those who have never tried it.
How about a third type of person: someone who had a dual-head system, but whose manager took the extra video card and monitor so he could have TWO emails open at once.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
(And I do know what to look for, I also have a 17" BenQ illuminated crap (yes, it's that bad) and the ghosting is horrible)
I may not like having a Dell computer that much, but my Dell Flat Panel is the nicest I've seen.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
Most video cards now seem to support it, $100 will get an excellent dual head ATI or nVidia card new, you can buy Matrox G400s/G450s used for $20 or less now.
I had as much as triple head several years ago when I put multiple $10 Matrox Millennium I PCI cards in the same computer and put together a bunch of cast-off CRTs.
I wouild do dual head CRT right now, but my desk doesn't have space for two of the cast-off 21" screens,
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:5, Informative)
I knew I wanted at least a 19" that was capable of displaying 1600x1200. I scoured NewEgg, but all I got were 19" LCDs with a native resolution of 1280x1024. I could put up with a lower resolution, but the fact that they all run at a non-4:3 resolution kills the deal for me. It just looks wrong.
In order to get 1600x1200, I would have had to buy at least a 20". And judging from the current prices at NewEgg, that's at least $600. So I went with the Samsung 997DF-T/T [newegg.com] CRT monitor for $210. That's nearly a third of the cost for a flatscreen CRT with great colors and dotpitch.
LCDs are great, and had I $600+ to spend, I would have jumped at the chance. But for now, the cost difference is enough to make me stick with CRTs for now.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2, Informative)
The reason they run at 5:4 resolution is because, get this, the monitor itself is 5:4.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:3, Insightful)
I beg to differ. I'm a systems administrator and I've been using dual 19" LCD's on my Linux workstation for months. I regularly load my screens with more xterms than you can shake a stick at. I have two virtual desktops filled with terms, one with a browser and my e-mail each a full screen and one for various other things (usually Ethereal, Gimp or OpenOffice) and I still find
I loathe LCDs but they are nice for coding... (Score:2)
Results so far:
21" CRT is not as sharp, but very low eyestrain.
23" LCD (Sony, 1600$) can't be run at full resolution in digital mode, requires a new card (no problem on the Dell)
20" LCD (Dell, 400$) works just fine at 1680x1050 from the card.
Mottle in the LCDs drives me crazy- I keep trying to clean them to get rid of the speckles.
Grey response is poor, low end flare is high (non-s
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
I tried it with one screen and alt+tabbing, I gave up and demanded a 2nd monitor after 20 minutes.
Re:No, it isn't. (Score:2)
I still use the Dualview setting by
mirror (Score:4, Funny)
please copy this website
so that this slashdotting might ebb.
(anyone?)
Re:mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Just check mirrordot.org next time. They automatically do it.
Full mirror - All pages (Score:2)
Never! (Score:2)
Just get two of the same LCD (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just get two of the same LCD (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd used widescreen displays previously on notebooks, but it was nice to finally get that kind of screen ratio on my desktop. The biggest thing about widescreen is breaking users of the habit many have of maximizing and subsequently minimizing *every* window they use and instead simply sizing the window down and leavin
Re:Just get two of the same LCD (Score:2)
Re:Just get two of the same LCD (Score:2)
My Balance LCD is pretty nice, it has excellent contrast/brightness, but does have some color shift starting at about 45 degrees and has some reallllllly pitiful speakers.
Re:Just get two of the same LCD (Score:3, Interesting)
What used to be luxury displays will soon become commodity, much to the shagrin of the Apple Cinema fans (who fall back on the "aluminum style" defense).
Anyway, 24" is about the size limit a person can tolerate for a desktop display if you don't want to have to physically pan your head around to take it
Re:Just get two of the same LCD (Score:2, Informative)
Subscriber-free! (Score:5, Insightful)
Two is the wrong number (Score:2)
Isn't two LCDs exactly the wrong number to combine, since it puts the seam dead centre (or at least, that's how the image on their site looks to me)? I can see arguments for one large LCD, or possibly for a main central display flanked by secondary displays on either side, but two equivalent displays just seems awkward.
Re:Two is the wrong number (Score:2)
Re:Two is the wrong number (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Two is the wrong number (Score:2)
duh.
Re:Two is the wrong number (Score:2)
That being said, the difference between having dual 19" monitors and dual 20" monitors is amazing.
2560x1024 = 2.6 Megapixels
3200x1200 = 3.8 Megapixels
2.
Re:Two is the wrong number (Score:2)
Three monitors was absurd, and I ended up using two of them most of the time, and just had logs scrolling by on the third. (sometimes handy, but not worth the effort)
I'm now sitting in front of a pair of 17" 1280x1024 LCDs, and am very happy with the setup. I'm writing this on one screen while pondering the PHP code I'
Exactly. (Score:2)
Why? (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:2)
Don't throw it out (Score:2)
Increase Productivity Substantially (Score:2)
Exactly how many pixels does it take to increase productivity substantially? How much more productivity do you get with each additional pixel? Just wonderin'...
Re:Increase Productivity Substantially (Score:5, Funny)
Apparently, about a million. I'd say round it to a million, maybe make 1,000,000 pixels == 1 substantial productivity increase, call it 1Mipx=1spi
More Pixels But Less Dead Pixels (Score:2)
When I purchased my monitor, I ensured that I bought it from only a local (i.e., not Internet fly-by-night operation) store with a return policy. My concern is that a small but not insignificant percentage of monitors suff
Not enough! (Score:2, Interesting)
(Sorry, the site is rather awful, check out the source, eww)
Is there a rate sheet somewhere? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is there a rate sheet somewhere? (Score:2)
I know what is. An story announcing a Dell laptop for x hundred dollars off if you order this month is a slashvertisement. Especially since discounts aren't news for nerds, and Dell laptops don't usually have new technology which is news for nerds.
A story announcing new low web hosting rates from a certain company is a slashvertisement. No new technology there, just lower prices which are not news for nerds.
Do you see the difference? To me, a m
Re:Is there a rate sheet somewhere? (Score:2)
"Increase productivity substantially"? (Score:2)
Furthermore, I can also draw up
Re:"Increase productivity substantially"? (Score:2)
Re:"Increase productivity substantially"? (Score:2)
If I'm debugging it's even better as I can have program and logs etc running on one screen and the debugger on the other.
Many businesses don't buy added screens despite the added productivity because the people signing the purchase orders are not the sam
And the price is ... (Score:3, Insightful)
When you consider that you're going to need to get a second video card, if you don't already have on lying about, just buying a 23" LCD (about 1920x1200) seems like a much better solution.
I'm guessing that someone has probably come up with a VESA compliant mount for two screens, or if they haven't, you could probably make your own from an existing base, a bit of sheet steel, a drill, and a few screws
Of course, the real issue the is stability of the base
I would think that the advantages to the small footprint would be those that couldn't fit two monitors side by site normally -- which would mean it'd be extending over the edge of the desk, and has that much further to fall when someone bumps it. (unless you VHB it down to the desk, of course)
Re:And the price is ... (Score:2)
Try it, you'll like it (Score:4, Interesting)
For example:
1) Writing code with your editor on one screen and a spreadsheet or word processor document on the other.
2)Preparing a report on one while surfing the web for references on the other.
3) Reading e-mail with your list of messages on one screen and the current message on the other.
4) Reading Slashdot on one screen with The Article on the other.
(Okay, I'll admit scenario #4 is a little farfetched.) :-)
--Greg
Re:Try it, you'll like it (Score:2)
The way I see dual monitors is that it just saves you alt-tabbing or tiling windows. Multiple desktops (as is common in linux) with the desktop switching achieved by a footswitch would be a simpler arrangement.
Re:Try it, you'll like it (Score:2)
I agree. I tried two for a while and it never did much for me.
I now run a 21 inch 1600x1200 LCD in portrait mode, since most docs, pdf, web pages run portrait mode. PDF bigger than real size is sweet, full page as well.
Now, I would love to have 3x as much real estate one day. 3x1200 wide by 1600 tall. The two monitor deal seemed distracting, like you have to change focus off the main but maybe one on each side would be more useful and balanced...
Picture (Score:2)
I find it funny that the sight lists the price of this monitor at $1337.00. Somebody is having fun with it...
Oh, and on the whole 2 monitors in 1 thing, I think it is kind of silly. You either buy 2 LCD monitors and dual-monitor them for cheaper, or if you really want a 30" LCD screen then by all means, get a REAL one, not one with an inch thick black line going down the middle.
New term " air space " (Score:2)
Besides, LCD's still arent as 'crisp' and 'responsive' as a good monitor.. Both can easily cause eye strain.
It's crap (Score:2)
A better idea would be to get two nice monitors with thin bezels [viewsonic.com] and get a dual monitor VESA mount [viewsonic.com].
Re:It's crap (Score:2)
Re:It's crap (Score:2)
Re:It's crap (Score:2)
Most people prefer less PC on their desks, not more :(.
Re:It's crap (Score:2)
Prior art? (Score:2)
Tigervista have been doing this for years. (Score:5, Insightful)
Digital Tigers [digitaltigers.com] have been making multi LCD monitors like these for years. They offer 2, 3, 4 or 6 screens on a single stand
The best option to my eyes is the Tigervista Power Trio, one large LCD flanked by two smaller ones mounted portrait. This neatly gets around the problem of having a 'seam' down the middle of your eyeline where the screens join.
Oh and before the accusations fly I don't work for the company, but I have been lusting after one of their screen setups for a while now.
Of course you do need an extra graphics card to power the third screen, and the screens are by no means cheap.
Nothing special, really... (Score:3, Interesting)
It is much cheaper do one yourself with your own LCD's and a stand like these: horizontal [touchscreens.com] or vertical [touchscreens.com].
so when are they gonna (Score:2)
desktop LCDs in general (Score:2)
All that productivity... (Score:2)
Ah, so that's what they're calling gaming these days...
Daddy, what's that black thing with the metal bit? (Score:3, Funny)
Is there *anyone* out there with the money to spend on this that does't have a CD/DVD drive? I'm willing to guess that the proportion of (potential) buyers without a floppy drive will far outweigh those without a CD drive.
Besides which, if a floppy is that important, they could put a "create floppy" option on the CD.
2560*1024? (Score:4, Insightful)
For that kind of money I'll just get myself an Apple Cinema Display instead. What's a couple more 100 dollars when you are spending that much already?
Viewsonic has had this for at least a year (Score:3, Informative)
Big deal, Viewsonic has offered stands that mount any of their Pro series LCDs (15" to 21") in not only dual horizontal [viewsonic.com] but also dual vertical [viewsonic.com], triple wide [viewsonic.com] and quad (2x2) [viewsonic.com] layouts. You buy the standard LCDs, remove the included bases, and mount them to the special stands. If you ever decide to split them up, you still have the original bases to reattach and use standalone elsewhere.
I priced out the same 2-wide setup at CDW with 19" ViewSonics and it came out cheaper, for better quality monitors IMHO.
Who so wide ? (Score:3, Interesting)
I would have made it 2048x1280 - 1:1.6 is a more natural aspect ratio.
The onbly large resolution screen that is made right that I have seen is the Apple 30".
Re:2560x1024 fractal wallpapers (Score:4, Informative)
This means that the pixels on your CRT won't be square, leading to the screen appearing stretched horizontally.
With an LCD, the resolution is factory set, so a 1280x1024 screen will actually be physically 5:4, and so the pixels will still be square.