Does such a monitor exist?

[A Traveller]

Hi All.

With almost all monitors being widescreen nowadays, is it possible to buy a new monitor with the following specifications:-

Squarish shape - not widescreen.
Around 23" actual viewable screen WIDTH (not diagonal).
At least 1920 x whatever resolution (is 2560 possible?)

What is the minimum that one of these would cost, IF it actually exists?

Thanks.

[lordsmurf]

I never saw a 23" non-WS monitor as an LCD.
The largest was 20-21", I opted for a 19" It's still not 4:3

The 22-24" WS ones are really nice.

[jagabo]

Biggest I've seen is around 21 inch with 1600x1200. And they're not cheap.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010190020%201301922115&bo...lt=True&Page=3
Get a 30 inch widescreen monitor and ignore the extra width:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010190020+1309825151&QksA...e=&srchInDesc=

[A Traveller]

Thanks smurf/jagabo.

jagabo, I may be able to ignore the extra width, but certainly cannot ignore the extra $$$ !! Haha.

[Seeker47]

Hi All.

With almost all monitors being widescreen nowadays, is it possible to buy a new monitor with the following specifications:-

Squarish shape - not widescreen.
Around 23" actual viewable screen WIDTH (not diagonal).
At least 1920 x whatever resolution (is 2560 possible?)

What is the minimum that one of these would cost, IF it actually exists?

Thanks.

I know someone who really dislikes the WS aspect ratio. He was able (with a bit of research help) to find a 19" Viewsonic that was 4:3, pretty decent, and reasonably priced. The Planars have been pretty good panels, and they may still have some, though pricier and only sold direct. Also true of some Dells, which were historically rebadged Samsungs . . . but maybe no longer the case. I think there are still some larger 4:3 CRT models around (check out Iiyama, for example), though these will be bulkier, much heavier, and expensive. Non-WS 21" and over is going to be tougher to find, whether in CRT or LCD.

[A Traveller]

Hi Seeker47.

Thanks for your information.

It would have to be bigger than 19", I'm afraid. At the moment I'm not considering a CRT. I've got a 17" and with the amount of space that is taking, I dread to think what a bigger one would be like!

No problem, as mentioned in another thread, there are widescreens which I like and hope to buy asap. I would have had to give it some more thought though if there did exist a nice big square monitor, as that would have been my natural first choice.

Thanks everyone.

[lordhutt]

21.3 is about as large as you will find.

I have a Samsung that I bought a few years back...paid about $800...and unlike your normal price drops...these have not!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010190020%201301922115%20...4&name=21.3%22

There is a used one on Amazon for about $400
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-SyncMaster-213-display-DVI-D/dp/B0000A03NH/ref=sr_1_1?ie...2368854&sr=8-1

[jagabo]

Consider the possibility of two smaller 4:3 or 5:4 monitors in portrait mode. Not good for movies though!

[A Traveller]

Thanks for the help.

The monitor would have to be brand new. Unfortunately, that would take it out of my budget range. Great suggestions though, very much appreciated. That Samsung doesn't look too bad at all!

They have to be good at video as well.

Thanks again everyone.

[ocgw]

Hi All.

With almost all monitors being widescreen nowadays, is it possible to buy a new monitor with the following specifications:-

Squarish shape - not widescreen.
Around 23" actual viewable screen WIDTH (not diagonal).
At least 1920 x whatever resolution (is 2560 possible?)

What is the minimum that one of these would cost, IF it actually exists?

Thanks.

Hanns-G 28" 1200x1920 $309.95USD

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824254026

ocgw

peace

[jagabo]

Squarish shape - not widescreen.

Hanns-G 28" 1200x1920 $309.95USD
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824254026

Hanns·G HG-281DPB Black 28" 3ms Widescreen LCD

[A Traveller]

Thanks ocgw/jagabo for the suggestions.

Remember when I mentioned a few posts ago that there were some monitors that I liked and would be buying them if nothing comes up, well, the ones you suggested, were the very same ones!

There is a problem though. The monitors only have VGA and HDMI and comes with a DVI to HDMI cable. I I realised AFTER buying that there are also models available with a DVI connection as well as HDMI and VGA.

Is it worth returning it (I haven't opened it yet)? I will only be connecting my pc to it, so I don't have to worry about unplugging cables or using switchers at the moment. It will be a dual monitor setup though.

My question is, what disadvantages could I face using the HDMI port, rather than using a DVI port? If I had a monitor with a DVI port AND an HDMI port and would only connect my pc, which of the two would be the natural (or better) choice to connect with?

Thanks.

[jagabo]

As far as computers are concerned DVI=HDMI.

[A Traveller]

Thanks jagabo.