Re: [vox] question about TFT's and flat screen monitors

[Rod Roark <roMAPSd@sunsetsystems.com>]

I think the word "flat" just refers to the front, not the back.  Don't 
count on them being any thinner than regular CRTs.

LCD displays are nice.  And they are "bigger" in the sense that the 
entire advertised screen size is viewable, so a 15" LCD is comparable 
to a 16" or 17" CRT.

-- Rod
   http://www.sunsetsystems.com/

On Saturday 08 December 2001 10:03 am, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> dear all,
>
> i have my heart set on a 19" monitor, or bigger, with a very short
> "depth" (it should be "slim") to conserve desk space.
>
> i've been looking at TFT's, which i gather are very slim LCD
> technology displays.
>
> recently, i came across "flat screen monitors" which i thought were
> synonymous with TFT, but now i see this is wrong.  from reviews, it
> seems that flat screen monitors are CRT based.
>
> the viewsonic P225F is a flat screen monitor, about $740, 22 inches
> (drool!) and gets extremely good reviews.  i'm almost sold.
>
> the only thing i'm concerned with is deskspace.  i can't seem to
> find any mention of the monitor's physical depth -- ideally, what i
> get will be a very thin so i can use more of the desk space for
> writing, as opposed to using the desk space to hold a monitor.
>
> are flat screen monitors supposed to be thin?   all the pictures
> i've seen show the monitor at an angle, so you can't really gauge
> how thin they are. my current monitor is almost a foot and half
> deep, so just about anything would be an improvement.
>
> if i'm worried about slimness, should i just be looking at TFT's?  
> or are flat screen monitors comparible in slimness?
>
> pete
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox