Slashdot Mirror

And it is compatible with other things than Macs (as the cinema display is not). The best price I can find on it is $3940; the list is $5370.

Even better is the IBM C220, at about 3Kx2.5K, but it requires a special IBM graphics card and special drivers. Moreover, it runs $21,000.

HW/SW question for slashdotters: For my next system, I'm thinking of getting either a 1920x1440 or a 1600x1200 LCD (probably the VS VP201, instead of the 230--I can afford it better). I like large virtual displays under Linux/XFree86 (currently I'm running 2Kx1.5K that seems to be the most that nVidia will support under XFree86). What graphics card should I choose to be able to get VIRTUAL 3200 2000?

Viewsonic VP230mb

ViewSonic proudly introduces the 23.1" VP230mb LCD display with 170 viewing angles and a 1600 x 1200 native resolution

As for some new cars: here's a good place to start :)

Uh, when I set up X to refresh my Viewsonic P225F at 20hz it still flickers...

• The Sony GDM-FW900, a 24" (22.5" viewable) screen that'll do 1920 x 1200 @ 85Hz, and 2304 x 1440 max. You won't believe how beautiful it is 'til you see it. Sony says retail is $1,999, but I've seen it for much less. The Viewsonic P225f is also very nice, 22", much cheaper.
  
• My favorite solution, 2 19" screens on a Matrox DualHead card. Right now I'm using 2 Viewsonic P95fs. Perfectly flat, max 1920 x 1440. Overall I think I like Iiyamas better, but these are nice.
  

• The Sony GDM-FW900, a 24" (22.5" viewable) screen that'll do 1920 x 1200 @ 85Hz, and 2304 x 1440 max. You won't believe how beautiful it is 'til you see it. Sony says retail is $1,999, but I've seen it for much less. The Viewsonic P225f is also very nice, 22", much cheaper.
  
• My favorite solution, 2 19" screens on a Matrox DualHead card. Right now I'm using 2 Viewsonic P95fs. Perfectly flat, max 1920 x 1440. Overall I think I like Iiyamas better, but these are nice.
  

The Viewpad

Not as cumbersome as a laptop, but larger than a iPaq or Jornada, which makes it ideal for me.

I think the failure of this thing is more due to the keyboard and mouse than anything else. If I want those things, I'd use a true laptop. A truely useful network appliance, on the other hand, would be closer to a large-screen PocketPC or Palm. Something with enough screen real estate to be useful, but no keyboard or mouse, just a finger or stylus. You could cradle it in one arm and input to it with the other like you would a clipboard. And it should have the ability to play streaming audio so that it could be used like a portable radio. I'd love something like that, so I could tote it all over the house and use it without having to set it down on something. Some of webpads like the Viewsonic 100 are getting close.

One of the biggest reasons many of these things bombed is that you had to subscribe to a proprietary service to use them. You can't bring your own ISP, you have to use MSN, AOL, etc. Subscribing to an additional service is no big deal if you live in an area with local dialup for that service, but in rural communities like mine even AOL and WebTV are long distance so at best you have to pay ISP charges, then an additional amount to use the service packaged with the device. At worst, you pay long distance for the privilege of getting email on the thing.

The people who would actually consider buying something like this probably want a bit more versatility. I desperately want a web appliance I can take around my apartment with me, but I want it to be configurable for my own internet service.

As I said in another comment, so far ViewSonic seems to have the closest thing to what I am looking for: http://www.viewsonic.com/products/viewpad100.cfm.

ViewSonic is releasing the ViewPad 100. Personally, this one makes me kinda moist, although I really want more than a PDA ...

ViewSonic is releasing the ViewPad 100. Personally, this one makes me kinda moist, although I really want more than a PDA ...

about one year ago. i set two limitations to the design of my "lan party computer"

1. it must use standard components (to make it easier to find parts to buy)
2. it must be cheap (at least cheaper than a comparable laptop)

this is a list of components that i used to build the system.
i updated parts of the list to reflect what components i would buy if i was going to build it today.

case mini tower $60
monitor 14" lcd $600
motherboard micro atx $100
processor P3 800Mhz 100FSB $160
ram 256MBpc100SDRAM $100
video Geforce2GTS64MB $195
keyboard mini-keyboard $40
mouse cordless optical $70
hard drive 40GB ide $100
cd-rom drive Plextor16/10/40A $250
floppy 1.44MB Generic $10
sound card SB Live Value $40
network card netgear FA310TX $20
cat5 cable 14 feet $20
headphones koss td61 $20
carry strap GearGrip Pro $35

other stuff:
cable bag a small, strong bag to attach to the side of the case to hold all the cables
power cable with 3 outlets that have 3 prongs each to accommodate the power cables for your system and monitor

i attached the lcd monitor to one side of the case and the cable bag to the other side. i put all the cables attached to the computer inside the bag to get them out of the way. then, when i went to a lan party i would only have to take one power cable, one network cable, the mini-keyboard, cordless mouse, and headphones out of the cable bag. everything was already connected at the back of the computer so there was no onsite setup involved.

i also screwed a piece of plexiglass onto the lcd monitor to protect the screen. (yes it was stupid to drill holes into a monitor that i just spent $900 on at that time, but it worked)

i had a lot of fun with that computer. i even dropped it down a flight of stairs once and the case was bent and all the pci cards popped out of their sockets. i put it back together and it worked fine.
the only downside to building this system was that it weighed about 30lbs. although if you spent more money on a lunchbox case with integrated lcd it would still weigh a lot.

unfortunately i never took any pictures of it for posterity and i ended up dismantling it for parts about 6 months ago, but i'm sure you get the idea.

-stan

I presume the LCD screen comes from Viewsonic, and come with the requisite screen savers showing three parrots, each naked as a jaybird, in various tropical settings?

Any decent monitor will support 110hz refresh or better at 640x480. Check out this low end viewsonic monitor: G655 15". If you want something larger there is this very nice PS790 19"(I have one of these) and the totally outrageous P817 21". Both support better then 110hz at 1024x780, and don't even list the refresh rate at 640x480. Ofcourse if you insist on getting that $200 19" monitor, you get what you pay for. There is much more to monitors then just the numbers. Better, more expensive monitors last longer and, more importantly, look better.

Any decent monitor will support 110hz refresh or better at 640x480. Check out this low end viewsonic monitor: G655 15". If you want something larger there is this very nice PS790 19"(I have one of these) and the totally outrageous P817 21". Both support better then 110hz at 1024x780, and don't even list the refresh rate at 640x480. Ofcourse if you insist on getting that $200 19" monitor, you get what you pay for. There is much more to monitors then just the numbers. Better, more expensive monitors last longer and, more importantly, look better.

Any decent monitor will support 110hz refresh or better at 640x480. Check out this low end viewsonic monitor: G655 15". If you want something larger there is this very nice PS790 19"(I have one of these) and the totally outrageous P817 21". Both support better then 110hz at 1024x780, and don't even list the refresh rate at 640x480. Ofcourse if you insist on getting that $200 19" monitor, you get what you pay for. There is much more to monitors then just the numbers. Better, more expensive monitors last longer and, more importantly, look better.

Viewsonic's VPA150 does the exact same thing. Extremely disorienting though; I gave up on it after less than a minute of use like that...

I'm pretty sure that the Mitsubishi is 20" viewable even though they call it a 22" monitor, which puts it in the same category with other 21" monitors. There seems to be a trend in the monitor industry to play games with the specs. Even dot pitch is being flubbed with, Hitachi states the horizontal dot pitch (which is often .21 or .22 mm instead of the diagonal dot pitch that most other companys state (which, for a monitor with a horizontal dot pitch of .22 mm would be about .26 mm) Also the maximum resolution on that Viewsonic monitor is 1920 x 1440, not 1600 x 1200. see http://www.viewsonic.com/prod/DATA SHTS/PT795.HTM