Slashdot Mirror


Large LCD HDTV as a Computer Monitor?

An anonymous reader asks: "I have seen $2000 27"and $1400 23" HDTV LCD sets at Costco, and similarly priced smaller sets elsewhere. I asked a salesperson (elsewhere) if I could try one with my laptop's DVI, and was told that the TVs wouldn't work well. DVI and VGA inputs, 400-600:1 contrast ratio, fast refresh rates (for gaming?), and HDTV capability for other uses, why can't they work? The prices run from as above to very significantly more. Has anyone tried the inexpensive large LCD HDTVs, or the expensive ones, for their desktop? I want to reduce the clutter in my family room and upgrade to highdef? Is it time?"

13 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. It's the resolution, silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just think about a desktop at 1280 x 720 at 27". Shudder...

    1. Re:It's the resolution, silly by T-Ranger · · Score: 5, Funny

      At that point you stop measuring Dots Per Inch, but Inches Per Dot.

  2. Apple 23" is $2000 by potuncle · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can get a 23" Cinema display from Apple for $1999 (plus $100 for a DVI to ADC adapter if you don't have a Mac). It displays 1920 x 1200. Plus, Apple's LCD displays are beautiful is design and image quality. Also, if you decide you don't like it or want something else later on, Apple displays have a much higher resale value that any other LCD displays.

  3. Large LCD Screens as monitors by dfinney · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'll see these fairly often at tradeshows. They make it easy to see the software from a relative distance during a software demonstration.

    I bought a large screen LCD for my company to use during such a software demo. We wanted to keep it in our development lab, figuring that a huge monitor would be a Good Thing.

    The unfortunate reality is that, for reasons that remain mysterious to me, the maximum resolution when driven by a computer is only 1280 x 768. This means that you're not getting a massive, high resolution display; you're just getting really big pixels.

    I spent some time searching, but couldn't find _any_ manufacturers whose large screens could be driven to 1080i HDTV resolution (1920 x 1080). Quite a disappointment.

    At a recent AFCEA show, I saw a 3000 x 3000 pixel large screen flat panel display in the Matrox booth. They said it was a prototype display made by Toshiba. They said it would be available in about 1 year for $30K.

    Is there someone out there with an EE type background that can explain why, with pixel addressability of 1920 x 1080 we're not seeing any LCDs that can be used at this resolution as computer monitors?

    1. Re:Large LCD Screens as monitors by justMichael · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here is one, that's close, not exactly 1920 x 1080, but 1900 x 1200.

      Or if you really have money to burn, you can get one from IBM at a blistering 3840 x 2400 for a measly $8k plus a grand or so for a card to drive it.

  4. Opposing design phillosophies by psyconaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TV: continuous tones, smooth (i.e.) slow transitions, discrete pixels

    Monitor: clearly defined, sharp, ability to invididually see a pixel.

    Ipso facto: you're probably going to be disappointed trying to use a TV as a computer display.

    -psy

  5. My take on it, as an LCD HDTV owner by hawkstone · · Score: 4, Informative

    Keep in mind that HDTV does not even mean a full 1080 lines of resolution necessarily.

    Specifically, I have an HDTV LCD rear projection 50". Its native resolution is 1280x720, but with a little overscan you have to cut that down to about 1200x680 (roughly). I believe this resolution is typically the same for DLP rear projections and LCOS. I suspect that LCD flat panels are the same. Some DLP TVs appeared to me to have a limited color depth and too much dithering was apparent. I don't think this is an inherent problem with the technology, however, as DLP projectors work quite well hooked up to computers.

    An "EDTV" plasma flat-panel TV is (IIRC) 768x480. That is clearly inadequate for use as a computer monitor. I think even the HDTV plasmas are commonly only 720 vertical lines. The few TVs that actually have 1080 lines of resolution are mostly CRT tubes (e.g. CRT RP).

    The most important question is what the native resolution of these LCD flat panels is, and whether or not there is a computer-compatible connector that makes full use of it. For example, my TV I specifically got because it has both RGB (HD15) and DVI inputs, and I can get a resolution that maps directly to the pixels on the screen.

    Unfortunately, this resolution (again, 1280x720) is not really adequate for full-time use as a computer monitor. It's great for the occasional web surfing, but I wouldn't want to do any real work on it.

    In summary: If you can deal with the resolution, and there is a good connector on the TV (DVI is ideal, VGA is acceptable), then you will be fine. There's nothing particularly wrong with the attributes of these LCD TVs for use as computer monitors, in general, including color depth and pixel response times. (Once you start looking at other technologies like CRT RP, DLP, and Plasma, these other issues may become problematic.)

  6. Projector by Coppit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given that you can get an X1 projector for a lot less, why would you try to put a huge, expensive TV on your desktop? ;)

  7. Video-Fu by kurosawdust · · Score: 5, Funny
    I want to reduce the clutter in my family room and upgrade to highdef? Is it time?

    When you can snatch the DVI adapter out of my hand, grasshopper, it will be time for you to upgrade.

  8. Re:Standard TVs? by woobieman29 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You little whippersnappers must be too young to remember the days when hooking your computer up to the TV was your ONLY option? In my day, we had to hook our Commodore 64 up to a 13" Zenith with vacuum tubes - and we liked it!

    --
    \/\/oobie
  9. I have a 42 inch Sony LCD RPTV by multiplexo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    that I use as a computer monitor with my HTPC. The resolution is not high enough for dedicated work, it's OK for websurfing if I want to look something up on IMDB but the resolution is too low for any sustained work. It is however pretty good for playing Civ III or other PC games and as soon as I get some time I'm going to set it up to play upsampled DVDs.
    I never had any luck using the DVI inputs on the TV with my video cards, I'd end up with horribly low resolutions or weird looking stretched screens. I finally went out and got an ATI video card and one of ATI's VGA to component video converters and that worked pretty well with Powerstrip to give me a resolution of 1280 by 680.
    Again, it's not perfect, but it's not bad for light web surfing, playing games, etc.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
  10. I think I know why by Daniel+Rutter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    > why can't they work?

    I talk about this in one of my letters columns.

    In brief: They will work, but only for suitably small values of "work", because they'll only accept DVI-HDTV input. That's a subset of regular DVI that only supports a few scan rates. If you can't goose your video card into outputting the resolution and frequency combinations the screen wants, you're out of luck.

  11. The agony of a non-HDTV! by gregarican · · Score: 4, Informative

    I recently assembled a VIA EPIA mini-ITX box to integrate into my home theater system. The idea was having a small form factor that would fit into the entertainment center, utilize an RCA out video port for my 51" rear projection TV, and operate with a wireless keyboard/trackball device. All of that came together fine. On paper at least.

    Where I was extremely let down was in the quality of the TV display. I don't have an HDTV, just an older rear projection set. I have to enable the Windows Accessibility Options in order to even come close to reading the fonts on the screen. Really ugly Windows High Contrast Black (large fonts). Yuck.

    When I called VIA to get the display driver specs versus typical TV specs I was told that 800x600 was the best resolution I could hope for. And that this sort of setup is primarily intended for watching videos. Any onscreen fonts are really pushing it.

    Can't complain in that the whole setup was around $600 in all, but I am still amazed at how average TV screen resolution is so much poorer than what a home PC can put out. I guess HDTV would be a good step up for me, but then again I am not relishing shelling out $1500-2000 only 5-6 years after getting my current set.

    [/rant]