Bring back 1920x1200 displays at decent prices.
Anyone "in the know" understand why they've basically stopped making 1920x1200 monitors (for both desktop and mobile computers)?
I've read a number of technical and marketing articles on the so-called why "they" dropped 1920x1200
displays, but the stated reasons just do NOT make sense to me...in either category...when one takes into account the advantages inherent in going from x1080 to x1200.
I can't believe the claims x1200 is THAT much more expensive to produce than x1080 displays these days of 60 inch LED TVs*
, and IMO the visual advantages of x1200 alone far outweigh any possible technical/quality impacts on manufacturing. All arguments drop out when the massive usability improvements of x1200 are considered for virtually all possible customer uses.
1920x1200 is the BEST format I've ever encountered, and I believe the market would explode for such displays were they re-introduced and reasonably priced. The marketing points would make them stand-out above the common-place x1080 displays. Customers would
take notice and it would be in a positive way.
Even 27-inch x1200's used to be available for just over $200 and now they're either not available or when available (from now limited manufacturers) they are ridiculously priced at premiums of $200 and MORE above the "normal" 1920x1080 monitors.
1920x1200 provides vastly superior usability and flexibility on home computers. An x1200 display provides major extra display space for toolbars, gadgets, status/monitoring/commo box insets, icons, avatars, and small PiP apps, thus leaving much more room for primary content.
In particular x1200 provides major commo, "status", and "Situational Awareness" advantages for serious Gamers
, without having to buy a second monitor (assuming a game even easily supports customized secondary information on a second monitor). It would instantly obsolete the need for auxiliary monitor or keyboard displays (e.g. like premium Logitech G519s and similar) while allowing one to not split attention between the primary action display and the keyboard status display.
In my opinion, 1920x1080p movies watched at full-screen 1920x1200p simply looks
far superior to the same movies displayed at full-screen on a 1920x1080 display. The x1200's extra ~10% in "stretched" vertical size really
adds to the viewing experience...and it does so without unacceptable levels of anthropomorphic feature distortion. This is contrasted with the un-ignorable facial ratio distortions (aka "fatness") one sees in horizontally stretched movies (e.g. displaying 4:3 movie "stretched" to full-screen 1920x1080 display (or even partial stretching).
In fact, x1200 also helps when viewing adapted 4:3 and dynamic anamorphic aspects by reducing the apparent introduced "fatness" that horizontal stretching produces. And if one is a purist, one can always go back to the original resolution if desired, which just puts black bars on the screen. Black bars can even cover up a multitude of sins. They can be a significant positive
for lower-quality monitors in which white-light bleeding from the corners and/or edges is a problem. They prevent such bleed-through from interfering with the actual movie content while retaining full-size, full-resolution imaging of the original content.
For document viewing and editing 1920x1200 is just unmatched by any 1920x1080 display, especially when you orient the display in portrait mode. The extra space is also handy when editing HD video by providing an area on the display for editing tool bar management that doesn't interfere with the video being fully displayed in 1920x1080.
Bring back 1920x1200.
Edit to add:
(Keep in mind these are TVs, which thus include totally un-needed tuner circuitry, so for comparison purposes to a comparable physical size 1920x1200p monitor's screen, the cost of these units could be reduced even more by eliminating the TV-related components)
Compare New40" 1080p (Chinese name) LED backlit HDTV=$250 post-Christmas sale
Compare New46" 1080p LED backlit HDTV Hisense mod 46K360M for $430+tax reg price at local Walmart (while surprisingly $530 at Newegg
for a refurbished
Compare New46" 1080p LED edgelit HDTV Westinghouse for $370 Newegg
Compare New32" 1080p LED (backlit???) HDTV-Seiki SE32FY22 for $200 (free ship)
Compare Refurb50" 1080p LED $350 (after rebate) HDTV-Coby LEDTV5028 (edgelit?, plus S&H?)
50" 1080p LED $400 Changhong HDTV-LED50YC2000UA (backlit?)
...Surprised by incredibly positive 5* and 4* (5*=highest) Newegg
...90% of ~150 reviews (still 86% of ~330reviews as of 20140624)
...were 5* or 4* (5*=best) Item=N82E16889623018 (but the 60Hz should show at 50")
Also, check this out...is "TCL"=="Changhong"?
that this "TCL" HDTV listed on TigerDirect
is from the same "core" manufacturer as the $400 Changhong HDTV-LED50YC2000UA above. The pricepoints and specifications are close-enough for "fudging" (to prevent customer's directly comparing in the marketing literature) but the I/O connections AND
their physical positions, the 7 control buttons AND
their physical positions, etc suggest to me these may
have the same core circuitry/LCDpanel inside.
$460 New50" 1080p LED TCL HDTV LE50FHDF3010 (Item YTE-102030368)
Compare New 40" $270 Seiki SE40FY27 HDTV LED (specs don't say edge or backlit, but reviewer said backlit) Newegg
50" $355 Changhong 50" 1080p LED HDTV after
subtracting value of included six HDMI Cables (worth about $4each) in "combo" deal, Newegg
"shellshocker" price (this is same model LED50YC2000UA LCD TV above that 5 months ago was $400 just for the TV) Still overwhelmingly positive reviews (86% of ~330 reviews)
So, again...a 1920x1200p display of a good size without all the HDTV bells and whistles should be relatively dirt cheap