i would be so happy with a 30" lcd, man....
i have two 19" lcds next to each other in my office, and its great

are you joking? you have to be the first person ever to complain about a 30" monitor.

I assume you're working on a mac, and if so, just have the window you're working in open to the same size as 19" monitor. problem solved.

lean back farther, or send me your monitor please.

at work its 2 17"crt's, and a wide aspect laptop screen.
at home its 2 19" crt's which i think does the trick nicely.

19" LCD + 19" CRT... i need the missing LCD twin.

i would just call them fraternal twins.

I have worked off a 15" powerbook LCD screen for about three years and find it works well enough, although I don't draft as much as my staff. Everyone else is on a 21" Viewsonic CRT. I think they work pretty well.

Next time we move the office though I 'm going for the 30" LCD. Another friend who we consult with has one and it is just so-o-o-o-o-o nice to work off.

my 18" monitor screen flickers and does a shimmy when old father time across from me powers up his machine.

23" LCD

dual 19" would like dual 30" please

I use one 15" wide screen Dell M60 latop BUT the reslution is 1900 x 1200. Most 23" monitors don't even contain that many pixels. It is soooo crisp.

Dell 20" LCD and Dell 24" LCD (that runs at 1920x1200). Love'em, specially the 24".

dual monitor with 17" palette on left and 19" main screen on the right.

home: 20" apple cinema on left, 17" apple studio on right
work: 19" CRT on left, 17" CRT on right

smaller screens are used for palettes, secondary apps, etc. larger is obviously for the main program I'm using at the time. Now if only I could have two menu bars in OSX, I would immensly happy at home.

form64 hinted at this - but it's more than just size for me, it's resolution and pixel density.

my 22" crt runs at 2048x 1536, for a pixel density of around 130 ppi.
there's a second, old 17" crt for menus and photo viewers, etc off to the left - 1280x1024.

the thing I hate about most LCDs is the low pixel density...most are in the 80-95 ppi range, which is pretty much unusable, especially the small ones running 1600x1200 or lower. no room for anything on those. the 30" apple is around 100ppi, and isn't bad, but could be alot better.

enter...the IBM t221. 3840x2400 in a 22.2" LCD for a total of 204 ppi...think of that as the screen real estate of 4 1900x1200 screens. but at about $8500 for the latest revision. sparesum change, brother?

compare

but how can you possibly see anything on that screen? Most people find 1600x1200 tiny (for a 20/21").

I can see how this'll be great for HDTV and DVD, but for actual work?

Just curious.

on the crt or the t221?

on my crt- I'm used to it I guess. it's so much screen real estate, anything less feels cramped when working in autocad or photoshop, etc. the "white column" of archinect takes up about 1/3 the width of my screen.

on the t221- I've heard you have to increase the font size in windows for easily readable text... and actually that's the direction things seem to be headed in...future versions of windows will have better controls for adjusting to various pixel densities.

and even the highest spec HDTV signal is only 1920x1080 (or thereabouts) so any of the higher end monitors can handle that just fine.

impala:

just tell your boss you'd prefer a smaller one. i'm sure the next time your office buys a monitor they'd be more than happy to save a couple grand.

23" apple studio display widescreen here, by the way.

21'' CRT and 21'' LCD

I would be happy to trade my 19"CRT for the 30" ...i'll pay for shipping

20" Apple Studio Display at work, Dual 19" LCD/CRT combo at home.

i sat down in front of the dual 30" monitors at the apple store, and i can't fathom working on those. at least that close up. maybe you can move back farther? sorta defeats the purpose though.