Ask HN: What monitor do you use?
I am looking for a new monitor to buy, but do not have much knowledge of them. I will use it primarily for software development, so I would like one that is easy on the eyes. What monitor would you recommend? Also, would you recommend a dual screen setup?
10 comments
Hazro 27" IPS (2560x1440) with glass front. It has the exact same display as the Apple Cinema Display (presumably made by Samsung or LG, etc), yet cost half the price - £450. Best monitor I've ever had and a huge productivity increase. I couldn't recommend getting one of these more.
Link (though out of stock): http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-013-...
Link (though out of stock): http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-013-...
Same here, one at work and one at home. Crummy (cheap) construction, but a truly stunning panel.
Couldn't live without the extra real estate or an IPS panel anymore.
Couldn't live without the extra real estate or an IPS panel anymore.
A few people have mentioned the bad construction but I don't think it's too bad at all. Doesn't compare to a cinema display of course but comparable to any other monitor IMO.
I wish I had one of those at work! I have 2 small, very old monitors and my company won't buy any of us new monitors unless they break :-(
I wish I had one of those at work! I have 2 small, very old monitors and my company won't buy any of us new monitors unless they break :-(
Get as many pixels as you can afford in terms of money and desk space. Dual (and triple+) monitor setups are just a way of achieving that, and you should strive for it.
I have a Dell u2711, which is a great 27" 2560x1440 monitor that can be had for ~$800 on sale. Nice IPS panel technology (great viewing angles, great colour).
Or if you're not risk averse and can stick to a DVI connection, I just received a Yamakasi Catleap. Not familiar with that brand? Don't feel bad. It's a monitor made for the Korean market, with the same panel as the Dell above (and the 27" iMac/monitors), but it came to my door (in Canada) for $330 US. There's a forum thread at Overclockers.net with almost 5000 posts: http://www.overclock.net/t/1225919/yamakasi-catleap-monitor-...
I have a Dell u2711, which is a great 27" 2560x1440 monitor that can be had for ~$800 on sale. Nice IPS panel technology (great viewing angles, great colour).
Or if you're not risk averse and can stick to a DVI connection, I just received a Yamakasi Catleap. Not familiar with that brand? Don't feel bad. It's a monitor made for the Korean market, with the same panel as the Dell above (and the 27" iMac/monitors), but it came to my door (in Canada) for $330 US. There's a forum thread at Overclockers.net with almost 5000 posts: http://www.overclock.net/t/1225919/yamakasi-catleap-monitor-...
At work, a 27" cinema display, calibrated to have the same color profile as the iPhone I use for day to day development. Makes comparing the final output to mock ups really nice.
At home, I don't have a desk (no good place in my apt for it), so, no monitor there.
At home, I don't have a desk (no good place in my apt for it), so, no monitor there.
I have a 27" Apple LCD, 2560x1440...
I would check these out, supposedly the same LCDs used but a lot more affordable: http://www.ebay.com/sch/dcsamsungmall/m.html?_nkw=monitor...
Forum thread about them: http://bit.ly/GMvsdP
I would check these out, supposedly the same LCDs used but a lot more affordable: http://www.ebay.com/sch/dcsamsungmall/m.html?_nkw=monitor...
Forum thread about them: http://bit.ly/GMvsdP
I have a 1080p monitor on my desk, and a 1080p TV hooked up to my computer as well. In addition to playing movies, I use the TV to show people things. That way they don't have to squeeze behind my desk to see my monitor. Overall I'd say that 1080p is not a good resolution for a desktop monitor. It's much too wide for a single window and not quite wide enough for 2.
Definitely dual monitors. At home, I have a pair of 25.5" monitors: an ASUS and a Samsung. Both do 1920 x 1200 resolution.
At work, I have a 4 monitor setup (I'm a software architect):
* 19" @ 900 x 1440 (portrait)
* 2 x 27.5" @ 1920 x 1200 (a Hanns-G and a Hannspree)
* HP laptop @ 1600 x 900
You can find the latest Hanns-G @ NewEgg for around $260.
At work, I have a 4 monitor setup (I'm a software architect):
* 19" @ 900 x 1440 (portrait)
* 2 x 27.5" @ 1920 x 1200 (a Hanns-G and a Hannspree)
* HP laptop @ 1600 x 900
You can find the latest Hanns-G @ NewEgg for around $260.
Three monitors, side by side. The center is a 19" SyncMaster 997DF CRT at 2048×1536, the outer two are 23" ViewSonic VP2365wb (IPS) LCDs at 1920×1080. They're the same height vertically (although not the same resolution), so the result is quite harmonious. If you get an LCD then IPS is the only way to go, really.
I have a three monitor setup on my desktop right now and love the extra space. I picked up a few ASUS VS247H-P's when they were on sale for a good price. I can't comment on the quality compared to other modern displays considering I upgraded from two Viewsonic VG191b's.
27" Dell Monitors.
Here are a few hints on how to choose a monitor:
1) Display technology
Nowadays there are basically three types of displays being used in monitors: TN, IPS and PVA. You can google details about all three, but here's the basic break down:
TN is cheap crap used in 90% of all monitors, popular in consumer devices sold in supermarkets and such. It has only two advantages: it's cheap and it has very fast response times, which might be of some value if you're much into gaming. Apart from that, it's crappy viewing angles, pathetic color reproduction and a backlight that will burn your eyes dry. BTW, if a device description doesn't tell you what kind of display it uses, it means it's TN and they prefer not to disclose. Also, if it has 2 or 3ms response time, it must be TN.
IPS and PVA is the stuff of people who know what they're buying. Great colors, great viewing angles. IPS are generally better for heavily-lit environments (think your typical corporate office), while PVA are better for darker environments (think your home) and easier on your eyes.
There's also one important caveat with regards to IPS. "Classical" IPS is no longer made, the technology has evolved over the years and now it's stuff like S-IPS, H-IPS or e-IPS. So whenever you see IPS, it means you need to dig deeper into the tech specs, because it's going be some variant of IPS. And that is important, because in the recent 12 to 18 months the market was flooded with e-IPS displays, which are basically a cheaper, but simplified, and thus an inferior version of IPS. Which is still better than TN, so you might go for e-IPS as an economical choice, but you need to be aware of the trade-off.
2) Display surface.
Maybe it's a matter of taste, but in my opinion always go for matte over glossy. Glossy looks good in a store, because it seems clearer and the colors seem a little more vivid. And most customers, like children, go for the tasty Skittles, and not for the healthy fruit. But I find it to be an annoying compromise in terms of viewing comfort, because everything will reflect in a glossy screen. And I'm not talking just about bright light sources (like lamps or sun), but literally everything, even if in a much subtle way than a light source. That means, with a glossy screen you always get your screen picture polluted with subtle shades and shapes from your environment (including your ugly face ;).
3) Working space and orientation
Obviously, you'll want as many pixels, as possible. In my opinion, 1920x1200 is an absolute minimum. Now, the important question is how do you organize your virtual environment for your main work (i.e. programming, I assume). Do you work in a single text-editor window (say, Sublime Text 2), or an IDE? Or multiple texts side-by-side? If it's a single text window, I found it's very helpful if you can see as much of the code as possible (for better context awareness and browsing efficiency) which means putting a 1920x1200 monitor in portrait mode. So in that case you'll want a monitor with a pivot. If you can afford it, get two 1920x1200 monitors or one 2560x1600 (I guess 2560x1440 will do too, although I hate 16:9).
4) Manufacturers
Well, there are the popular, reasonably priced, medium quality manufacturers, like Dell or HP - the Fords and Chevies of monitor market.
There are the cheap alternatives, where either you consciously buy something lower quality for lower price or you do your research and find a little-known underdog that produces something decent. In that group I'd put all the Hazros, ASUSes and Hannsprees of this world.
There is the Jaguar of monitor market, i.e. Apple, which makes an overpriced product (very decent quality, but not mind-blowing). But some people fall for the looks, are blind fan-boys or most likely go for the popular image because they need the ego boost, to feel more sophisticated or artsy.
And then there are the Mercedes and BMWs of monitor market: NEC and Eizo. Those are of high quality and neat, understated design. Their higher models are basically the golden standard for professional graphics designers. Eizo has a slighter leg up in quality, but for me personally NECs look better with that black, rectangular shape, like the old-school ThinkPads (while with closed lid ;). Also worth noting, Eizo manufactures its products in Japan, not in China, like the rest of the herd.
5) Monitor reviews
Steer clear of popular, general IT/tech sites, like CNet or Engadget. These people will tell you about the input ports and parameters they've read in tech specs and give a vague impression of picture quality. Some have even heard of the different panel types, so will knee-jerk to praise anything IPS. But they don't really have a clue how to judge a monitor. Their reviews are as good as if you asked your buddy or neighbor about his display, but with nice photos.
For more valuable advice, you have to visit sites that are capable of making technical evaluations. Good starting places are probably TFT Central, Prad.de (there's an English version) and AnandTech.
1) Display technology
Nowadays there are basically three types of displays being used in monitors: TN, IPS and PVA. You can google details about all three, but here's the basic break down:
TN is cheap crap used in 90% of all monitors, popular in consumer devices sold in supermarkets and such. It has only two advantages: it's cheap and it has very fast response times, which might be of some value if you're much into gaming. Apart from that, it's crappy viewing angles, pathetic color reproduction and a backlight that will burn your eyes dry. BTW, if a device description doesn't tell you what kind of display it uses, it means it's TN and they prefer not to disclose. Also, if it has 2 or 3ms response time, it must be TN.
IPS and PVA is the stuff of people who know what they're buying. Great colors, great viewing angles. IPS are generally better for heavily-lit environments (think your typical corporate office), while PVA are better for darker environments (think your home) and easier on your eyes.
There's also one important caveat with regards to IPS. "Classical" IPS is no longer made, the technology has evolved over the years and now it's stuff like S-IPS, H-IPS or e-IPS. So whenever you see IPS, it means you need to dig deeper into the tech specs, because it's going be some variant of IPS. And that is important, because in the recent 12 to 18 months the market was flooded with e-IPS displays, which are basically a cheaper, but simplified, and thus an inferior version of IPS. Which is still better than TN, so you might go for e-IPS as an economical choice, but you need to be aware of the trade-off.
2) Display surface.
Maybe it's a matter of taste, but in my opinion always go for matte over glossy. Glossy looks good in a store, because it seems clearer and the colors seem a little more vivid. And most customers, like children, go for the tasty Skittles, and not for the healthy fruit. But I find it to be an annoying compromise in terms of viewing comfort, because everything will reflect in a glossy screen. And I'm not talking just about bright light sources (like lamps or sun), but literally everything, even if in a much subtle way than a light source. That means, with a glossy screen you always get your screen picture polluted with subtle shades and shapes from your environment (including your ugly face ;).
3) Working space and orientation
Obviously, you'll want as many pixels, as possible. In my opinion, 1920x1200 is an absolute minimum. Now, the important question is how do you organize your virtual environment for your main work (i.e. programming, I assume). Do you work in a single text-editor window (say, Sublime Text 2), or an IDE? Or multiple texts side-by-side? If it's a single text window, I found it's very helpful if you can see as much of the code as possible (for better context awareness and browsing efficiency) which means putting a 1920x1200 monitor in portrait mode. So in that case you'll want a monitor with a pivot. If you can afford it, get two 1920x1200 monitors or one 2560x1600 (I guess 2560x1440 will do too, although I hate 16:9).
4) Manufacturers
Well, there are the popular, reasonably priced, medium quality manufacturers, like Dell or HP - the Fords and Chevies of monitor market.
There are the cheap alternatives, where either you consciously buy something lower quality for lower price or you do your research and find a little-known underdog that produces something decent. In that group I'd put all the Hazros, ASUSes and Hannsprees of this world.
There is the Jaguar of monitor market, i.e. Apple, which makes an overpriced product (very decent quality, but not mind-blowing). But some people fall for the looks, are blind fan-boys or most likely go for the popular image because they need the ego boost, to feel more sophisticated or artsy.
And then there are the Mercedes and BMWs of monitor market: NEC and Eizo. Those are of high quality and neat, understated design. Their higher models are basically the golden standard for professional graphics designers. Eizo has a slighter leg up in quality, but for me personally NECs look better with that black, rectangular shape, like the old-school ThinkPads (while with closed lid ;). Also worth noting, Eizo manufactures its products in Japan, not in China, like the rest of the herd.
5) Monitor reviews
Steer clear of popular, general IT/tech sites, like CNet or Engadget. These people will tell you about the input ports and parameters they've read in tech specs and give a vague impression of picture quality. Some have even heard of the different panel types, so will knee-jerk to praise anything IPS. But they don't really have a clue how to judge a monitor. Their reviews are as good as if you asked your buddy or neighbor about his display, but with nice photos.
For more valuable advice, you have to visit sites that are capable of making technical evaluations. Good starting places are probably TFT Central, Prad.de (there's an English version) and AnandTech.
> I found it's very helpful if you can see as much of the code as possible (for better context awareness and browsing efficiency) which means putting a 1920x1200 monitor in portrait mode.
It's hard to find (online) if any given monitor can rotate. Furthermore, you'll get unsatisfactory results rotating a monitor (even one that pivots naturally) which has poor vertical viewing angles (ie, TN monitors).
I'd suggest getting an IPS monitor (or two) ensuring it has a VESA mount, and then getting table mount like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Dual-Monitor-Stand-clamp-monitors/dp/B...
It's hard to find (online) if any given monitor can rotate. Furthermore, you'll get unsatisfactory results rotating a monitor (even one that pivots naturally) which has poor vertical viewing angles (ie, TN monitors).
I'd suggest getting an IPS monitor (or two) ensuring it has a VESA mount, and then getting table mount like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Dual-Monitor-Stand-clamp-monitors/dp/B...
It's very easy to find if a monitor can rotate: It will say "pivot" in its features. No-one adds such a functionality and fails to mention it to potential customers.
You might also notice, I have recommended not buying a TN a monitor, but suggested IPS or PVA.
You might also notice, I have recommended not buying a TN a monitor, but suggested IPS or PVA.
> Maybe it's a matter of taste, but in my opinion always go for matte over glossy
If you can control your lighting environment and manage direct reflections (bright spots behind you), glossy isn't a problem. I just got a glossy monitor after using nothing but matte, and it's a fair bit clearer. Another thing to consider is the "shimmer" in anti-glare monitors, where slight movements of your head cause the bumps in the AG coating to reflect different colours depending on the angle. I don't mind it, but some people do.
If you can control your lighting environment and manage direct reflections (bright spots behind you), glossy isn't a problem. I just got a glossy monitor after using nothing but matte, and it's a fair bit clearer. Another thing to consider is the "shimmer" in anti-glare monitors, where slight movements of your head cause the bumps in the AG coating to reflect different colours depending on the angle. I don't mind it, but some people do.
Many "bright spots" aren't really manageable: one runs all around my room and it's called a wall. The other follows me everywhere I go and it's called my face.
A bright picture on the monitor (say, a Google page) will beat reflections in most situations. But as soon as I open something darker - say the Sublime Text editor in its default (and best) color theme, and it's a friggin mirror.
As for "shimmer", I'm afraid it must be a problem of lower quality monitors. My good ol' NEC 1990FX gives me nothing of the sort.
A bright picture on the monitor (say, a Google page) will beat reflections in most situations. But as soon as I open something darker - say the Sublime Text editor in its default (and best) color theme, and it's a friggin mirror.
As for "shimmer", I'm afraid it must be a problem of lower quality monitors. My good ol' NEC 1990FX gives me nothing of the sort.
I'd just like to add one thing in regards to what you said about manufacturers. I've taken apart many Dell and Apple LCD displays and typically they're using the same model # for panels (Philips, LG, etc). I'd agree overall that Apple is of higher quality when it comes to casing and perhaps the non-components, but often the engine inside is the same, which can't be said of Jaguar vs. Ford.
"but often the engine inside is the same, which can't be said of Jaguar vs. Ford"
Actually, the Jaguar X-Type was built on a Ford Mondeo platform, and two of the engines offered were Ford engines.
Actually, the Jaguar X-Type was built on a Ford Mondeo platform, and two of the engines offered were Ford engines.
Terrific summary. I would only add that if you go for the portrait mode do not buy a TN monitor. One side of the monitor will be noticeably darker than the other.