Re: 17" vs. 21" monitors

Subject: Re: 17" vs. 21" monitors
From: "Dan S. Azlin" <dazlin -at- SHORE -dot- NET>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 1995 00:44:10 -0400


I have been working with a 21" monitor for about 5 yrs now. When I go
out to a customer's location to do some work, the monitor size is always
less and certainly limiting in what I can do with it. Certain work just
comes easier on a big monitor, no question.

But, when this big beast died on me 1.5 years ago, it took 7+ months and
$600+ to have it repaired (it could only be done by the manufacturer's
service depot on the west coast). I had to limp along with a 15"
"monitor" that limited my productivity _and_ the quality of my graphic

My feeling is that you should get the biggest _and_ best quality monitor
that you can justify. If that's a 17" display, go for it. If it's a 21"
screen, better yet. Don't compromise on the quality!

On Thu, 14 Sep 1995, Richard G Harris wrote:

> Karen Mayer inquires about 17" vs. 21" monitors.

> I have a 17" monitor on my home system and a 21" at work.

> I find working on the 17" monitor to be acceptable, but I wouldn't dream
> of trying to judge a page's organization and content until I could see
> the whole page on my 21" monitor.

> Imho.

> Dick Harris
> rgh -at- world -dot- std -dot- com

Dan Azlin ** WORD ENGINEERS, Technical Writing & Publishing **
Ph/Fax: 508-921-8908 18 School Street
Internet: dazlin -at- shore -dot- net Beverly, MA 01915-4851

Previous by Author: Re: Illustrator to Frame4
Next by Author: Re: comma with TM
Previous by Thread: Re: 17" vs. 21" monitors
Next by Thread: Seeking synonyms for bulkiness

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads