On 2/3/2015 8:09 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 11:42:50 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:41:38 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/2/2015 3:49 AM, wrote:

plastic.

I wouldn't even consider a tv that big for a monitor. I'd get a stiff
neck from having to keep turning my head to read an email or web page.

I'm looking for a similar size, 17 to 20".


Bigger is not always better. For most uses, a 19" to 23" is quite a lot
on a desktop. The only advantage to a larger screen is not making that
email bigger, but having it in full view of it with a spreadsheet next
to it also in full view. Or larger CAD drawings.

Given the price difference, I'd consider 19" the minimum.
In my opinion a 28 inch monitor is about optimum. At the insurance
office I have many users on 2 19 inchers, one on a 23 and a 19, with
the 19 in "page mode" (standing on it's short side), and a few on 28s.

+1

I use a 27", which seems about right. It gives you enough space
to view two documents, side by side. The other factor is enough
heigth to comfortable view full pages. Given the small price difference,
if you have the room, I think it's definitely the way to go.


I use two identical ViewSonic 23" panels which are, contrary to convention,
stacked vertically because my computer desk is just too small to do
otherwise. It actually functions well -- the top monitor is taken up by the
remote panel for my WHS computer in the basement, a BOINC client, a handful
of useful widgets, and many virtual sticky notes -- things which are pretty
much static most of the time. That leaves the bottom screen for 'work' (or
what passes for it) and since it is at a better angle and doesn't need any
head movement that is comfortable.