e1705.. xga vs uxga truelife

im about to order a e1705

was wondering which screen to get since right now my desk top monitor is at 1024x 768. i often play games at this resolution also as any higher resolution makes it hard for this old man to see.

i realize the uxga screen has higher resolution and its glossy but is there any other main reasons to go with either.. for example is one of them more likely to have defects? any other reasons? any personal opinions? experiences?

ty

 

Ideally you should try to go to Best Buy or some big computer store & check out both glossy screens vs. anti-glare matte & high resolutions such as 1920 x 1200 vs. 1440 x 900 but if you don't have that opportunity:

I personally prefer anti-glare matte (I only like glossy glaretype finish at night otherwise the glare is annoying) & ~ 100 PPI. You can still DVI out to an external monitor if you need more than 1440 x 900.

1440 x 900 = 99.9 Pixels Per Inch (17" WXGA+)

1920 x 1200 = 133.2 PPI (17" WUXGA)

I'm going to post a separate thread on this soon as it comes up a lot but a more accurate measure of real-life screen real estate is Pixels Per Inch (PPI often also called DPI) which accounts for both the screen resolution (e.g. WXGA=1280 x 800) & the size of the display as follows:

PPI = diagonal pixel resolution / diagonal inches (Calculate diagonal pixel resolution and divide by the physical diagonal viewing area) or just go to a DPI-PPI calculator:

http://www.raydreams.com/prog/dpi.aspx (.NET form DPI-PPI calculator)

Apple has stated "Optimized for Graphics and Text: A Balanced Design - Apple has determined that the ideal balance between monitor size and number of pixels is approximately 100 pixels per inch (ppi). At 100 ppi, the display is optimized for images, yet it allows you to work easily with applications that require manipulation of text, such as sophisticated type treatments in layouts."

Many people feel if the PPI is too high (e.g. over 120 DPI for notebook) e.g. 1920 x 1200 on a 15.4" = 147 PPI, this may cause an imbalance in being optimized for graphics & text. You can increase the DPI setting in Windows XP but it doesn't always work & can cause problems in some application with cut-offs but Microsoft's next OS Vista is supposed to better support high resolution displays. I've even heard of people returning 1920 x 1200 on a 17" = 133.2 PPI screen because they thought the PPI was too high for their many text based apps in Win XP causing too much accommodative stress on their eyes. External 20"-30" displays typically have ~ 100 PPI.

Screen resolution still has to work along with the physical dimensions of a display, the applications, the OS hence why PPI (pixel density) is a better measure than resolution alone.

 

u get so much work space with the high resolution but yes, he right, you need to see if that small size will be ok with u.