flatscreen for graphic design?

[cookie24/7]

Hi,
I was wondering if you could use a flatscreen for graphic design and animation. Or is a normal monitor better? I've heard that a zipdrive is very slow in storing data, is that true?
Another question, is AMD faster/better or Pentium 4?
Thanks.

[kayofcircles]

1. You can use a flatscreen for graphics, or a "normal" one. I am frankly lusting for a flat panel monitor for two reasons, the display area and "flat" effect, and secondly saw on news that they use a LOT less electricity. Couldn't justify the expense on the first reason alone, but the second one puts a flat panel in a different catagory. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

2. Don't know about the slow part on zip drives, but we bought a CD writer because everyone's puters could read it, you know? Whereas you save something on a zip thingy (cartridge? disk?), only people with zip drives can read it. And you can put a LOT more info on a CD than on a zip. And CD's are a lot cheaper than the zip thingies. And my son would add that you can make a bunch of music CD's with the writers.

3. Sorry, have no idea. I have AMD...fast enough for me.

------------------
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for the rest of his life.
-- Chinese proverb

[iisbob]

hi, cookie24/7 and welcome to the forum's. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

For the first answer i would have to say;

See Kay's answer, http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

for the second question-again see Kay's answer, http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif and for the final question,

It really depends on the system you have and it's configuration, what kind of programs you run, etc..But the simple answer is ( in my humble opinion ) AMD. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
iisbob
"Soap and education are not as sudden as a massacre, but they are more deadly in the long run."

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

[mjc]

In answer to the third part...in certain situations the 1.4Ghz AMD will beat the 1.7 GHz P4, but in overall performance it has gotten to the point the AMD and Intel chips are about equal (now all you gamers out there don't take ofense at this... http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif ). The one main advatage to the AMD chips is that they are much cheaper than the Intel (as much as 50%)...so you get more "bang for your buck".

------------------
mjc
Links list:Computer Links (http://www.dreamwater.org/tech/mjc/index.htm)

Celts are the men that heaven made mad, For all their battles are merry and their songs are all sad.

Gun Control...hitting what you aim at!

[cookie24/7]

Thanx for the advice. I want to purchase a 19" monitor, so I was also considering buying a flat panel monitor. Main reason is it's flat and not as bid as a normal one, but I didn't know that it uses less electricity. Is a 17" flat panel as large as a "normal" 19" monitor? Is a flat panel much more expensive than a normal one? Which flat panel are good for design work?

[buck52]

Hi cookie24/7

Here's my 2¢

Not to long ago I built a second computer and needed to buy a monitor. I desperately wanted to try an LCD flat panel one ( space saving.) I bought a Samsung 17" took it home and didn't like it.( to dark , uneven brightness no matter the angle I was looking at)I took it back and exchanged it for a ViewSonic's 17" LCD ( the clerk said maybe I got a bad one or something) Didn't like it for about the same reasons. Took it back and changed it for a ViewSonics 19" "normal" CRT "PerfectFlat" A95f and love it. It takes up a fair amount of room but the picture is worth it IMHO. I don't do alot of graphics just picture editing and viewing from a digital camera.

Price...
regular CRT..least
Flat panel CRT...medium
Flat Panel LCD... most

I have read that the LCD's are a little more efficent than the CRT's but I have a home woodworking shop that uses atleast 20 times as much juice as any monitor could so that was not an issue http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif

sorry for being so looooooong winded

buck

------------------
just hav'n fun

[sea69]

I am actually wondering why people get the flat screens at all.

they are more expensive (much)

they get lower resoluton, and are not as clear to look at (amoung other problems)

the only thing that is good about them (IMO) is that they look very spacey/cool.. when they are OFF.

I won't buy a monitor because the monitor itself looks better... forgetting about the picture it DISPLAYS. !!


I agree with AMD as the better cpu (for the $$) and as I have one and have had nothing but excellent performance, that's how I see the debate.. as mjc says above.

and as for the electric it supposedly saves..... where I live the only limit on electric is how much you want to pay a month. hehe

(No shortage for those that pay at all)


http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif


------------------
sea1_69@hotmail.com

homepage (http://www.seanweb1.homestead.com/3.html)




[This message has been edited by sea69 (edited 08-02-2001).]

[buck52]

Quote by sea69

"the only thing that is good about them (IMO) is that they look very spacey/cool.. when they are OFF."

I hate to admit but that's probably a good part of why I got one in the first place http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

buck


------------------
just hav'n fun

[kayofcircles]

Oh rats! Didn't know the part about lousy display! Absolutely need good colors and clarity for graphics work..duh. On the other hand, the flat panels we've seen were a LOT more expensive; as in a couple of hundred more, so you guys have saved us some money. Thanks!

cookie: Think it depends on the monitor. My son says his 15" flat panel measures 15" whereas my 15" CRT only measures 13.5". My advice on a monitor is do a bit of research at say, CNET, and go down to a puter store where they have a bunch on display and just see whether that "flat" effect is something you want. Get some idea on "dot pitch" and resolution/refresh rates, etc. Most of the ones we saw had the best refresh rate on the higher resolution, whereas someone old and blind like me prefers the 800x600. We recently picked up two 17" monitors (one for us and one for a friend) for $119 after rebate. Viewsonic, and a CTX flat screen. Bear in mind, too, where you're going to put the monitor because my husband's puter desk actually gets that new 17" monitor a little "close" for comfort. (I just measured it, btw, and it's 16" diagonal.) After looking at his, I have decided that 15" is big enough for me unless I want to invest in a whole new arrangement.

[This message has been edited by kayofcircles (edited 08-02-2001).]

[johnnywyoming]

Just purchased a 17" KDS AV7TF @ 175.00 after rebate at Office Depot. So far I like it. Configuring the screen has been interesting, but not impossible. I've been using much older Packard Bell crt for a number oif years, this is a great improvement.

[kayofcircles]

johnnywyoming: I mis-spoke above; was a KDS from Office Depot we bought for a friend. (His vehicle wouldn't make it to the big city.) And my husband knows what you're talking about...BIG difference going from ancient CTX monitor to 17".