Conquer Club

Dako wrote:and watch movies on a 22" with HD quality. Awesome :p.

I have a 46" led lcd series 7 samsung with 200 hrtz for that sitting at the end of my bed

Dako wrote:Left one is 15.4" laptop == 1280x800
Right one 22" samsung - 1680x1050

I can work on 2 monitors and watch movies on a 22" with HD quality. Awesome :p.

In sovjet russia, monitor watches you!

White Moose wrote:

Dako wrote:Left one is 15.4" laptop == 1280x800
Right one 22" samsung - 1680x1050

I can work on 2 monitors and watch movies on a 22" with HD quality. Awesome :p.

In sovjet russia, monitor watches you!

Have you read 1984 recently?

MrBenn wrote:

White Moose wrote:

Dako wrote:Left one is 15.4" laptop == 1280x800
Right one 22" samsung - 1680x1050

I can work on 2 monitors and watch movies on a 22" with HD quality. Awesome :p.

In sovjet russia, monitor watches you!

Have you read 1984 recently?

No, i haven't accually.

google analytics...

600x1200 is an option? I got a small laptop.

natty_dread wrote:I've always found 1440 x 900 to be a seriously weird resolution. It has more horizontal resolution than 1280x1k but less of the vertical...

Know what? I hereby declare 1440 x 900 non-canon!

That resolution is standard for any 16:9 widescreen 19" monitor. I had 2 at one point (see a pattern?).

17" Widescreen
1600 X 900

Has Blitz added a "Top 5 Biggest Monitors" category yet?

Im Irish, Id rather not say.

Timminz wrote:Has Blitz added a "Top 5 Biggest Monitors" category yet?

This thread (clicky) could be used to help establish a "First 5 Monitors" list...

As for "Top 5 Biggest Monitors", I think we'd need to insit on pictures or it didn't happen.

MrBenn wrote:

Timminz wrote:Has Blitz added a "Top 5 Biggest Monitors" category yet?

This thread (clicky) could be used to help establish a "First 5 Monitors" list...

As for "Top 5 Biggest Monitors", I think we'd need to insit on pictures or it didn't happen.

A couple of years ago I hooked up the dig projector to the screen. To be honest, it was hard to see, but it was indeed big enough, at at least 10 feet.

Mine's really 1280x800, not 1280x960, so I have plenty of width, but tall pages present a problem. As long as the map is short enough, which the small ones are, the Clickable Maps script via Greasemonkey helps in the fight against page scrolling.

I have a 30" (2560x1600) and a 20" (1600x900) that i more commonly use to save power/heat (the 30 sucks juice like you wouldn't believe)
IMO, it's the height that's killer on smaller monitors.

Between the top of the browser panel and the start of the map, there's 185 pixels roughly of space that could be moved. We don't need the top nav in games, nor the game number in huge text above the map and all the padding and colors. Moving this will gie you 25% more height without changing any viewport.

Then, there's a row of tabs in my browser, a bookmarks toolbar, title bar, etc etc eating about another 175 pixels.

so, out of the 900 tall that i have on my 20" widescreen, 30% or 300px of it is wasted landscape.

The real pain is anything over 550 tall, as the dice are now a scroll into view out of the map. I would so much rather have the dice to the RIGHT (or even left) of the map than underneath it.

25" and 1920 x 1080

thats a rather personal question

19"

1280 x 1024

Timminz wrote:19"

1280 x 1024

same as mine!

let's be monitor pals