That was very educational, cheers.

But some of my friend's laptop don't even come with s-video anymore, just VGA and HDMI.

But what of the Vga- S-video cables, generic types, do they ever work?

2233SW is 21.6" 16:9
2253LW is 21.6" 16:10

Depends on your usage
If you want it cheap and more resolution 2233SW
If you want more vertical screen space for whatever you do, 2253LW

Fyi, a 22" widescreen 16:10 monitor is a extension of the 5:4 19" monitor.

Meaning, if you run 5:4 resolution on a 16:10, it'd be 22".

I don't understand why you wouldn't switch to 16:10 or 16:9. It's not that games don't support it. And most shows are in WS anyways.
If you want vertical height, rotate it 90 degree and you get one.

RM735? Where did you get that price?

Hint: check the Video Driver setting

The T220 I'm using is not advertised as 1:1 pixel mapping. Previously, with an older video driver, I cannot run it at 1:1, set 1280x800 and everything get stretched out, no matter which setting I choose at the Nvidia control panel. With new driver, if I set to no scaling it works perfectly, as opposed to the older driver.

What I meant is, check the driver setting for the GPU, see what kinda scaling it is at.

Set it to use the scaler inside in the Monitor and see whether it does 1:1, I think that's how you test, other than bringing the ps3 along to test it.

In this case, both are mutually exclusive. If got black bar, means no distortion, IF no black bar, means got distortion. In MPC, you can easily set it to have both black bars by setting it to 'Touch from inside'.

Viewing 16:9 movies on 16:10 and 16:9 is absolutely the same with regards to screen size, since the 16:9 22" is actually 21.6". The feeling you get running 16:9 shows on a 22" 16:9 is an optical illusion. Your brain makes you think that you have more viewing space, but actually it's the same.

@adie82I don't know what you read that caused you to think that there's distortion running 16:9 shows on 16:10. Have you ever used a 16:10 monitor before? Check your facts

I don't understand what are you talking about. 16:10 Monitors with 1:1 pixel mapping will display without distortion, 16:9 formatted movies and the ones without 1:1 pixel mapping will present distortion? Then it's obvious, too, that you've never used one, well, save that BenQ with the 1:1 pixel mapping.

Consoles aside, either I need new glasses, which I don't, or that 16:9 movies on 16:10 has absolutely no distortion whatsoever given the presence of black bars. What I trying to say is, on 16:10 monitors, if you stretch the show to the brim, then there will be distortion. If you set your media player to show black bars, then distortion will not occur. Using Media PLayer Classic, one could easily set any 16:9 show on a 16:10 to set to 'touch from inside' and the player will automatically set the show to display at its maximum size. In 16:9 case, the show will be upsized until the sides reach the end of the monitor and the vertical size will increase. But the player will ensure that the aspect ratio will be maintained.

Comparing 22", 16:10 vs 16:9 for a 16:9 show, both sizes are exactly the same. 22" 16:9's actual size is 21.6", and when a 16:9 show on a 16:10 monitor is maximized, the diagonal width is exactly the same as a 16:9 22" monitor.

Stop confusing people since you've never used a 16:10 monitor w/o 1:1 pixel mapping.
You are showing pics of what happens when a 16:9 show is fully stretched on a 16:10 monitor. At any rate, consoles aside, watching 16:9 formatted media files, through the computer will not present any distortion whatsoever, provided that you can set your media player program to show 2 black bars, on the top and the bottom. Whether the monitor has 1:1 pixel mapping or not is immaterial. The issue can be solve by a software solution, which is free.

Like I said earlier, the software in question is Media Player Classic, or any other program that can do the same. MPC can stretch your 16:9 formatted show to the maximum horizontal width of the monitor and keeping the aspect ratio intact.

1:1 pixel mapping should the concern of console users, since the scaler inside the monitor plays an important role. If you are playing a 16:9 show on a 16:10 monitor, it will present no distortion whatsoever, provided that it shows black bars. Whether or not it is an old technology is immaterial as well.

This post has been edited by kaiserreich: Jan 12 2009, 07:09 PM

Unless your eyes have problem, using the same monitor with the same settings, 4850 and 4870, both being the same GPU, albeit the 4850 being the lower end one, there would be no color difference at all.

The only difference is your framerates. Better GPU = higher framerates.

Color difference? Either your card is koyak, or your monitor cable sudah rosak.

You should've know this before buying it.
Wouldn't a 22" 16:10 fit the bill for gaming and surfing at WSXGA+ 1680x1050

Don't buy monitor, upgrade your GPU 1st.

It wont be nice because you get those two black areas. Pretty much a non-issue, unless you want to use the monitor exclusively for media viewing.

In your dreams.

Maybe 3 - 4 years after it being phased out, you'll see the 2408 being that price.

Nope, not comparable to the T240.

This one has LED backlit, thus, more thinner, and better picture quality.

Under 'Video Frame', set to 'Touch From Inside'. Works perfectly for me.

Dude, do you really have to ask?

It's around RM1k, that's about the price I paid for my T220 3 months back. If I knew this would come out.....

Well, at this price, it's a absolute recommendation if you got the dough for it. The s2409w is just a overstretched 22" TN film anywyas, I'd take the 2209wa anyday if I get the chance

8308GFPH$2NBT4$

there's the $ sign so, the edited one is like this

8308GFPH$2NBT4 <---the correct coupon code

@glo:

how do you know all these deals and stuff? You work for Dell?

This post has been edited by kaiserreich: Feb 13 2009, 11:24 AM

And just because of that you call them what you called?

HDMI - DVI adapters aplenty, what is there to complain. That thing looks sexy, though 50 000 : 1 Dynamic Contrast is just bullshit. What matters is the typical anyways