id have to agree that lcds are soooo much nicer on the eye, when i use cheap crts these days i tend to get irritated eyes, only problem with lcd that i would warn anyone about is the color reproduction is not up to scratch yet on most models. you just cant beat crts for this. saying that i have heard of lacie models that 'apparently' are as good but i dont have a grand to spare to find out :) mark -----Original Message----- From: Kasimir K [mailto:evolt at kasimir-k.fi] Sent: 27 October 2004 16:05 To: thelist at lists.evolt.org Subject: Re: [thelist] [OT] CRT Died - Options Norman Bunn wrote on 2004-10-27 16:32: > My 5-6 year old Nokia 19" CRT died this morning and I need a > replacement. The question is whether to continue CRT or go LCD. I > really like running my setup at 1600x1200 and it seems there are few > LCDs that run this at a "reasonable" price, so I am leaning toward > getting another CRT. I really could use some input to make the > "correct" decision. LCD is the correct decision :-) Your eyes will thank you for it. An option for one expensive screen is two cheaper ones: 17" screens typically give 1280 x 1024, so two side by side would give you 2560 x 1024, or if you pivot them 2048 x 1280, which is not bad at all. You'd of course need a second display adapter, or a dual-head one, but they are quite cheap. Three 15" screens at 1024 x 768 would be nice too... .k -- * * Please support the community that supports you. * * http://evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ For unsubscribe and other options, including the Tip Harvester and archives of thelist go to: http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !