[thechat] Monitor sizes in USA

Shirley Kaiser skaiser1 at skdesigns.com
Mon Feb 4 17:01:00 CST 2002

At 02:23 AM 2/4/2002, you typed:
>At 11:34 PM 2/3/2002, thechat-request at lists.evolt.org wrote:
>>I've just been to a huge geek heaven store (Fry's) and checked out a ton of
>>computers and monitors this past week and these are the prices and
>>resolutions that I saw.
>My goodness, Shirley. Please don't tell me you did all that research just
>for *me* :)

<big chuckle> Yeah, well, Madhu, let's just think that. <grin>

(I won't tell you that I've been hunting for a flatpanel monitor anyway.
<big grin>)

>>High end computer packages have 17" monitors set at 1024x768 (regular
>>monitors and flatscreen), and the highest end had 19" monitors (regular
>>monitors and flatscreen).
>Hmmm... I must have assumed wrong. I thought that most new machines came
>with 19" ones as standard.

Well, I didn't survey everywhere, of course. But I do regularly check out
my Dell magazines (and drool), PCMagazine, and some others online, and I
also did some consulting and rewriting of a "How To Buy A Computer"
tutorial last summer and checked out a bunch of computer sites and
magazines for that, too, to get some general pricing and components for
middle-of-the-road computers. My perception is that 17" monitors are pretty
standard for middle-of-the-road, typical home computers. There are
increasingly more 19" monitors, definitely, but from what I've seen,
they're generally with packages that cost more.... maybe with a few of the
upper end packages that are still within the middle-of-the-road packages.
But I wouldn't say that 19" monitors are the standard at all here in the
U.S. yet. -- maybe another year or so is just my guess. And I think the
flatpanel monitors will get more popular too since they also save space,
are easier to move around, etc.

>>If you're into better graphics quality, you're probably looking at at least
>>$500+ for a good 17" regular monitor.
>Whoa. My 17" Samsung monitor (with 16" viewable area, 0.25 mm dot pitch)
>costs $270, and things are more expensive in India. How is it so much more
>expensive out there?

I know Samsung monitors are good (I almost bought one the other day that
was gorgeous in addition to being a good one). Yeah, you're right. I was
thinking 19" monitor for that price.... looks like I typo'd somewhere.
Sorry about that. Decent 17" monitors are probably more around $200-$400,
and higher end ones are upwards from there. I saw some for $150 at Fry's
the other day, too, but the graphics quality wasn't as sharp, either.

>Indeed it does. So would it be fair to say that over the past few years,
>average monitor sizes have been increasing? I need to make that statement
>for an article I'm writing, so I want to be sure of my facts first ;)

Yes, I'd agree with that. 15" monitors used to be the norm that shipped
with the average packages. And in 1995 I remember it being a pretty big
deal that I got a 14" color monitor (the size and the color both). That
seems so, so tiny now, especially after working on a 19" monitor now, but
it still hums along on my old 486 for testing sites. I also definitely
agree that we're seeing more 19" monitors than before, too.

So, Madhu, that's my 2 cents. I'm in no way an authority on all this. The
above info is just my own observations and checking stuff out. I love
looking at computer stuff, that's all. And I'm helping my son (age 13-1/2)
price some right now so he can buy one with his own money for his dad's
house (I gave him my old pentium 266 here at my house, which still works
just great, even with all his games... well, a few of the very newest ones
want more beefy power, though).

HTH, Madhu!


Shirley E. Kaiser, M.A.,  SKDesigns  mailto:skaiser1 at skdesigns.com
Web Site Design, Development     http://www.skdesigns.com/
WebsiteTips: Design Resources   http://www.websitetips.com/
Brainstorms and Raves  http://www.brainstormsandraves.com/

More information about the thechat mailing list