On 16/05/2005, at 8:53 PM, Mark Secker wrote:
well the quotes for decent quality monitors that I got were not all
that different from Apples pricing - only around $140 difference
and they were all 19" and most were not wide screen and some of
them cam in above Apple's price of $999 ex GST
sure you can get an LCD for $300 but, and please, please, please
excuse the language here as there is nothing else I can use to
describe the "quality" of the image that they display that would
encompassed the disgust that I feel seeing good money wasted one
them...
they are shit.... compleat and total shit - even worse than the
cheapest nastiest CRT - staff here are rebelling against them - at
first they were all keen as mustard to get them now all they want
to do is get rid of them and get something that they can read
without looking like they are squinting through a fogged up window
trying to read some fudged up text.
I'm a little curious as to why people would buy an Apple LCD when
other LCD screens seem cheaper. I'm sure there'd be reasons and
perhaps it may be helpful for other users to know them.
Ruben A. Franke
Any LCD that uses VGA as its output is crap. Unfortunately that
encompasses all those cheap displays. For good LCD use, you have to
start with DVI output, to stay digital all the way. I use a Samsung
172x at home, which was about $900-odd retail. Super sharp display,
and not far off in price from the Apple displays. And only 17". You
pay for good quality. The 20" from Apple is great value imho.
Seeya
Rod!
