[geeks] Is bigger always better?

[Lionel Peterson]

>From: Jonathan Groll <lists at groll.co.za>
>Date: 2008/08/25 Mon AM 02:30:06 EDT
>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [geeks] Wow, PCs are cheap...

>On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 01:34:17PM -0500, Lionel Peterson wrote:
>>>From: james <james at jdfogg.com>
>>>Date: 2008/08/22 Fri PM 10:37:31 EDT
>>>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>>>Subject: Re: [geeks] Wow, PCs are cheap...
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>I got a similarly configured Vostro (400 I think) about 6
>>>months ago. It's my Winders desktop (running XP). I use it
>>>constantly and often run 6 or more heavy applications
>>>simultaneously. I have never had to reboot it, and it only
>>>gets turned off a few times a year. The wide monitor was a
>>>bit hard to get used to, but it seems natural now.
>>
>>Well, my father in-law will probably not run it at it's highest resolution - his aging eyes will benefit from increased screen area...
>
>Not sure if there is any benefit to ever running a TFT screen at it's
>non-native resolution?

Bigger, slightly fuzzy/non-optimal pixels are better than too-small to read pixels ;^)

I look at it as I do HD TV - watching "regular" cable on my HD TV looks better than a lower-res TV, even though my TV is capable of better resolution. No Benefit <> Bad, just not as good as it could be, but better than the 10+ year-old 17" CRT for sure.

Lionel