Whats the best LCD or screen rez you have used?

[SaberX]

As of now i have to go with UXGA with WUXGA in 2nd....

[Neil]

Problem is, the best screen I have used is the one on my A31P, 15" UXGA IPS. While I really like having the desktop area to work with, my eyes are just not good enough to make use of the screen without wearing reading glasses. So I picked the XGA resolution from the poll, because that is what my eyes are most comfortable with.

[ajkula66]

UXGA hands down with me, at least on a 15" 4:3 machine. I've had a R50p with pianowizard's QXGA mod, but that was way too much for my eyes.

WUXGA is OK as a resolution per se on a 15.4" LCD, but the problem is that the vast majority of these LCDs are garbage....

[ZaZ]

The size of the screen plays a big role too. I don't think I'm one of who likes 12" SXGA+ or 15" QXGA. If were talking 15" I like SXGA+ or UXGA. SXGA+ is easy on the eyes and UXGA has so much real estate. Plus standard screens are taller and easier to read. I can live any resolution as long as there's a decent way to scroll, but I'd take a quality screen over higher resolution. I ran my 20" desktop CRT at XGA for years and never really thought much of it until a got a SXGA LCD, then it seemed huge.

[underclocker]

Screen size should also be included, as mentioned above.

My favorite resolution until recently was 15" SXGA+ FlexView. Scaling works very well within IE 7, so I've recently switched to a 15" UXGA FlexView. At 125%, IE 7 looks great (to me). All other apps work well for me, too, at UXGA - and the extra screen real estate is helpful, especially with spreadsheets.

So, at this point, I'd say 15" UXGA FlexView for me.

The quality of the LCD is more important as resolution increases.

[dr_st]

SXGA+ for 14-15" laptop LCDs.
UXGA for 20" desktop LCDs.

WUXGA for 23-24" desktop LCDs (although haven't owned one to date).

[georgema]

I'm still using SXGA+ from my trusty T41P and like that very much. However, I'm very tempted to go with WUXGA for the next purchase as I like a lot of desktop area. Must try and see a display before I buy next as these things are all very subjective.

George M-A

[SaberX]

I see now i should have added the lcd sizes...
XGA in 12.1"
XGA in 14.1"
XGA in 15"

SXGA+ in 12.1"--(tablet)
SXGA+ in 14.1"
SXGA+ in 15"

UXGA in 14.1" --not sure if thinkpads came with this but i know theres a mod for this...
UXGA in 15"

[rek]

Anything with at least 1000 pixels in vertical resolution.

[yak]

Well, generally the higher resolution the better, but of course the pixel pitch is important - you don't want the pixels to be too small or too big. And if we're talking about laptop displays, you don't want the laptop to be too big.

Since 14.1" SXGA+ works great for me in my T60, that's what I chose.

My external monitor has a 2048x1152 resolution on a 23" 16:9 surface.

[KristianJ]

I've found WUXGA in 15.4" to be quite good for my needs - thus for my impending new laptop purchase I'll probably go with Full HD in a 16 or 17" laptop. 1600 x 900 is probably not quite good enough for me, because whilst 1600 horizontal may well be fine, the vertical resolution just doesn't float my boat.

[Andy]

So my vote put 1400x1050 (on a 15" display) right at 50%.

[dr_st]

*removed due to no longer being relevant*

[RealBlackStuff]

1280 x 1024 (5:4) on a 19" screen is the preferred format for my desktop.
My only 15" laptop has SXGA+ Flexview.
On my 14.1" laptops it's a mix between mostly XGA (T23/T30/T40/R51) and SXGA+ (T43/R52/T60).
My eyes can't handle anything smaller than that.

[dorronto]

1280 x 1024 (5:4) on a 19" screen is the preferred format for my desktop.
My only 15" laptop has SXGA+ Flexview.
On my 14.1" laptops it's a mix between mostly XGA (T23/T30/T40/R51) and SXGA+ (T43/R52/T60).
My eyes can't handle anything smaller than that.

I have to agree....I'm using now a 14" WXGA and an 12.1" XGA...Fine for my eyes.
SXGA+ even for me now is a little too small...must be age..

Ron

[Utwig]

SXGA+ or WSXGA on 12"
UXGA or WUXGA on 15"

[obarriel]

QXGA in my T42p is really nice. In Windows Xp that was too small, but later I moved into Windows 7, that allows to scale the size of the elements on the screen (everything, not just text and icons) so you can enjoy the pixel density of the QXGA screen avoiding the "too small" problem.

[lexicon]

XGA 1024x768 @ 12" or 13" 4:3 LCD
SXGA+ 1400x1050 @ 14" or 15" 4:3 LCD

[pianowizard]

For me, there are three kinds of displays to consider:

1) Desktop monitors:
I like to put desktop monitors almost 2 feet from my eyes, and at this distance the best range is ~90 DPI to ~102 DPI. My favorite size is 24" at 1920x1200 (94.34 DPI). I currently have a 19" 1680x1050 Acer LCD, whose 104.27 DPI looks a tad too small. At one point I had a 20.8" 2048x1536 (123.08 DPI), which of course was even worse!

2) Desktop-replacement laptops:
For laptops, I view the monitor quite a bit closer than for desktop monitors because the laptop keyboard needs to be at a comfortable distance. As a result, the DPI doesn't need to be as low as for desktop monitors. I like ~120 to ~135 DPI, with the ideal size being 17" 1920x1200 (133.19 DPI).

3) Mobile laptops:
While on the road, I need something very light -- my limit is around 3 lb -- and so big screens are out of the question. But I also want to have as much real estate as possible. So, I am forced to tolerate a higher pixel density. Currently, my only mobile laptop is my 240Z with 1024x768 (123.08 DPI), which doesn't really give me enough real estate but I like this laptop anyway because it's so cute and preciously rare. But in general, I consider 1280x800 to be the minimum res for productivity, and my preferred DPI range is 140 to 155, i.e. the range defined by the Sony Z series (13.1" 1600x900) and the HP 5101 netbook (10.1" 1366x768).

[Synthetickiller]

Desktop: 1920x1200 so WUXGA. If 30" monitors at 2560x1600 (QWXGA) weren't expensive ($1000+), I'd go that route. Instead, I own two 1920x1200 monitors, 25.5" and 24". QXGA was great back in the day, but now that 4:3 is dead, and even 16:10 is dying, I'll stick with 16:10 for an LCD. 16:9 is just garbage as there's not enough vertical real estate. I can't see using anything smaller than a 22" 1680x1050 for a desktop, period.

Ultra portable laptop or net book: This is difficult. I just bought an x200 for the portability. Its only 1280x800. I think I'll get used to it. I own an acer aspire one netbook 1024x600 and its usable, although not very productive, but that's the point, its for internet browsing.

Regular laptop: probably 1440x900, something like that, although I've even found 1280x800 no an SL500 to be usable at 15.6". Most laptops are now widescreen, so unless you get something older, you're stuck with 16:10 or 16:9. 4:3 is still very very practical, but that's not where the market is heading unfortunately.

Desktop replacement: 1920x1200, hands down, no questions asked.

[pianowizard]

I own two 1920x1200 monitors, 25.5" and 24".

One of my rigs has three 1920x1200 LCDs, with two of them rotated 90 degrees into portrait mode, i.e. 1200x1920. I get so much vertical real estate! If you haven't tried that, give it a try. It would make more sense to rotate your 24" LCD, because rotating your other LCD would probably make it too tall.

[Synthetickiller]

One of my rigs has three 1920x1200 LCDs, with two of them rotated 90 degrees into portrait mode, i.e. 1200x1920. I get so much vertical real estate! If you haven't tried that, give it a try. It would make more sense to rotate your 24" LCD, because rotating your other LCD would probably make it too tall.

My 24" monitor is dim and the color quality is just not there (samsung 240T syncmaster, good, but old) would work fine for this, but it doesn't support vesa stands. My 25.5" is an LG monitor with a TN panel, granted the colors are really good. I don't want the LG as a secondary b/c I can mount it to a vesa stand. I think in the future, I'll eventually get a 30" and turn the 25.5" on its side. I'll figure out something with the 24". I don't want to rotate my head that many degrees, lol.