|
Edited on Wed Jul-01-09 11:40 PM by RoyGBiv
It'll be easier and cheaper.
I've seen some 21.x inch monitors with standard display resolutions, but they're getting expensive, like $500 and up.
You can still find an assortment of 20" standard screens. Again, these will be more expensive than the widescreen counterparts.
Generally speaking, the so-called standard sizes aren't being produced in any quantity anymore.
Out of curiosity, is there some specific reason she wants the standard screen rather than widescreen?
I ask for a couple reasons. If you're willing to pay for it, you could find some 22+ inch screens with standard resolutions, but these cost a mint. One I saw was $1800. It's a specialty monitor for use by people with specific needs.
The other reason is I wonder if she may have the same prejudice against them I once had. Prior to getting the one I had now, I refused to go widescreen because I was losing pixels with it. The common 1680x1050 native resolution provides fewer pixels than the 1600x1200 you get with standard resolution monitors of an equitable size. (In reality, I still prefer the CRT monitors, but I'd have needed back surgery if I kept lugging around my 21" I had for so long.)
I finally gave in and got a 24" with a native 1900x1200 resolution, and I've never looked back. It's widescreen, but it's not the "widescreen" one associates with television, i.e. having the black bars across the bottom and the top. (That was my mother's trepidation at getting one.)
|