I ordered a new computer widescreen (16:9) monitor yesterday. I wanted a smaller one (21.5”) than my main screen and with HDMI input. HDMI is becoming common in monitors these days. It also has a DVI and a D-SUB port. There are several more amazing specifications. It is full 1920×1080 HD resolution (1080p), LED, 5ms and is priced at only $150.00 with cables. It is an Asus VS228H-P.
I am going to run the HDMI from the Raspberry Pi to it and also use it on my Main Linux computer. It will also be just fine for my Parallax Propeller C3 micro computer. All three inputs can be connected at the same time and switched at the monitor. That makes $150 split three ways. Not a bad deal.
I spent nearly 9X that much for a large flat monitor a few years ago (1920×1200) so today we are getting more pixels for the cost. I’ll probably miss that extra 120 rows of vertical screen resolution but the price was still right.
I don’t have room or the desire for a larger monitor. That much resolution in a small format should and is reported to be outstanding. Pixel density is the reason the Apple Retina display looks so good. Of course I will be the ultimate judge of the Asus when I plug it in.
When using large screen TV’s for computer display, I notice a lack of pixel density that makes small computer icons look horrible when working close in. For large touch screen work as seen in some TV and movie programs (CSI and NCIS for example) large HD TV screens just don’t cut the mustard. Great for viewing 10 feet away. High density large displays are possible (Apple used to sell one that required TWO video cards) but it takes extremely expensive hardware, not just a large screen HD TV. Movie makers just pretend.