LCD monitors are great. No question. They’re thin, can be moved around easily, don’t use much electricity, don’t produce static when turned on or off, have a crisp picture that stays crisp, and so on.

However there is one failing of LCD monitors and a big one at that. It’s a lack of vertical resolution.

I’ll explain.

Let’s say you want a monitor that has a 2048-pixel-wide resolution. Yes, this is an insane amount of pixels. How big, as in physically big, do you have to go with an LCD to get this?

The answer is 21 inches.

However, at that size you only get 1152 pixels on the vertical within a reasonable price range – and those are 23-inchers. The monitor is really wide, but seriously short. Bear in mind that is only 72 pixels taller than a 1680×1050 resolution. Like I said, short.

Now let’s say you want something with some true vertical resolution, as in 2048×1536. That’s proper.

That will cost you $4,400 to get it with LCD. You literally pay an extra four thousand dollars for those extra 384 vertical pixels.

Now let’s compare this to the good ol’ CRT – which is really hard to come by these days.

You can get a 21-inch monitor that will support a true 2048×1536 resolution. I found one on eBay for just $600. It’s used because I could not locate a new one.

(Note: If you know of any vendor that does sell these new, please feel free to post a comment with a link as I’m sure there would be some interested parties.)

Who needs crazy resolutions like this?

Programmers love having this kind of screen real estate. You can fit so much stuff on-screen that there is no need for a secondary monitor.

If you’re wondering, "How could anyone read anything at that resolution?" Trust me, programmers can and do routinely.

You simply cannot get the vertical resolution of those old huge 21 and 22-inch CRTs on modern LCDs. Not without paying several thousand dollars for it, anyway.

To answer the question: Did we lose resolution with LCD? Unquestionably, yes.

Hopefully someday the LCD monitor manufacturers will wise up and give us some decent vertical resolution at an agreeable price.

And no, buying an LCD that turns sideways is not the answer because then you lose a ton of horizontal real estate. What the monitor manufacturers need to do is start making taller monitors and not wider. We’ve got enough wide to go around already and don’t need any more. We need height.

For those that would say, "Well, just get a 2560×1600 LCD! Problem solved!" No, problem not solved. The monitor is physically too large. You’re going to have a 26 or 30-inch behemoth on the desk. That’s not practical at all. Maybe fun and cool, but not practical.

Wide is great, but don’t you wish sometimes you had an extra 300 or so pixels at the bottom? I know I do.

Real-world monitor resolution considerations for those of us on a budget

The two best resolutions that give you the most usable vertical space within a reasonable price are:

• 1680×1050
• 1280×1024

Why is vertical resolution so important? Because you scroll less.

My advice: Don’t buy anything under 1000 pixels on the vertical. Not unless you like scrolling a lot.

If you’re like most computer users, you’re using an LCD monitor as your primary computer display. And you’ve probably adjusted your monitor settings as best you could, but it still doesn’t “look right”. Some hues appear too blue while others appear too red, or maybe the black looks like a dark gray at best. Continued

Sony is developing a new fold-up display that could herald the production of fold-away computers.

According to The New Journal of Physics, researchers from Sony and the Max Planck Institute are exploring the possibility of creating, and are working on the development of, bendable optically assessed organic light emitting displays.

When fully developed, this technology could lead to the production of electronic poster displays for advertising as well as digital newspapers that can be folded and televisions which can be bent.

Additionally, the “upconversion” full-colour displays have several other advantages than flexibility over current display technologies. These include faster response times, almost unlimited viewing angles, and a virtually unlimited possibility of shapes and sizes.

Sony originally announced news of a similar development in 2006, but that early development ran into problems such as distortion when bent and size-limitations. Their new technology isn’t beset by any of those previous problems and therefore makes the development open to many further possibilities.

It certainly appears that technology is providing some amazing gadgets and gizmos that we never even dreamed of only ten years ago. Amazing developments are occurring lately, such as the one above, that can only change society for the better if used correctly.

It appears, to the untrained eye, that the depth of development of technological gadgets and gizmos is unlimited. However there is just one thing that puts the brakes firmly on one avenue of development – that being component miniaturization.

Current technologies have made it possible to build microelectronic devices out of almost infinitesimally-small transistors as small as 45 nanometers across – considerably less than the width of a human hair. You can pack millions of these devices into a small package, such as the processor chip of the computer that you are using right now.

There is a limit beyond which it appears impossible to go though. 45nm is only the distance across a small number of atoms of the doped molecular substrate used in the transistor’s construction, and we’re already getting close to as small as all possibility will allow these devices to be built without massive fabrication costs, electromechanical breakdowns, and current-leakages in the individual transistors themselves. In short, we’re nearly at the point where technology is as small as we can make it.

Nevertheless, even if we do ever actually reach that limit, there still seems to be almost endless possibilities in utilizing the available technologies.

Do you think that there may be a limit at which we have to stop developing all technologies and accept defeat? A point when humanity has developed every technology possible? If so, do you think there will ever come a point when we’ve also invented every possible practical device imaginable? Will geeks die of boredom at that point?

The Microsoft Windows operating environment introduced something called "font smoothing" right around the time Internet Explorer 4.0 was released in 1997. Even way back then (this is before the release of Windows 98) Microsoft understood that type on screen must be as legible as possible.

ClearType, another Microsoft way of making fonts look better, was announced in 1998 but didn’t make an appearance until January 2000 as a feature of the Microsoft Reader software for those that remember that title.

When Windows XP was introduced in 2001, ClearType was built-in.

All this font stuff is called subpixel rendering technology. In layman’s terms is just means the fonts you see on screen are rendered differently.

In Windows XP (and in Vista assumedly) you can enable or disable ClearType at whim. This is done via Control Panel / Display / Appearance / Effects button. You see this:

If you check "Use the following method…" and select "Standard" from the drop-down menu, fonts under the 12pt size will not show as ClearType. If you select "ClearType", all fonts are rendered in ClearType. If you uncheck the box, no fonts will be shown in ClearType at all.

I do recommend anyone running Windows XP to download and use the ClearType Tuner PowerToy. This will add an icon in your Control Panel called "ClearType Tuning". When you click it you see this:

Using the Wizard helps out a great deal in selecting how much ClearType rendering you want. Very handy to have.

Which is more readable, ClearType or Standard?

This obviously depends on a few factors:

LCD or CRT?

Subpixel rendering has heavy concentration to make fonts look good on an LCD monitor (note the screen shot above: "..improves the readability of text on existing LCDs"). More often than not if you’re using a CRT, turning ClearType off will look better.

Why is this? Because CRT monitors aren’t as crisp as LCDs are. If you have ClearType enabled on a CRT it may "fuzz out" the fonts too much causing them to look "smudgy".

Font size

Obviously larger fonts look better than smaller ones when talking about subpixel rendering. Think of it this way: With digital photography, larger resolution is always better. With smaller resolutions you lose focus. The same can be said for fonts.

LCD screen striping

If the smaller fonts on your screen have the tendency to have oddly-colored edges, sometimes something as simple as changing the LCD screen striping will fix this. The ClearType Tuning applet has an "Advanced" section where you can change it from red/green/blue to blue/green/red:

Note the left side of the screen shot above.

If when you change this it makes the fonts look bad, just change it back. It will not "mess up" your monitor whatsoever because it has nothing to do with screen resolution; just the font rendering method.

Standard resolution fonts do not have any issue whatsoever with display no matter what screen striping method you use.

Is the font "interrupted" by a background image?

This is particularly dealing with what wallpaper you use. Certain wallpaper will make the text under your icons difficult to read while others will not.

General rule of thumb: Darker-image wallpaper always make the icon text look better. And of course, using no wallpaper is the best for legibility – especially if the background color is black.

What’s your refresh rate?

The standard refresh rate for almost all LCD monitors is 60Hz. I made mention in the past that some offer the option of 59Hz. This may offer slightly better readability.

With CRT monitors, the default refresh rate is also 60Hz – but you may find better luck with 70, 72, 75 or 85 depending on the choices you have.

If no matter what you do for hertz on a CRT the fonts still look crappy, disable ClearType.

Screen hardware settings

This actually has nothing to do with the font itself but rather the physical monitor settings.

The ones to pay attention to are:

• Brightness
• Contrast
• Sharpness
• Color

Brightness and Contrast:

When your monitor is showing nothing but black, it should be as black as possible and not gray-ish. If the gray exists this will "fuzz" fonts a bit.

Sharpness:

Too much sharpness will cause odd colors to appear in font rendering.

Color:

You have "cool" and "warm" settings here. Generally speaking "cool" (blue-ish) is better read easier. HOWEVER – going to blue can be trying on the eyes by making the whites too stark. Adjust only in slight increments if you have the option.

It’s a safe assumption that the vast majority of computer users today use LCD monitors. It is in fact a very reliable technology and it’s not often that you hear of one breaking. But being that it’s an electronic device, yes it will eventually fail.

How long does it take before an LCD fails completely?

Usually about 5 to 7 years.

What is the first thing to "go" on an LCD monitor?

With a free-standing LCD (i.e. one attached to regular desktop computer), the backlight is usually the first thing to break. With a laptop a whole host of other things can go awry. More on that in a moment. When a backlight fails, the picture will get extremely dim. It will still work but be almost unreadable.

Is it worth it to repair an LCD monitor?

Never. The cost of repairing an LCD monitor will usually cost more than replacing it outright.

Common issues with LCD monitors

Solid horizontal and/or vertical lines

One day you will turn on the monitor and these brightly colored lines will appear with no way to get rid of them. This is a hardware fault and there is no fix for this. Replace the monitor.

Monitor takes a while to "warm up" after starting it

You turn the monitor on and it takes a minute or two to reach full brightness. This is a backlight issue. You can still use the monitor normally until the backlight breaks (which it will eventually).

Monitor flickers on and off randomly

This is laptop-specific. The LCD ribbon connector cable is damaged from normal use of opening and closing the lid over time. This can be repaired. The monitor does not need replacement, but the ribbon connector cable does.

If you’re brave enough you can order this part from the OEM manufacturer and replace it yourself. It it normally located under the left-side hinge. It is not easy, but certainly cheaper than replacing the entire display.

Suggested course of action is to locate an authorized computer repair center and have them replace the ribbon connector. It will cost anywhere from $60 to $150, labor included. This may sound expensive but it’s still cheaper than replacing the monitor itself which will cost a whole lot more.

Corners or one side of monitor appears dimmer than the other

Again this is a backlight issue. There is no fix. Deal with it or replace the monitor.

Everything "goes green" or "goes pink" or "goes red"

For laptops, again this is the ribbon connector cable. Replace it. For desktops, replace the monitor cable which may or may not fix the problem.

"Wild patterns" appear for no reason

It will look something like this:

No fix for this. Monitor is busted. Replace it.