Originally Posted by
mrgreenthump
I wonder if you were truly paying attenchion when the change from 16:10 to 16:9 happened.. The 16:9's at least in here just purely replaced 16:10's slowly, but the price was the same, in some cases even more, cause it was "Full HD". Nobody seemed to care you got less pixels, cause Full HD was the thing back then. And nowdays its just really really hard to find decent 16:10 monitors for budget price. Like when my previous screen left for the greener pastures, I had to go straight to HP's ZR product line, cause there were simply nothing else there, that was worth the money(at least in here at that time). And even the 24" ZR would've put me back allmost 3x the price of a standard budget 16:9 at the time, the quality was and is miles ahead, but is it 3x as much.. prolly not? In the end I landed a sweet dead on the 30" model and have never looked back..