"TV's" versus "Monitors"

Hi everyone,

I have, the past several years, always sought Monitors to purchase as opposed to Television sets, as from my experience, a monitor will serve (perfectly well and fine imho) in BOTH capacities, whereas a TV only serves as a TV.

Is this correct? Am I correct in my thinking here, and if so, why on earth would anyone ever purchase something designed/built/sold strictly as such a "MONOLITH" (TV), please?

I have long believed (since the late 1970's!) that the Monitor was 100% more useful/desirable and therefore, 100% more affordable/sensible.

Thanks in advance,
glenn

 

Hi Laura and thanks . . . are you saying the resolution wouldn't be as high (one wouldn't be able to find or would have a hard time finding) a TV with the same, higher resolution of a monitor?

I've never looked into buying a monitor as a tv, but two thoughts I have are size. I'm not sure how big they make monitors, but I wouldn't think they'd make them as big as I like for my TVs. The other thing would be the lack of speaker. You'd have to buy speakers for the monitor.[/QUOTE]

Good points, all, thanks.

Please pardon my quirky vocabulary (again)...I was referencing the word "monolith" in it's usual sense - TV'S being monolithic (in my less-informed opinion) sort of "old-school", and one-dimensional"...as I saw them prior to your post here.

Thanks again! :wave

 

as far as resolution goes TV's have caught up

a typical 24" monitor will have a native resolution of 1920 x 1200 or 1920 x 1080 which happens to be the same resolution as 1080p HD which more or less all 22" LED TV's have the same resolution ( and quite a few of the newer gen 22" LCD TV's ) the difference being that 1080p is the maximum a TV will achieve regardless of being 22" or 50"
some of the larger monitors can achieve much higher resolutions for instance the dell U3011 30" monitor has a native resolution of 2560 x 1600 but the price isn't cheap

another thing to consider is a TV is setup for TV where monitors are setup for graphics especially where colour profiles are concerned i don't think iv'e seen any TV that caters for sRGB or adobeRGB where quite a few monitors do

there is still differences between monitors and TV's but i have to say the gap is closing

 

Thank you for this - very educational, though now I'm not sure WHAT the heck I'm looking for . . . ?

I do know I want 1080p, and a "device" which can/will just as easily serve as a TV as it will a PC monitor ... umm, Great (high) dynamic contrast (or is it "Native") - at least 1000-1 (I think?).

Here's an interesting note (to me at least anyway) on the current "device" which I possess...I have used it for my son to play his video games ("Call of Duty", etc.) with no problems at all, however, when I use this same machine (a "refurbished" 19-inch "Polaroid" [brand] Monitor) AS a PC monitor, every so often, the screen/picture just goes BLANK (goes black - though not in any "fading" sense ... the screen/picture just plain goes OUT!), which I merely have to push the power (On/Off) button, wait literally one moment for the power-on light to change from BLUE to the "off" or stand-by mode/color (amber), and then simply turn it back on and VIOLA! Works like perfect again for the remainder of the day (hours) . . . ??

I have (rather unofficially and quite amateurishly) determined that video games draw less energy or load - place less demand on the graphical-capability of the device (?).

In any event, would you happen to know where to find great deal (the best, of course) on a 26" Monitor/TV "device", please?

Thanks again and in advance,
glenn . . .

 

You could look at this item from Tiger Direct. It's a monitor with a built-in TV tuner.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5766663&CatId=3774

 

Well yes indeed (what WILL they think of next??) ... and yes, I have now 'looked at it' (thank you BTW! ), and it seems a darned-good deal (I'm trying to figure-out what's NOT to like about it??)...

Hmm ... well, I don't see that it's "Energy Star" rated (or am I missing the spec on that?). It seems a bit on the "high-side" of energy "drain", or electrical usage, to me, but I am really not any sort of knowledgeable person on the subject.

Is "59W" much power-load (demand) for a device of this sort to draw (do we know?)?

Other than that, the only (desirable to me) thing it would seem to be missing or lacking, is an adjustable/tilt "neck" or screen (sans wall-mount) . . .

Something (??) just strikes me as "odd" about it though, considering what Laura was saying here, in that most (or virtually all?) new machines are now "capable" of performing both, primary tasks/functions ... those being, PC Monitor and TV/DVD (and Blu-Ray?)/Video-game display device . . . ?

I missing something here (which, if you know me here, is more-often-than-not, the case).

 

Hi grc123,

It would appear that you are nit-picking on a lot of things. No disrespect intended.

The question is, do you want a monitor or a television, or both?

59 watts of power consumption is not too bad, considering what you would be getting with a 27 inch monitor/TV unit.

As far as tilting or rotating of the screen, I usually place my monitor/TV at eye level to the center of the screen using a stand of some kind to raise it to that level.

 

A big chunk of stone. Occasionally described as "phallic"

[QUOTE="Merriam-Webster's Dictionary]1: a single great stone often in the form of an obelisk or column
2: a massive structure
3: an organized whole that acts as a single unified powerful or influential force[/QUOTE]

As for monitors vs TVs, I think the main difference, as others have said, is that monitors can do better and more detailed graphics. As the webcomic XKCD put it, 1080p television are about where computer monitors were 5-6 years or so ago. I have a 37-inch monitor that serves as a TV in our guest room. It does HDTV, of course, and also video games, and has a HDMI connection that connects to a Media Center PC.

So I'd say that since TVs are finally catching up with monitors, the biggest difference today is in size, name, and price.

 

:eek Well thank you, however, yes, I am nit-pickin' ... AKA: "critiquing", in advance of purchase (with very hard-earned money, I would add) ... don't we all do this (?).

In any event . . .

Though "Not Available (at this time)", can anyone see why this set--->http://www.walmart.com/ip/Vizio-M260MV/15410887, in ANY way, should be about $20 MORE than the set that Puppywunder58 was so kind to link me (us) to, especially as it is an inch smaller right -off-the-bat ... please?

 

"critiquing" translates into "sitting on the fence":dancer

 

:confused :confused :confused :confused :confused :confused :confused

 

It's better known as "fence sitting". Definition http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fence-sitting

You seem to do this a lot.:dancer

 

Well yeah, sure, I'm familiar with the expression, however ...

Of all the various online forums I frequent/visit/etc., `tis this one, here, which I approach (or attempt to/need to approach) most humbly :-o ... as I know less about this stuff here ("techie-stuff"), then perhaps all other matters/areas of interest - combined.

I do, and realize that I do, play "Devil's Advocate" quite a bit, though again, feel that it is prudent and wise to do so, for just as absolutely long as possible, in advance, of plunking-down any hard-earned cash.

Not to mention (though I am mentioning it, aren't I...oh well), mistakes in this techie-world can get MIGHTY expensive!

I reckon????????????????? :confused :-D

 

I'm sorry, I cannot and will not respond to you any more.

 

Good Lord??? Now I'm REALLY confused??? What did I do??????????:confused

 

Basically Monitors and TVs served different purposes. A monitor will display information from a PC and a TV will display information from television broadcast. The displays were specified and designed relative to the source of the image that they are going to display. PCs historically work at higher resolution and refresh rates due to the PC out put being higher. TV broadcasts were much lower hence why they were only designed to operate at lower res and refresh. Blue Ray and HD broadcasts have driven TVs to operate at resolutions that are now comparable to monitors.

Other differences are connectivity. A monitor will usually only look to connect to one source. A TV will have many inputs for DVD, Satellite, BlueRay etc.

TVs obviously also have an integrated tuner to decode the broadcast signal which monitors dont.

Hybrid units have been around for a while and I have a small 17" TV/Monitor although I dont use the TV tuner at the minute.

You need to decide what you want the device to do and purchase accordingly. No purchase will do everything so you need to decide what is important to you and buy accordingly.

 

INPUT LAG

HDTV's all have high input lag there are very few LCD TV's with an input lag that acceptable for high speed gaming,LCD monitors are much better but the gold standard for high speed multiplayer gaming are CRT monitors and Plasma HDTV's.

So I would say if you or your son do any multiplayer gaming and enjoy first person shooters get a monitor or plumb for a plasma.

I have a SONY bravia 40 inch TV and games look amazing on it BUT the input lag is noticable there is a slight delay from moving the mouse to when the screen moves.

I don't play any competitive multiplayer games on it though so it isn't really an issue.

The input lag on most HDTV's is around 66ms and upwards which doesn't sound too bad in itself but when you combine it with your ping often also around 30-100ms and it can become hampering.

http://www.digitalversus.com/input-lag-tvs-how-our-tests-work-n15440.html

 

This felt suitable.

Okay, maybe not, but I just couldn't resist. I love XKCD.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/hdtv.png

 

Okay...surely I am missing something here ... lost in translation, from tech terms used here, to my ears (eyes) here ... and, at the risk of sounding COMPLETELY ignorant about this *stuff*(which BTW, I AM!) this "seems" contradictory, to me . . . ?(<<<---"seems", especially in quotes, is "not" in any way, shape, or form, to be construed as an "ABSOLUTE", "CONCLUSIVE" term, or specific, blanket statement).

You say here:

But then go-on to say:

My head hurts . . . (PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I mean NO offense by this!!!

THIS, occurs to me as "genius" ... well, perhaps not genius, but the work/words of one who clearly understands/knows what he/she is speaking of, and is able to express it clearly...concise, and succinct.

Something I "feel" like I may have picked-up from this post is: RE: the Monitor I currently have, and the "issue" it has, which I mentioned in Post #5, well, perhaps I could change the refresh rate? To a Higher number? A Lower number? In order to get it to keep from going blank (dark) on me/us here).
To answer your final point/comment: I wish to buy a machine which will serve firstly as a TV...with the option to utilize it as an Monitor, when/if the opportunity presents.

Thank you very much for your time, and for sharing your vast knowledge here!

This is great info., though I don't expect it to effect me (much?) in my situation much - currently. I am SURE my son will let me know in time though if I pick one with a considerable amount of Input Lag.

Thanks to you one and all once again ~
gentle glenn . . .

 

quite a number of monitors have HDMI inputs and more or less all current LCD / LED tv's have vga inputs ( 15 pin d sub ) it would be right to say most are dual purpose

i think the biggest difference between tv's and dedicated monitors beside the built in tuner is colour profiles which can be important if you do a lot of photo processing
if not it wouldn't be too much of a concern

 

Thanks much again, and naaa, not really, I'm pretty simple ... basically just looking for the best I can do, to watch TV, Movies, play some PS3 (or whichever "console/box/thAng" my son pulls-out) and to have as a back-up monitor to check email, surf the web or just basically get online in the event it became necessary...(though of course at the best price I can find. The machine PuppyWunder linked me to has now gone-up (IN-CREASED in price) $50

Sere there, I'm basically a pretty simple guy . . . :tas

Now, the final, though perhaps most complex question: "New or Re-furb" -D :duck:grouphug

 

New or Re-furb, I'd look at the warranty.

 

Totally agree the warranty is one of the most important considerations when spending so much money IMO.

If you buy new Sony provide a 5 year manufacturers warranty.

 

I didn't really want to respond to this, but, when 'ya snooze' , 'ya lose'. You could have gotten a brand new monitor/TV for the price quoted at Tiger Direct, but you "sat on the fence". Now I guess you'll have to settle for this, if you want it. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001504

Refurbed + Free shipping even.

No disrespect intended to you. This one even offers tilt.

 

Thank you...I really don't think you know how grateful I am, as well as how much I appreciate your time and effort.

I could not buy the other set. I don't like mentioning this, however, I have been on disability (fixed-income) for about a year now. My benefit check pays-out once a month. December 2 (I "think"?) has been my "purchase-able date" all along.

I certainly meant you no disrespect either, and was likely stalling (not really procrastinating) more than I realize. There is no "plastic" (credit-card) in my wallet. Only one Check/Debit card. That's it.

And I have always "tried" to be a cautious consumer (some have remarked in effect; 'a bit on the ANAL side') ... yet still I have made big (costly) mistakes in the tech realm and others. Still I try.

Probably doubled-down now, in "nit-pick" mode.

I "am" grateful. I "do" appreciate your response...your time, and effortS (plural). Thank you very, very much.

Best,
Glenn
PS - Tomorrow looks like "The Day"...your link looks like "The One"~!~ :clap :hyper :strong :dancer :dood

 

Hi Glenn,

Sorry to hear about your disability. If you can't get that monitor/TV then I'll keep a lookout for something else for you. I've got somewhat of an idea what you're looking for.

Steve

 

Thanks Steve,

I expect to make a move on it as soon as my direct deposit hits (in the morn!).

People RAVE about it this screen/Pic-Quality (though equally bemoan the scant, 'scary' packaging haha! - sounds ExCITING to me~!~ heehee).

I would still like to ask questions about ALL (or, "some", at least) of the various specs on/in these machines...though of course will start new threads as I go.

Thanks again,
glenn . . .