3 ms·
I went down this path a few years ago. You're right, but monitors of size X tend to be much more expensive than TVs of size X. At least they did a few years ago
by dreamcompiler 9y ago
I went down this path a few years ago. You're right, but monitors of size X tend to be much more expensive than TVs of size X. At least they did a few years ago.
- emodendroket 9y agoMonitors are less expensive at small sizes, I think. But otherwise I would agree.
- logfromblammo 9y agoAnd at this point, I would be willing to pay slightly more to not pack stuff into the case that I don't want, which may negatively impact the features that I do want. And if you want a DisplayPort input in lieu of one of the HDMI sockets, that seems to add at least $30 to an otherwise identical monitor, even though DisplayPort is royalty-free. There does seem to be an attempt to segment the market to charge more for displays connected to a computer than for displays connected to a home entertainment appliance. At larger sizes, I think the assumption is that if you don't have a TV tuner, you're attaching it to a computer, and if you do, you're not. And that breaks down at smaller sizes, where resolution and pixel pitch become an issue for computing, but less so for consoles and DVD players.