> panel quality is reported to be inferior to its U2415 predecessor Ah, that's disappointing. Those monitors fill a nice niche. I remember buying monitors 20

> panel quality is reported to be inferior to its U2415 predecessor Ah, that's disappointing. Those monitors fill a nice niche. I remember buying monitors 20 years ago, and I remember what stuff cost back then, so I don't complain too much (we've got a lot of bargains) and I accept that "you get what you pay for." The disappointing thing is the nonsensical nature of monitor pricing. It tends to be a pretty bimodal distribution and it often takes some research to figure out why something is cheap or expensive.