4 ms·
> Secondly, the Seiki is not a "good" monitor. It isn't even a "good" TV. The only thing Seiki has is pixel density and cheapness, it is awful in every other me
by d23 13y ago
> Secondly, the Seiki is not a "good" monitor. It isn't even a "good" TV. The only thing Seiki has is pixel density and cheapness, it is awful in every other measurable way, without a doubt one of the worst panels I have ever purchased. I can't fathom how you can justify calling it "good". Excluding resolution -- can you even name a single thing you like about it, that you think is a cut above?
Do you have an ax to grind, or is this just typical HN pedantry?
The reviews on Amazon for this display is a solid 4.0 from 200+ reviews -- hardly the shite quality you seem to be suggesting. Given that the thesis of the article is that this would be great for programmers (i.e. not designers or the color obsessed), the fervor to which you're arguing the point seems misplaced.
- barrkel 13y agoThe man used two physical calibration devices on the monitor. I think that means he values color reproduction much higher than the average buyer.
- chris11 13y agoCNet compared the 50inch model to a 50 inch 720p plasma, and came to the conclusion that the plasma was a better tv. The review was more focused on using it as a television, but it appears that product is low quality. http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57599449-221/budget-tv-resolution-rumble-720p-plasma-vs-4k-led-lcd/ http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57599449-221/budget-tv-...