GORESAN TINTA EMAS: Improving Your Image

Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine, June, 1999 by Scott Bernard Nelson

Flat panel monitors are slim and sleek and still pretty pricey.

Once you've seen a flat-panel monitor up close, you're going to want one: "Low profile" liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors free up acres of desktop space, you can even mount them on the wall and are amazingly light. They gobble up far less energy than the oversize cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors most of us have. Screen resolution is superior, and the latest models have cleared up early LCD monitor problems such as ghosting and screen flicker, which means you generally get beautiful, crisp images.

But then there's the price tag. Although prices have tumbled in the past 18 months, LCD monitors still cost significantly more than old style monitors with comparable specs. Whereas you can find 17 inch CRTs selling for about $200, svelte, 15 inch LCD monitors with roughly the same viewing area cost anywhere from $800 to $1,500.

To see if the advantages of the flat panels justify their price tags, I spent the past month swapping between my tried and true Gateway EV700 CRT monitor and two popular entry level LCD monitors that each cost less than $1,000.

Testing the monitors. Of the two flat panels I tested, the Princeton DPP 500 (estimated street price, $799; 800-747-6249; www.prgr.com) has the edge in value. Even though it has only a 14 inch viewing area, this little monitor holds up well next to its pricier brethren.

Like most 14 to 15 inch LCD monitors, the DPP 500's standard resolution is 1,024 x 768 pixels (a noticeable improvement over the 800 x 600 provided by my conventional Gateway). Text and graphics are crisp. At ten pounds, it also weighs about one-third as much as my current monitor, and it comes with two speakers and a microphone built in (though the speakers aren't nearly as good as the external pair I use now). Another bonus is the DPP 500's lull range of motion: You can move it side to side and from completely horizontal to completely vertical (but you can't hang it on the wall without additional equipment that must be purchased separately).

One drawback' In order to plug in the monitor's digital-compatible 20 pin connector, you have to replace the analog video card inside your computer with Princeton's digital version (unless you own a brand-new computer that's already digital-enabled). If you're uneasy with the idea of popping the top of your PC, you might shy away.

I preferred the ViewSonic ViewPanel VP150 ($995; 800-888-8583; www.viewsonic.com), although it didn't outperform the DPP 500 enough to warrant spending the extra $200. You may be able to get it cheaper. I found it at the Necx online store (necxdirect .necx.com) for less than $900, including shipping.

The 15 inch VP150 is an analog monitor, so it plugs directly into the back of most PCs without requiring surgery on the motherboard. Some experts argue that analog monitor images aren't as crisp as those produced by digital viewers, but with the current generation of flat panels, it's tough to tell the difference.

Compared with my Gateway monitor, the images were crisper, in any case. I liked the ViewSonic's smoother images and found the screen easier to look at for extended periods of time (perhaps like an audiophile who prefers the warmth of LPs to cool-sounding compact discs). And the brightness and color displays were as praiseworthy as the DPP 500's.

On the other hand, the VP150 had more distortion when viewed from the side than the Princeton monitor, and it features a plain Jane design. It's also heavier than the DPP 500 (by nearly 16 pounds), even though it doesn't come with built-in speakers.

No relief in sight. LCD monitors have become popular with Wall Street firms, where space constraints justify the high price, and they're often promoted as ideal for medical and scientific uses, where emissions and heat generation can be a problem and where it's desirable to be able to see the screen from oblique angles. Still, the screens accounted for less than 1% of U.S. desktop-monitor sales in 1998. Rhoda Alexander, a senior analyst at market-research firm Stanford Resources, predicts market share won't rise above 5% for a couple more years, mostly because prices will remain stubbornly high (they actually rose a bit this spring).

After weeks of Web surfing, word processing and game playing on the monitors, I have to agree with the market's assessment: You may be able to talk yourself into buying one for your home office if desktop space is at a premium or if you don't mind paying a premium for the latest technology. But it's hard to justify the cost for most of us.

Reporter: James Ramage