[lug] Picking a monitor.

[Davide Del Vento]

> Or are there other performance factors to consider?

Besides what other have already said (I too consider particularly
important the pitch), I'd add 3 things not mentioned yet, in order of
relevance (for me):

1) good gamut and color profile - it's hard to do it these days on
linux, but I hope it will become mainstream, especially if your
monitor will live 10 years as the previous one.
Gamut - Basically this means that the colors the monitor can display
aren't all the ones your eye can see (there is a nice diagram on the
right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut ). No monitor can
display all possible colors, but a good one can display consistently
more colors than the cheapest guy in town. A good color profile -
guarantees that the actual color you are seeing on the monitor will be
the same you'll see on a piece of paper if you print the image on
paper, or display it on another well-calibrated monitor.

2) High refresh rate (related to the low latency). Good for games,
movies, and 3D (but "bad" 3D, the one with active, relatively
expensive at about $50-$100 each and cumbersome spex). This kind of 3D
works just fine on linux, and it's great for the occasional watch, if
you can afford the spex for you and your family/friends.

3) if you are really excited by the 3D, there are a few 3D monitor
that use lightweight, passive, cheap spex (the same they gave you in
the movie theater, at $1-$10 each). I'm aware only of iz3d and zallman
brand, and they need dual head graphic card. They can be used normally
as 2D monitors and they are fine (don't think they have excellent
gamut, though). And of course they are more expensive than 2D ones,
but they are not outrageous at all. One of the two (don't remember
which one, and it's the best from the stereoscopic point of view) has
troubles working in 3D with linux, though - and that's the only reason
I didn't buy it - yet: I'm lobbying their mailing list asking for
linux drivers....

HTH,
;Dav