The Dell Community has contributed: 9386 ideas | promoted 642362 times | 71670 comments

How IdeaStorm Works:

Post Promote Discuss See
Desktops Comments | Desktops Ideas | Monitors and Displays Comments | Monitors and Displays Ideas
320

Dell: We are not all BLIND!

320 points posted to Desktops, Monitors and Displays by winoffice Feb 8

Dell: We are not all BLIND! On your 17" NOTEBOOK dislays, you offer a 1920x1200 screen resolution (on that page "WUXGA" means "1920x1200"). Yet on your 17" DESKTOP displays, you offer only a 1440x900 screen resolution.

If you can offer 1920x1200 on a 17" notebook display, then you can definitely do the same for 17" desktop displays. Please offer 1920x1200 on your 17" desktop displays, just like on the 17" notebook displays!

And obviously, of course offer 1920x1200 on all 17"+ screens (by 17"+ I mean 17" or greater, so this includes the 17" screens, as well as the screens that measure greater than that), as Dell currently offers 1920x1200 only on 24"+ screens (by 24"+ I mean 24" or greater, so this includes 24" screens, as they have the 1920x1200 screen resolution).

zanlok
Feb 8		 you WOULD be blind if you tried to use a screen that small at WUXGA
one sits *close* to a laptop, but not a desktop monitor
if you want 1920, great. then just get a 24" flat panel
kanoneno
Feb 8		 I agree that Dell should offer the choice, but I also agree that if you are going to use a 1920x1200 resolution you should really consider buying a 24 flat panel. That way you will get the most out of it without having to force much your sight.
winoffice
Feb 8		 zanlok: "one sits *close* to a laptop, but not a desktop monitor"

Most of the time I DO sit close to a desktop monitor so you are wrong there. And what are those asterisks for anyway?

"then just get a 24" inch flat panel"

That is easy for you to say. The idea here is that I do NOT want to be forced into buying a 24" display or greater in size to get a 1920x1200 screen resolution.
zanlok
Feb 8		 well.. yes.. for your instance perhaps.
so, don't use a 24" - I don't either - I like my 22" ones (3) at 1600x1200.
but, most people don't want / need a 17" like that
winoffice
Mar 3		 Merged Idea originally posted Feb 28
Stop Ripping Off Your Monitor Customers! (Stop making us pay more than we should to get a 1920x1200 resolution.)

First to IdeaStorm users: This idea is partly related to this one.

Yes this is a duplicate of that idea. A duplicate of my own idea even. But I want to buy Dell monitors, and I am trying to vote for them with my dollars. And without the option of a 1920x1200 resolution on those monitors that measure less than 24" in size, it becomes difficult.

And now, here is the idea:

Dear Dell,

Recently I was browsing for monitors on your Web site. I must say that most of them have really good looks. BUT I SHALL NOT BUY THEM (that is, until you implement this idea), and why? Because you do not offer a 1920x1200 screen resolution on your monitors that measure less than 24" in screen size!

Okay I understand that they want me to buy a 24"+ (by 24"+ I mean 24" or greater, so this includes 24" models, as they have the 1920x1200 screen resolution) monitor to get that functionality, because they want to get more money from the sale. But I do not want to be forced into buying a 24"+ display to get the 1920x1200 resolution!

Click the link that I have supplied earlier in this idea (here it is again). There anyone can see that Dell offers 1920x1200 on 17" notebook displays, but only 1440x900 on 17" desktop displays.

So Dell thinks that desktop users have less vision than notebook users? Or Dell thinks that I sit close to my notebooks, but not to desktop monitors? I can tell you that the answer to both of the previous questions is no! I use both desktops and notebooks and of course my vision is the same, no matter which of those I might be using at a given instant. And I sit close BOTH to notebooks AND to desktop monitors.

Obviously they treat desktop users as "second class" to notebook users (at least when it comes to displays/monitors). As a person who has bought several Dell monitors over the past few years, and as a person who has spent thousands upon thousands of U.S. dollars on electronics from Dell (I have spent over 1,600 U.S. dollars on electronics from Dell in the year 2007 alone, which would be over $4,000 if I ordered the most recent models in new condition), that causes me to be angry indeed (furious if I were being honest).

Dell offers 1920x1200 on their 17" notebook displays. And if they can offer 1920x1200 on 17" notebook displays, then they can certainly do the same for 17" desktop displays. And yet they are intentionally forcing me into buying a 24"+ display to get that resolution, thus forcing me into paying more money (to get the desired functionality) than what I should be paying.

This is VERY annoying, and a lot of hassle that they should not be forcing me into! I obviously will not be buying Dell monitors again! (That is of course, until they implement this idea.) I am warning them that I will not be giving Dell any more money on monitors until they implement this idea.

As one who spent thousands of US dollars on electronics from Dell (and who has bought desktops, monitors and notebooks) from them, I expect them to treat desktop and notebook users equally.

So what is the idea for Dell?

It is for you to offer a 1920x1200 screen resolution for all of your widescreen desktop monitors (at least for all of your widescreen monitors that measure 17" and greater in screen size), not just 24"+ monitors. And as I said in the title, stop ripping off your monitor customers. That is, stop making us pay more than we should to get a 1920x1200 screen resolution, by making us get a 24"+ monitor to get that feature, instead of letting us get a 17" one like that. But keep your current resolution options on the 17"-24" monitors, just add 1920x1200 to the list of options on those monitors.

And to IdeaStorm users: promote this, if you demote, then please at least let us know why!
zanlok
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
personally, I think WUXGA is way too much for anything under 24"

BUT: the option would be nice for certain of 'you' for the 22" (and under) models. however, I'd expect the price to be higher. maybe that wouldn't be worth it. for the purposes of consolidation and avoiding confusion in their products, I can see why this has been done in the current fashion. I know laptop people have gotten used to this whole whatever ?XGA? thing, but: Are flatpanel customers used to making dpi decisions? perhaps this is the crux of the issue.
winoffice
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
zanlok: I myself would also expect the price to be higher, and I would add $50 or even $100 to the price to get the option of WUXGA. But note that I said "It is for you to offer" in the penultimate paragraph, so customers could still get smaller resolutions for monitors under 24". I even added a new sentence to the penultimate paragraph to reinforce that.
zanlok
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
I was thinking more like a 40% increase in price. so, if an on-sale 22" is $250, the WUXGA might (initially, pending demonstrative demand) go for $375.. which may be too steep?

"penultimate".. that's (rofl) great, man!
winoffice
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
"(rofl)"? So it is funny?

The increase in price would depend on the resolution. For example to upgrade 1680x1050 (WSXGA) to 1920x1200 (WUXGA) would probably be cheaper than upgrading WXGA+ (1440x900) to WUXGA.

I doubt that the increase in the price would be 40%. Even if we were upgrading WXGA+ to WUXGA, the increase in the screen resolution would be only 33%, and since everything else would stay the same, the increase in price would probably be less than 33%. If we were upgrading WSXGA to WUXGA, then the increase in the screen size would be only 12.5%, and again everything else would stay the same, so the increase in price would probably be less than 12.5%.
zanlok
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
p.s. the "ripping off" in your title seems quite unnecessary [to me]
if you're willing to pay extra, then just pay for a 24" ??
winoffice
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
No the "ripping off" means intentionally making us pay more money than is necessary to get that feature. An upgrade from a 17" WXGA+ to a 17" WUXGA does not cost as much as an upgrade from a 17" WXGA+ to a 24" WUXGA. So they are making us pay more than is necessary for that upgrade.
zanlok
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
right. I already had that part. and, I get that you don't like it. but where's the "rip" if you're already willing to pay more. for that higher res in a smaller format?

I don't like the no options, either, because I might like WSXGA+ on a 24", but it isn't offered.

what do you think about the point I was trying make about flatpanel customers not even being used to choosing resolutions at all? I don't think introducing that complexity is necessary. I don't think Dell is ripping anyone off, but just trying to keep things simple!
zanlok
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
attacked by censorship, but whatever
cjcox
Mar 3		 Merged Idea originally posted Feb 29
How about a smaller widescreen high res panel?

I like high resolution, but my desktop doesn't have the real estate for a 1920x1200 monitor. However, just so happens my 17" 4x3 Samsung can compress a 1920x1200 signal... but I'd love to have a small 17" 1920x1200 native widescreen monitor. Am I the only one who would like to see smaller panels with the extra high resolutions? (we can do it on the laptops, why not with the desktop displays?) Or maybe there' s not enough interest? Vote it up if you agree!!
winoffice
Mar 3		 Merged Comment originally posted Feb 29
I do agree! Dell should offer 1920x1200 on all 17" monitors and up, not just the 24" monitors and up.

By the way: the idea was already posted by me here, and even earlier here (again by me).
cjcox
Mar 13		 Jericho (wow.. are you just out to get me or what?!), the point is that laptops with teenie tiny screens already come in 1920x1200... even down the to the 15" widescreen size (yes... it's true!). So I'd like to see Dell have a smaller than 24" 1920x1200 solution. Ditto for even a smaller 4:3 1600x1200 solution... just because you CAN'T always get a bigger desk as you suggest.
xyrtrax
Mar 29		 cjcox and winoffice, you might want to check prices for 17" WUXGA panels (just the actual LCD panel). The cheapest I could find was US$ 595 (US$ 506, wholesale)over at Screentek. Dell's cheapest 24" WUXGA display on the other hand costs just US$ 449. Going through PriceWatch, I managed to find a 24" WUXGA display from Acer for only US$ 378.14 over at eWiz.
winoffice
May 14		 xyrtrax, then explain how I can configure a Vostro 1700 notebook PC with WUXGA (http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=04&kc=6W300&l=en&o...) for only $799. The screen would cost $506, more than the rest of the system, which would cost $393. Given the processor, optical drive, operating system, memory and more, your claim is obviously not true. And, show us a link to back your claim.
paperpilot
May 15		 Speaking for myself, I use a DELL 21'' wide screen monitor 20" in front of me and 1680 by 1050 is as much resolution as my good eye will stand. If the pixels were any smaller, I couldn't read the screen.
zanlok
Jun 2		 exactly what my points keep being on many threads in this regard, mr. pp
Please log in to post a comment
recently promoted by: