12.1 inch = 13 inches for LCD display?

[N_Cook]

12.1 inch diagonal, from corner to corner of the overlying mask, but that
would be called 13 inches wouldn't it. No way it would be called a 12 inch
model ?

 

[Boris Mohar]

12.1 inch diagonal, from corner to corner of the overlying mask, but that
would be called 13 inches wouldn't it. No way it would be called a 12 inch
model ?

Sales droids rounding up.

 

[N_Cook]

For a while, they were all being honest about LCD sizes. Lately, the
word "class" has been used - as in "22 inch class TV" - so they are
back to their old games.

Seems its worse than that, called 13.4 inches , not 13 inches

 

[Tim]

So, if you want a screen size that is vertically the same as a tv you
are replacing, you have to buy a larger size, if you are not smart or
alert enough to figure this out, and buy a tv with the same diagonal
measurement as your old tv set, the picture will be noticeably smaller
in the vertical direction and that much harder to see.

Just look at how much of the HD pic you see on a standard TV. You'll
soon figure out those black bands top and bottom take out a chunk of
size. I figured I will get the same picture size as my 27-28" SD TV with
a 32" High Def one, even with the reduced height, because it is already
being reduced by the broadcaster.

- Tim -

 

[N_Cook]

I don't like the flat panel TVs,because EVERY one I've seen,in stores and
sports bars,have improper geometry;
a circle looks oval,and peoples heads look flattened. the vertical was
being compressed.
it didn't matter what aspect ratio was being displayed.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Its judder between frames of moving video content I cannot tolerate. I've
just worked how to reconfigure and retain my nice 20 yearold CTR TV with the
total UHF-analogue switch off in our area in 4 months time.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

I don't like the flat panel TVs, because EVERY one I've seen,
in stores and sports bars,have improper geometry;
a circle looks oval, and peoples heads look flattened. the vertical
was being compressed.
it didn't matter what aspect ratio was being displayed.

Mr Yanik, this is physically impossible.

A 16:9 set with 1080 by 1920 pixels CANNOT display a 16:9 image with
anything other than correct geometry. There is a fixed number of pixels,
with a fixed "shape" (square).

What you are most-likely seeing is a 4:3 broadcast that has been widened to
fill the screen.

How could a rational person think that monitors were so grossly misdesigned?

 

[William Sommerwerck]

It's judder between frames of moving video content I cannot tolerate.

There are sets without this problem (generally plasma). Buy one.