I just went from a dual monitor CRT setup to an LCD setup. Why? For various reasons.
Phase 1:
I dropped my dual CRT setup for a single 17" CRT.
From this:
To this:
Why? I used my second monitor, the one above my stereo for 2 things. My Trillian buddy list, and
Desktop Sidebar. I realize that the Trillian buddy list could be minimized, but I stayed with dual monitors for the Desktop Sidebar. I like this little utility as it shows the time, local weather, Windows Media Player, winamp, and other things. I only used it for the Windows Media Player tool bar. That, I learned, could be minimized to the task bar, which you can see
here.
So, I sold the monitor locally, along with a 14" CRT that was collecting dust in my closet.
Phase 2:
Now, I was using a very nice 17" Philips CRT monitor. But, I wasn't done yet. I chose to now move to a LCD monitor. LCD's are getting more inexpensive and better day by day. Previously, I stuck with a CRT, because it was very inexpensive, had very nice color clarity and depth, and could easily take various resolutions. But, it used power like a greedy gold digger, generated tons of heat, and took a lot of deskspace. LCD's on the other hand use little power, take up little space, and are pretty light. But, until recently, LCD's costed more, and had some resolution and response time issues.
The LCD I purchased cost me around $230, a 17" Acer, in black none the less, with 12ms response time, and a native resolution of 1280x1024. I run a 1024x768 on my desktop and 1280X1024 when gaming, for the best picture. The response time should make sure I don't have ghosting. Now, I also gained a ton of desktop space:
Now, I, like most people, would benefit from a LCD. I still have my 17" CRT, just as a backup. The only thing that is negatively affected by my switch is video editing. A CRT will provide better picture for that, as it is much like a traditional television, so it displays the picture as it will be seen. I don't have to edit video, nor do much graphic design work, so I don't
need a CRT.