This is not quite correct.Quote from gnome:
Both 17 & 19 have the same native resolution... 1280x1024. Pixels are smaller on the 17".... hence the sharper image.
...
Quote from b1tr0t:
It is unlikely that any dual-DVI video card will have trouble supporting a pair of 20" displays. I picked a video card at random, and it has no trouble supporting both of my 2405FPWs running at 1920x1200.
Several people have suggested that 20" displays are better than 17" or 19" displays because they offer more resolution. While this is often true, it isn't always true. You need to look at the native resolution of the panel in question.
The Sony Vaio A690 portable (hardly a notebook) has a built in 17" panel with a native resolution of 1920x1200 that will make your eyes bleed. Fortunately, it also has a DVI docking station that can drive a 2405FPW.
17" is very acceptable for 1280x1024, 19" is fine for 1600x1200, 23" is fine for 1920x1200.
Quote from gnome:
1. Many dualhead cards list a max DVI resolution as 1280x1024 (though their VGA resolution may be higher).
2. To my knowledge, there has been only one 19" LCD at 1600x1200... it was made by Planar.
LCDs should always be run at native resolution where possible... native will have the sharpest image.
Quote from b1tr0t:
Iiyama[/url] offers a 1600x1200 19" LCDs. AFAIK, they don't own their own foundry, so tehre are probably several other monitors that use the same OEM panel.
... 80% of the world's flat panels are made by 3 manufacturers, so there's not really all that much difference. [/B]
Quote from Nana Trader:
It's always better to have 17" and Three LCD, instead of having 19" and 2 LCDs
Even 3 monitor isn't much, you might need to add another 1 or 2 LCDs soon (you don't want to end up having 19" six LCDs, because then you need to have a large table and heavyduty LCD arms) secondly you can't resell 19" LCDs easlily if someday you need to![]()
So i recommand 17"