Peripherals forum: Pros and cons of using an HDTV for computing

I recently bought a 28-inch HANNspree LCD HDTV on sale to use as a replacement for a 24-inch Acer monitor that died right after the warranty expired. I love it. The resolution is amazing and the colors are beautiful.

I'm using my normal LCD 19" monitor for everyday work use, but make use of my EVGA 9500 GT (Dual DVI out/1 gig RAM) card for outputs. One feeds my desktop monitor at 1024x768, the other feeds out via a DVI to VGA connector and a 25 foot cable that feeds into my 42" HD TV's VGA input.

I get beautiful images on both screens, crystal clear! I use the EVGA video console to set each screens display. The TV indicates its' getting a 1080p input. Super crisp display.

I split the audio out from my machine to both my stereo (with sub) computer audio and the main surround audio system.

Works, like a charm!

MarkinTO

I have my PC attached to both 23" HD PC monitor at my PC and a 42" Panny Plasma for the secondary. The 23 is hooked up via DVI and the Panny uses a DVI to HDMI adapter cable. I use a separate coax audio line. The send to the TV is going thru my Yamaha 9.1 surround sound receiver. 2 reasons I have the separate coax line for audio. The card that I have has an input for the audio but the jumper was almost impossible to find plus this card from VIA Technologies really doesn't support the connection (other models do). So it was just easier to use a coax output to my receiver. I pretty much only use my 42 to display video and very little computer graphics so things look good in this area. I do a lot of downloads & will be doing some Avid work which I will be displaying on the 42" Panny.
It's personal taste but I don't care for LCD's in a TV as I like the much better blacks that the Plasmas give over the LCD's. That's why the smaller LCD for main PC monitor is OK. Oh BTW at least w/ Panny the VGA input is limited to 720p. I definitely didn't want that kind of resolution going to a 42 constantly. Some material I dnld is only that rez but I try to only use that when I can't find a better quality signal.

"1024x768 and it is awesome" at that resolution how could it possibly be?

I would suggest starting with how far away from the TV/monitor you want to work. That has an important effect on how satisfactory the resolution and size of a display device will be. If you want to sit fairly close to the display, as on a the top of a desk, then a large TV even at 1080 X 1920 (highest HDTV resolution available) will not have enough resolution for good display of text and pictures will not be sharp. If the display device is some distance away and too small, you will not be able to read text without resizing it, a real pain, regardless of its resolution. There is an optimum device size and resolution for any viewing distance, and guidelines for these are available on the net. Don't stray too far from these and you may be very pleased with an HDTV.

Seems we thouht we could hookup the flat screen HDTV for monitor usage, apparently, its got a USB hookup, but dont see a plug for a router to hook to the TV. With the set being in the other room, and girlfriend having illness issues, from time to time, thought we could hook it up for her enjoyment (Netflix and College Studies) thru the port.
With all this going on, and the insructions buried somewhere within the filing drawers,this seems a bit of a chore to look into. Though eventually we would luv, to be able to have her, and others surfing and movie watching thru the seperate division.

If I understand the question correctly you are looking at PNP. You may find yourself a little disappointed.
About 5 years ago I had a 27 inch westinghouse monitor which had PNP. It was defined as a TV at best buy. I could use PNP and have a computer as a source in PNP. I sold that TV and then purchased a samsung thinking it could do the same. I was wrong. I have not found a TV that is capable of using the PC as a source for PNP. All you have to do is look at teh TV settings and I think you will find the same results. You can use the TV as a monitor alone but don't expect being able to switch the source of PNP to anything other outputs. Ideally that is what you want.
So I think you will find that you want a Monitor instead that has a PNP function and not a TV. Make sure you can set what gets displayed in the PNP box.

So Now I have a dual head video card in my PC and I have two screens. I have cable going to one TV via hdmi from the cable box. The TV is a 40 inch. The second screen is 24 inch. set my sreen to 1080. I then simply change the inputs to do what I want. I like having two screens.

Good luck

Rick

I have my 2008 24" iMac connected via HDMI cable to a 32" Sony (must be 7yo) Bravia LCD. Amazingly simple. The Mac recognised the Sony immediately. Brilliant for movies, using Front Row and VLC media player. Using the trackpad I can sit on the couch and operate the all the Sony like it were the desktop. The standard apple remote does works wonderfully so long as the mac and TV are in the same room. I recomend that any mac user do it. It is SO easy. With movies and music and TV stations streaming so much via the net there is a danger that you will become housebound! Brilliant - I could not live without it. : )

I haved hooked up my computer to a Sony 40" Bravia HDTV with a HDMI cable & it is the greatest set up. I don't know anything about the technical aspects, but having a 40" monitor for computing is the greatest set up that I have ever experienced.

I had a large 47" 1080P HDTV already, and wanted to use it as a primary computer monitor, so I built my new system around this idea.

Here is what I concluded:

Cons:
1)You absolutely must have a high end machine, and a high end graphics card (My motherboard had a built in graphics card with supposedly 1080P output, but as I found out, it wasn't stable at 1080 and would cut out often. Long story short, I bought a graphics card (hd5770), and it's worked great since.
2)Resolution is lower than a standard monitor, especially since the screen size will probably be larger and still maintain the same resolution. Basically the pixels per inch are much lower.
3)If you're sitting on a couch or bed, you have to either buy a good long range wireless mouse and keyboard (I bought the logitech MX5500), or get USB extension cords and have the cables run across the room (sometimes a more accurate solution since wireless is never perfect).
4)It becomes extremely difficult to read text without zooming in, or sitting about 6 feet from the screen. I lay on my bed about 13 feet from the monitor, and I frequently have to zoom into the screen. Solutions are simple but have their own set of pros/cons: Windows 7 has a built in feature that increases the size of all text up to 150%, however, this will mess programs up which use the full screen feature, and you have to log out when you switch back to normal mode. You can also use windows 7's built in magnifier to view text easier around the mouse cursor, but then the zoom window gets in the way. The last option is to zoom into web pages and files by holding the CTRL key and rolling the middle mouse wheel (or you can hold the WINDOWS key followed by the "+" or "-" key to zoom in/out accordingly).

Pros:
While it may not seem like it, for me, the pros do still outweigh the cons.
1) Your full library of 1080P videos from your computer/network are accessible at your whim on a full size high res(well high res as far as tv standards go). Totally worth the price of admission.
2) Watching youtube videos, and browsing the web on a huge monitor (besides the aforementioned text issue) is excellent.
3) This setup is by far the best for computing on a Couch/TV, excellent for lazy computing without the strain of sitting in a stiff chair all day, plus you can always set up a table in front of the TV if you want a traditional desk.

I am sick and tired of having my 12 megapixel camera shots being compressed to fit my 1280 x 1024 monitor that can only capture only one or two megapixels of the 12 megapixels with the rest thrown away!! LCD makers , hurry , go manufacture monitors with far more lines !!! I want to view actual sizes of my 12 megapixels into the perimeters of my monitor not fractions of them...

John,

Seems like you already got a lot of advise from forum members but thought I'd through my hat in as well. I have two desktop PCs networked together running a DVI cable from each to a KVM switch and a DVI to HDMI cable back to my deskop monitor allowing me to share a common keyboard and mouse. On my 'primary' desktop PC I went to Control Panel/All Control Panel Items/Display/Screen Resolution and selected Multiple Monitors under Display, Set my screen resolution to 1920x1080 (your's may vary depending on the resoulution your monitor(s)can handle), Orientation 'Landscape' and Multiple Displays to 'Duplicate these Displays'. I can work at my home office desk using the computer monitor or switch my TV to PC input and work from my living room using a wireless keyboard and mouse (a USB cable with an extender also had to be run from the computer to the TV with a IR sensor as USB is only good for 15' to 20')all from the comfort of my recliner. Bottom line I see no reason why not use a TV as a primary or secondary display. The only drawback is that I have to increase the screen resolution while using the TV as my monitor (as I am sitting 8' away from it). Any computer function I can do from my desk (including Media Player or printing documents) I can do from my living room. I am running Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit. If you have not already made your decision I hope this helps.

HyperSpeed

I agree that the refresh rates on the plasmas are real time and that is that makes the Plasma sell. It beats the LCD when it comes to those sizes. This is where it gets a bit tricky. LED has now 10 000 000:1 contrast ratio. U cannot compare that 2 anything! Its a spaceship vs an old ford1 car. If u have a TV and want to use it as a monitor... fine but if u going to purchase one consider the technical. Big Plasma beats big LCD. Big LED beats Big Plasma. Make sure its not HD ready but full HD 1.4. The HDMI cable makes a difference also, when going high performance audio visual the HDMI cable should cost around $250.

I bought my plasma when LEDs were first hitting the market and a bit pricy. They did not seem to have any better ratings based on my viewing environment and, for my purposes, the plasma fit the bill. Can't imagine a more crisp and pristine picture and this is a true Hi-Def 1080p set. Its also a perfect match for my Samsung Blu-Ray player. Thanks for the info. though.

If you pay more than a few dollars for any cable then you have more money than brains. I have worked with A/V for most of my life and hi end cables are 99% of the time just money makers for the salesman. Monster cables are some of the most over prices cables that are out there. The mark ups on them are like 300%. I used to work for company setting up the end end equipment and when we were doing the jobs we would put in the Monster cables that were sold to the customers and take home the ones that came with the equipment. An HDMI has to meet certain specs or else it isn't able to be listed as an HDMI.