What's so great about Dell 2005FPW or 2405FPW?

C

cheezies

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
1,106
I recently bought a 2005FPW and images tend to look clearer on my 700m notebook screen. When compared to my Samsung 17" LCD screen, the width of the screen is 4" wider, the height is the same.

There are the 2 obvious advantages, one being that I can view documents side by side and the other being that DVD movies make good use of the aspect ratio. I do have plans to connect this panel to an XBOX 360. For those that game on this panel, how do you think games look compared to other LCD's?

I'm not sure why this panel is so popular aside from these 2 things, perhaps I am missing something. Could it be image quality, color quality, viewable area or maybe USB ports on the side? Please enlighten.
 
Everyone seems to go on about the value for money and mega warranty etc which for cheapness i can understand, you can get a huge dell monitor for the price i pay for one of my monitors, but i for one like a supreme picture quality which is why i pay a lot more for my monirots.
 
For the price the DELL 2405 simply cannot be beaten, if you are a gamer looking for massive display real estate then you can not go wrong.
I had one with 3 dead pixels (stuck on white) I got a replacement 2 days later (i'm in Finland) and it is perfect.

BTW man from Doncaster, happy this morning? City were robbed by the ref!! :D
 
I just played a game of UT2K4 on the panel and I must say, widescreen is quite "immersive". I guess this 20" widescreen can't be beat for the price.
 
If you aren't in native resolution, it is going to be fuzzy..and about the superior image quality to the guy above, i don't know about that. The 2005 and 2405 have compared to the apple cinima line quite handily which cost almost 2x as much.
 
>> What's so great about Dell 2005FPW or 2405FPW?

Apparently not much besides the price. Many people get blinded by the fact that they got them for relatively good price and than defend their purchase saying "ooh-oh it's the greatest monitor ever" even though they may not even seen any other one. Sure moving from 10 years old 17" CRT to one of those is gonna feel like an improvement.
I have 21" Sony Trinitron and decided to take a look at 2405 for the screen real estate. after about a week with it, it went back to Dell. Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful product, mine was flawless - no dead pixels, perfectly even backlighting, nice black level, decent response time. However it had one huge flaw that pretty much disqualified it for any video/graphics work - the viewing angle. If you were looking straight at the screen and than glanced at the sides (it's huge so just looking at the sides you got some serious angle) the colors change, they get washed out. For all 2405 owners you can see it on hardforum.com pages. Just look at the gray background on the right, it changes from silverish at angle to gray whan looking straight on. The XP in the xp background theme looked orange vs deep red-orange when looking straight on. Scenes in DVD movies with lot's of dark, when looking at the sides got either gray or greenish look to them. That's S-PVA in action. Pretty much not acceptable.
Got HP F2304 and none of those problems (it does have different ones). Right now I'm even looking to go down to Dell 2001, since I can't really convince myself that the extra 320 pixels is worth $500. Oh and for those which will say but wider is better in the games, well, I've looked at FarCry and actually the Field of vision is THE SAME despite using 1600x1200 vs. 1920x1200, pretty interesting. Just compare the landmarks the guy sees on the left and right at different resolutions, they are the same! Of course it looks great in the widescreen mode but that just because it's bigger.
As far as 2005 vs 2001 I'd definitly take 2001, the extra 80 pixels is not worth loosing 150 vertically.
 
what are the other main differences between the 2005 and 2405 besides the 4" and higher native res?
or are there none...
does the 2405 have much better quality etc?
im asking because im leaning more towards the 2005 and im willing to sacrifice the 4" and higher native res but i would like to know what else i would be missing.
thanks in advance for your help
 
CRaZYMoFo said:
what are the other main differences between the 2005 and 2405 besides the 4" and higher native res?
or are there none...
does the 2405 have much better quality etc?
im asking because im leaning more towards the 2005 and im willing to sacrifice the 4" and higher native res but i would like to know what else i would be missing.
thanks in advance for your help
Click to expand...

2405 is a S-PVA panel - better black level and contrast, worse viewing angle
2005 is a S-IPS panel - lower black level and contrast, MUCH better viewing angle and better color reproduction. Apple Cinema series use S-IPS panels...

response time is pretty much the same.
 
If I recall, some things are potential issues with backlighting in the 2005 dont exist with 2405, and maybe a slighty crisper/nicer overall picture? It also has component inputs the 2005 does not. I believe these are the differences from when I was back reading up on it. Been using a 2005FPW all summer and love it.

Edit: Guy above me said what I was trying to, regarding image differences
 
Xeon22 said:
If you aren't in native resolution, it is going to be fuzzy..and about the superior image quality to the guy above, i don't know about that. The 2005 and 2405 have compared to the apple cinima line quite handily which cost almost 2x as much.
Click to expand...

I was refering to the sony hs95p monitors i have. the picture, colour richness, viewing angle, response times are far superior to any Dell, which is why i paid a lot more for the 3 Sony monitors. i could have bought 3 Dell 20" lcds for the same price but there was no contest in my eyes, i also agree with alexpronko.
 
cheezies said:
I recently bought a 2005FPW and images tend to look clearer on my 700m notebook screen. When compared to my Samsung 17" LCD screen, the width of the screen is 4" wider, the height is the same.

There are the 2 obvious advantages, one being that I can view documents side by side and the other being that DVD movies make good use of the aspect ratio. I do have plans to connect this panel to an XBOX 360. For those that game on this panel, how do you think games look compared to other LCD's?

I'm not sure why this panel is so popular aside from these 2 things, perhaps I am missing something. Could it be image quality, color quality, viewable area or maybe USB ports on the side? Please enlighten.
Click to expand...

Its called "followers"........some don't bother to research things for themselves and strictly rely on others opinions....
 
I, personally, hate shopping for monitors because no matter how much research you do there is only one true test and that is to see and play with it in person... Show me a really good, responsive display, with >1280x1024 native resolution for around $500 or less and I'm there.

I was looking at the L90D+ display for a bit but people have started having a LOT of problems and the support for these is horrid.

I'm still considering one of the sceptre line of monitors... My mind is swimming with information. No monitor has everything and I'm trying to look at the pros and cons of all of them.

And then there's this Sony FW900 in the other thread... I don't care if the monitor I get weighs the same as the anchor on a US Aircraft Carrier. I just want a good picture and a montior that might last me a few more years cause my old 22" Sony is going out right now.

When you are limitted on funds and you have to replace now rather than wait the choices are overwhelming. Whether it seems like following or not, sometimes ya need a little guidance.
 
I have to see monitors side by side to compare.....After all I've gotta be satisfied, who cares what the next guy thinks?
 
ZigZagZeppelin said:
Its called "followers"........some don't bother to research things for themselves and strictly rely on others opinions....
Click to expand...
It's called 'I went to see how well games played on a 2005 and felt the performance was worth my money.'

Speaking for others should be a trick only for magicians and puppeteers.

For Little more than 400 US, I'm a very satisfied customer. Followers indeed.
 
Xeon22 said:
If you aren't in native resolution, it is going to be fuzzy..and about the superior image quality to the guy above, i don't know about that. The 2005 and 2405 have compared to the apple cinima line quite handily which cost almost 2x as much.
Click to expand...

Using the XBOX 360 VGA cable, it would most likely run at 720p, which is not the native resolution for the 2005FPW, in your words ... it's going to be fuzzy. In that case, I'll probably wait until the XBOX 360 comes along, give it a try and it it sucks, sell it.
 
alexpronko said:
2405 is a S-PVA panel - better black level and contrast, worse viewing angle
2005 is a S-IPS panel - lower black level and contrast, MUCH better viewing angle and better color reproduction. Apple Cinema series use S-IPS panels...

response time is pretty much the same.
Click to expand...

seems more like the opposite, i own both and the 2405 has a MUCH better viewing angle. with the 2005 the greater the angle the more purple n less u see
 
The only lcds I like are Viewsonic, Dell or Samsung.....

But to see 1000 Dell threads here there are definitely followers at this bbs.

Don't personalize it if you aren't one but the sheer number of Dell posts here quantifies my statements.
 
alexpronko said:
2405 is a S-PVA panel - better black level and contrast, worse viewing angle
2005 is a S-IPS panel - lower black level and contrast, MUCH better viewing angle and better color reproduction. Apple Cinema series use S-IPS panels...

response time is pretty much the same.
Click to expand...


Uhhh no, the PVA panels produce better colors and have greater viewing engles then IPS panels, hence why people were hesitant to buy the Hyunda L90D+. It was insanely fast but the IPS panel resulted in very poor viewing angles and 6bit vs 8bit on the Dell panels.

Read this you will learn why

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-guide.html
 
ZigZagZeppelin said:
The only lcds I like are Viewsonic, Dell or Samsung.....

But to see 1000 Dell threads here there are definitely followers at this bbs.

Don't personalize it if you aren't one but the sheer number of Dell posts here quantifies my statements.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. The sheer posts got me excited and interested in the panel but it was to expensive for me to buy so I continued to use my L90D+. Until I learned the Small Business "trick" to lower the price by haggling with the saleman, I got a monitor that exceeded all my expections. I thought my L90D+ was good enough but damn once that 2405 appeared, goodbye L90D+, I won't be missing you.
 
I acquired the 2405FPW primarily for the real-estate. I do alot of work on my own business, some casual gaming, and I need as much space as I can squeeze without making the resolutions so high as to make the text neglible. Currently, I use a dual CRT setup and it's not enough. The primary 19" monitor is running 1600x1200, and seeing text for me is difficult, especially when staring at the monitor for a few hours. If I am going to spend this much time in front of one, I'd rather be comfortable.

Having said that, the 2405FPW is on it's way as I write this, so I can't comment on the quality, as I haven't had the opportunity to use it. If I like the 2405FPW, I will be buying a second one; otherwise I will be looking at HP L2335. The reason I am going for the Dell first, is the price ... it sounds like a great value. And I would be lying if I said that opinions of other users didn't influence my decision ... not only on this forum, but other websites as well.

ib.
 
IceWind said:
Uhhh no, the PVA panels produce better colors and have greater viewing engles then IPS panels, hence why people were hesitant to buy the Hyunda L90D+. It was insanely fast but the IPS panel resulted in very poor viewing angles and 6bit vs 8bit on the Dell panels.

Read this you will learn why

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-guide.html
Click to expand...

Oh I read that, believe me, many times before I've ordered 2405, but decided to give 2405 a try anyway.
Let me quote from the link, describing PVA:

"Color reproduction is not perfect, too, like with MVA matrices: when you are looking straight at the screen, the matrix “loses” some shades, which return after you deflect your line of sight from the perpendicular a little."

This is exactly the behaviour I was describing. Well, I called it the viewing angle, which they measure as a 10:1 contrast loss. But nevertheless the colors DO change a lot with viewing them directly vs. looking at angle. Simple test, put yourself a photograph with some shadow detail, picture of tree with leaves works great, look straight on, then look at an angle, and - oh, what's that, there are some detail gray areays there I couldn't see straight on?
I'm not knocking on 2405, it's a great panel but for this particular flaw it was out of the race for me. IPS matrices may go a little purplish when viewed at bigger angles but the colors do not wash out. Furthermore I could see the change just looking at the 2405 straight in the middle and glancing to the sides, I'd see a wash on the sides. This does not happen with F2305, I'd have to be looking at the extreme angle to get the purplish look. Having said that F2305 is not perfect either, I've already went through 3 of them (uneven backlighting) and will probably return the last one. Just ordered Dell 2001, and probably settle with that one until next round of big screen technology comes out.
 
IceWind said:
Uhhh no, the PVA panels produce better colors and have greater viewing engles then IPS panels, hence why people were hesitant to buy the Hyunda L90D+. It was insanely fast but the IPS panel resulted in very poor viewing angles and 6bit vs 8bit on the Dell panels.

Read this you will learn why

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-guide.html
Click to expand...

You should read your own reference. It says that S-IPS have the best color reproduction:

MVA and PVA matrices boast an excellent contrast ratio and viewing angles, but they are not very responsive: the response time degenerates quickly as the difference between the initial and final states of the pixel is decreasing. Thus, such monitors suit badly for playing games. They also have some problems with color reproduction – they are worse than IPS matrices in this respect, so MVA and PVA matrices both are unsuitable for working with color. On the other hand, thanks to the high contrast ratio, such monitors will be an excellent choice for working with text, line drawings, and will make a good home device, if you don’t need a high-speed matrix. Choosing between PVA and MVA, it’s better to go PVA as they have a much better contrast ratio and repeatability of quality from model to model.

I'm pretty sure the Hyundai is a 6 bit TN panel. Both Dell monitors have 8 bit displays. Every type of panel has major weaknesses, and this is what I have heard:

MVA/PVA (Dell 2405): Response time
S-IPS (Dell 2005): Contrast ratio
TN (Hyundai L90d+): Pretty much everything except response time

TN panels are by far the cheapest (most, if not all, 17" LCDs are TN, and a large proportion of 19" LCDs are also TN). Also, note that reponse times are not compared evenly between panels. For example, it has been said that a S-IPS reponse time of 25 ms is equivalent of 16 ms TN. On the same note, PVA 25 ms is slower than TN 25 ms.


alexpronko said:
Oh and for those which will say but wider is better in the games, well, I've looked at FarCry and actually the Field of vision is THE SAME despite using 1600x1200 vs. 1920x1200, pretty interesting. Just compare the landmarks the guy sees on the left and right at different resolutions, they are the same! Of course it looks great in the widescreen mode but that just because it's bigger.
Click to expand...

Then you must not have Farcry adjusted properly. Many games claim to support widescreen, but in reality, what they do is zoom in and chop off the top and bottom of the image. So in actuality, your widescreen will have LESS vertical viewing angle with the same horizontal viewing angle.

However, if you adjust the game with tweaks, hacks, or simple INI modifications, you can get true wideangle FOV. If you can manage to pull this off, WS looks better. It is hypothesized that this is because humans naturally have more horizontal viewing angle than vertical. So, if you can get true widescreen support for your game, then you have a more natural looking image. You can, of course, increase FOV on your 4:3 aspect screen, but it will definitely look weird.

Some games do not support widescreen FOV, the most notorious being BF2. In this case, you are better off using 4:3 or 5:4 aspect ratio since you will be forced to lose a strip off the top and bottom of the screen.

Please see www.widescreengamingforum.com for details on how to get true widescreen support for a variety of games.
 
Ahh well, forgot and kinda skimmed it so my bad, but either way I find my colors to be alot truer and deeper on my 2405 then my L90D+ and im sorry, but even if the FOV isnt' the same in widescreen mode, just playing Far Cry in widescreen with HDR is enough to give any gamer a hard on.

But then again, im easily satisifed with such things and others im not.
 
Then you must not have Farcry adjusted properly. Many games claim to support widescreen, but in reality, what they do is zoom in and chop off the top and bottom of the image. So in actuality, your widescreen will have LESS vertical viewing angle with the same horizontal viewing angle.
Click to expand...

Yeah, games are realy not my piece of cake. If I play once in 6 months thats a success.
I just wanted to see what the big fuss was about widescreen gaming.
I'm sure they can be adjusted by using tweaks but if the game claims to support 1920x1200 out of the box than I don't expect to have to tweak it to get REAL widescreen.
What I saw was what I've reported. I was prety surprised myself to find the same FOV. Oprical illusion had me fooled first and I thought I was seeing more but than I just compared landmarks on left and right and it was the same.
However I just saw shots of 2005 with HL2 on it and it looked like more FOV than on 2001, so I guess if the game supports it properly widescreen works as expected.
For gaming that's fine, but I have hard time believing that someone actually uses 2 web pages or other documents side by side at 1680x1050, I could believe it more at 1920x1200 but not 1680, it's just not wide enough. Since most documents are still more vertical oriented, I'll rather take more vertical resolution for day to day work, hence my decision to get 2001. Just my opinion, everybody has different needs.
 
alexpronko said:
Yeah, games are realy not my piece of cake. If I play once in 6 months thats a success.
I just wanted to see what the big fuss was about widescreen gaming.
I'm sure they can be adjusted by using tweaks but if the game claims to support 1920x1200 out of the box than I don't expect to have to tweak it to get REAL widescreen.
What I saw was what I've reported. I was prety surprised myself to find the same FOV. Oprical illusion had me fooled first and I thought I was seeing more but than I just compared landmarks on left and right and it was the same.
However I just saw shots of 2005 with HL2 on it and it looked like more FOV than on 2001, so I guess if the game supports it properly widescreen works as expected.
For gaming that's fine, but I have hard time believing that someone actually uses 2 web pages or other documents side by side at 1680x1050, I could believe it more at 1920x1200 but not 1680, it's just not wide enough. Since most documents are still more vertical oriented, I'll rather take more vertical resolution for day to day work, hence my decision to get 2001. Just my opinion, everybody has different needs.
Click to expand...


Uh you know you CAN rotate the 2005 and 2405's and get insane verticle area if thats what you want. My friend is a programmer for a medical database company and when he saw my 2405 in rotated view compared to his 1905, he about shit his pants. Hes like "Fuck man, that be screaming awesome for writing code!!!"
 
not to much to add besides i would rate my monitor a 8 out of 10, with the price it cant be beat, plus it is awesome step up from a CRT, just like wireless once you go LCD you will never go back. I would say i am the average users, plays a good amount of games, some in native widescreen some not, and alot of surfing and instant messaging and some DVD watching, everything I do I cant see anything that i dont like, granted i havent seen any of the 1000 LCDs out there but I am not a monitor sniffer.
 
RHollister said:
not to much to add besides i would rate my monitor a 8 out of 10, with the price it cant be beat, plus it is awesome step up from a CRT, just like wireless once you go LCD you will never go back. I would say i am the average users, plays a good amount of games, some in native widescreen some not, and alot of surfing and instant messaging and some DVD watching, everything I do I cant see anything that i dont like, granted i havent seen any of the 1000 LCDs out there but I am not a monitor sniffer.
Click to expand...

I was reading that message on my 12" widescreen laptop LCD and even though it is much brighter and sharper, I noticed that I was slouching towards the screen. I grabbed a meter stick and measured, my head was 12" next to the screen! I now realize how much bigger a 20" widescreen really is, and when rotated 90 degrees, the thing is GREAT for coding.

As for side by side applications, truth is, I still open one window at a time, which is why I probably didn't understand why widescreen was so great. But on the bright side, I have just enough space to keep my MSN messenger chat windows open and can peer at them without minimizing and clicking things.

Now I can't wait until I try start coding my assignment with the screen rotated 90 degrees.
 
ZigZagZeppelin said:
The only lcds I like are Viewsonic, Dell or Samsung.....

But to see 1000 Dell threads here there are definitely followers at this bbs.

Don't personalize it if you aren't one but the sheer number of Dell posts here quantifies my statements.
Click to expand...
Now you see why people don't use machine guns to swat flies.

Your generalizations were woefully inaccurate and also untruthful.

The Dell users, especially those that have the monitors, in this thread, seem to be rather full of information and not just blind opinions or blind spending like GWB.

So far, I haven't seen anyone say they bought it because everyone else has one.

That'd be your follower.

Everyone else seems to think that it's about performance, which both monitors offer, and at good prices (thanks to the [H]ard forums.
 
IceWind said:
Ahh well, forgot and kinda skimmed it so my bad, but either way I find my colors to be alot truer and deeper on my 2405 then my L90D+ and im sorry, but even if the FOV isnt' the same in widescreen mode, just playing Far Cry in widescreen with HDR is enough to give any gamer a hard on.

But then again, im easily satisifed with such things and others im not.
Click to expand...

As I said, the Hyundai is a 6-bit TN panel, which has significantly worse color reproduction than an 8-bit PVA. It doesn't surprise me that your 2405 just looks better.

Also, the FOV is only wider if you adjust the game appropriately. Most games do not support true widescreen unless you tinker with the settings. You should really go to www.widescreengamingforum.com to optimize Far Cry for WS gaming. You will be happier that way. Or, you could just play Half Life 2, which natively supports widescreen. Big FOV with no tweaking!


alexpronko said:
I'm sure they can be adjusted by using tweaks but if the game claims to support 1920x1200 out of the box than I don't expect to have to tweak it to get REAL widescreen.
What I saw was what I've reported. I was prety surprised myself to find the same FOV. Oprical illusion had me fooled first and I thought I was seeing more but than I just compared landmarks on left and right and it was the same.
However I just saw shots of 2005 with HL2 on it and it looked like more FOV than on 2001, so I guess if the game supports it properly widescreen works as expected.
For gaming that's fine, but I have hard time believing that someone actually uses 2 web pages or other documents side by side at 1680x1050, I could believe it more at 1920x1200 but not 1680, it's just not wide enough. Since most documents are still more vertical oriented, I'll rather take more vertical resolution for day to day work, hence my decision to get 2001. Just my opinion, everybody has different needs.
Click to expand...

I know what you're talking about. I had a 2005fpw, and I returned because I now hate Dell. But it was a pain in the butt to get FPS's running correctly on widescreen. Only a few games (including HL2) natively support true widescreen. And then there's that whole deal with trying to get decent frame rate on native resolution with a 9700 Pro... But when I did get it working, the view was definitely worth it.

You are also right about viewing documents side by side on a 20" WS. It isn't really that comfortable, and you have to squeeze the windows together. Going with a non-WS 20" is fine for games as well; in fact, even if there are more pixels with the 2001fp, it still runs faster! That's probably because there is less "action" going on in the vertical FOV than there is in the horizontal FOV. So not only do you have more pixels, it has better frame rate. Note, however, that the 2001fp has a horrid contrast ratio and poor black levels.
 
ZigZagZeppelin said:
The only lcds I like are Viewsonic, Dell or Samsung.....

But to see 1000 Dell threads here there are definitely followers at this bbs.

Don't personalize it if you aren't one but the sheer number of Dell posts here quantifies my statements.
Click to expand...



Yes, lots of other people are following the other people who bought 24" widescreen LCD's for @$900 shipped instead of paying over $1500 for something not much better.

Or how about price range?

Lots of people have price range for well under $1000 for monitors, but if they can get an LCD that huge and right around $1k, they might just stretch their funds and buy.

It's like some snob driving around in a $100k car (not all rich people are snobs I am sure) looking out at the multitude of people in cars that cost under $20k and going

"Omg, what followers those people are, all of them driving around in cars that only cost 20k."

Take a poll on how many people own mid range Honda's or Fords vrs how many people own Bently's.

Not everyone can buy things, price no factor.

But to see 1000 Dell threads here there are definitely followers at this bbs.
Click to expand...


How about there are definitely alot more people that can only afford around $1k for such an item vrs people that can buy whatever they want at any price here? I guess that never occured to you.
 
ZigZagZeppelin said:
Its called "followers"........some don't bother to research things for themselves and strictly rely on others opinions....
Click to expand...
Followers? While other's may have the time to research certain items on their own, other's may not. So they look for other people who have personal opinion's about the product they own. I sure as hell have boughten items out of an opinion of a friend and have yet to be let down. To call people who conserve time by asking other's followers..it's rather lame. Don't ya' think? Let's leave calling followers to the music/highschool/fashion scene.
 
You Dell fanatics are too fuckin much.....

There are better monitors out there, Dells bleed backlight like a mofo.

RMA king of lcds...

I can be a prick too....and these statements are fact.

glad Im not a Dell fanatic.....buy a Dell pc to go with that?

LMFAO

get over yourselves, they aren't the best. My family has a digital photography business for a few years now & guess what? no Dells in da house....but we have Eizo's & Apples
 
Eizo and apples are nice for your parents business. Although with complaints of 2405 FPW blurring, of which I also partake, I must say with those two panels you mentioned you might as well game fucking drunk or tripping off your ass. Or shake your head furiously after getting coked up. I'd love to hear the owners of any of these compain of nvidia shimmering. That would rock my world. Have fun looking at photographs though. My colars are more acur8 ftw! Bring on SEDs... next time I spend 1k on a screen it won't have a glaring fault that smacks me in the face the second I try to do something other than read text or look at still images.
 
I think the Dells have a nice image, in fact among the best.

But quality control is subpar, many get RMA'd.......

Two of my brothers run the business, btw.

For gaming I like Viewsonic, Dell and Samsung like I've previously posted.

For graphic related work Eizo or Apple.

But theres no way I'd spend $1000 on a Dell, for that money I can get a large Apple display.
 
texuspete00 said:
Eizo and apples are nice for your parents business. Although with complaints of 2405 FPW blurring, of which I also partake, I must say with those two panels you mentioned you might as well game fucking drunk or tripping off your ass. Or shake your head furiously after getting coked up. I'd love to hear the owners of any of these compain of nvidia shimmering. That would rock my world. Have fun looking at photographs though. My colars are more acur8 ftw! Bring on SEDs... next time I spend 1k on a screen it won't have a glaring fault that smacks me in the face the second I try to do something other than read text or look at still images.
Click to expand...

Don't trip, get drunk or do coke.

I smoke greens...

:)
 
My preferred choice. But I'm out, so I'm getting hammered. :) Me & JD, best friends since 2001. I'd like my woman MJ too but she's out of town. *scrape scrape scrape* :p:
 
Apallohadas said:
Uh hu. Tell us again why we should care about your 'opinion'.
Click to expand...

Didn't say daily, did I? On occasion, yup.

And its a whole lot healthier then the legal alcohol the gov't taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top