NEC's 23-inch MultiSync EA231WMi LCD monitor welcomes DisplayPort
By Darren Murph 
posted August 5th 2009 7:37AM
posted August 5th 2009 7:37AM
posted August 5th 2009 7:37AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Too expensive for it only being 1920X1080, some of us like better resolutions than this
This is, incredibly enough, an IPS panel. It's really a steal at this price...
16:9? why?
Because 16:9 is the resolution that DVDs and HD TV shows use.
16:10 is pointless.
@ bartoron: yeah, all that extra screen real estate I get with a 16:10 screen. Really pointless.
Sheesh, some people actually use their computers for *working*. Meanwhile, some others don't have anything else to do than whine about small black bars at the top and the bottom of their screens while watching movies, which they should watch on a big ass TV anyway.
These stupid 16:9 screens seem to be getting rather common. I hope they don't go and kill off the 16:10 monitors.
@ Yours
.........then get a screen with a higher resolution? If you are so worried about using it for working or not, you would probably realize there's more than 16:9 and 16:10, go back to square because you are one
actually most companies are doing it wrong, basically the wider aspect was supposed to give you more pixels not less. for example where we used to have 1600x1200 turned into 1920x1200, and that was supposed to turn into 2048x1152 but most manufacturers went with 1920x1080 for optimal blu-ray viewing and advertising as full HD while QWXGA is relatively unknown. Similarly 1680x1050 was supposed to be replaced with 1920x1080, 1440x900 with 1600x900, etc
@ neofolklore: blah blah. And you're a rectangle. Childishness aside, no thanks, I won't get a square monitor. The widescreen format is superior to that since I can fit documents side by side. Higher resolution or not, a 16:9 screen still gives you less pixels than a 16:10 screen of the same size and prize category.
Maybe Americans who only watch Holywood-pulp can do with 16:9, but if you wan't to see foreign movies, it's actually kind of neat to have the subtitles in the black bar below the 16:9 image. That's where 16:10 comes in handy!
Do you remember who had the first 16:10 screen? It was the original 23 icnh Apple Cinema Display, designed to make Full-HD video editing possible with some room for control bars. So for computers, that are used to edit widescreen content, 16:10 is still welcome. For TV's, 16:9 is perfect. So I was thinking about using this NEC as TV. But hey, where's the S-videoport? Local HD broadcast is not available yet in the Netherlands, and the cable tuner only has S-video out. It would be cool to be able to hook this unit up.
And the silver is piss. They should have made it all-matte-white, so it would fit into the wall stucco.
the next hdmi? I thought hdmi was the next hdmi
No word on VESA-mount compatibility? It probably won't have it- it seems like the perfect monitor otherwise. =\
All pretty nice. Until I read that it's 16:9.
Who's idea was it to push 16:9 for computers?
So that 16:9 movies don't have a black bar we now have to give up space?
I need to edit videos, not watch them on my computer.
DisplayPort is nice, though. No more feeding Sony with money.
Then don't buy it.
Rib-bit
seems like samsung's new C-PVA panel same as F2380 monitor.
You're not "losing space" with a 16:9 monitor. A 23 inch 16:10 monitor is the same size, just a different shape. I'd say more people watch videos than edit them, probably on the order of about 100 to 1 so it's probably a good move for them.
Yeah... no....
My 24" monitor is 1920x1200... 16x120 by 10x120 (16:10)
Is a 23" 16:1 monitor the same size too? Geometry fail.
@ Dab
Surely you mean 1x30 by 1x12 (8:5)
Seriously, where can I get that wallpaper? Does anybody happen to know?
I fear that regualrly portrayed frog is dead by now. : (
Is this a TN panel, or a VA-family one?
It's actually an IPS panel. Seems way too cheap since most IPS in that size are more expensive.
$400 for a 23-incher?
Just a few weeks ago I bought myself a 22 inch ASUS (HDMI, DVI, VGA, 1920x1080, built-in speakers etc.) for less than $200 and a few days ago my friend bought an almost identical 23 inch ACER for $220.
No idea where this price is coming from . . .
The display is an IPS (in-plane switching) screen, which means *generally* better colors and viewing angles than TN (twisted nematic). It is rather cheap for an IPS by the way.
It has been suggested that it is an e-IPS panel, so it should hopefully be excellent (and we can pray that it may be affordable in UK). Finally IPS panels that the masses can afford.
..does DisplayPort support HDCP?
Yes, it does. You can clearly see this in the DP1.1 specification - I think the spec document is freely available for download at VESA's web site. The exact terminology used for DP is DPCP - it's basically HDCP adapted for DP.
Thanks for your reply! :)
..so, even if this monitor doesn't have an HDMI port, is it going to be HDCP compliant too?
I mean: can I connect a blu-ray player or any other HDCP protected source and play videos on it?