Remember when LCDs first came out? They all had like 16ms response times, they all topped out at 1280x1024, they all cost like $500...and they looked like crap. That was when they first started hitting it big, sort of like where solid state disks are right now, and for some people it was enough that they were flat and didn't take up a quarter of your desk, or produce as much heat as your tower. For most people, the fact that you couldn't (or perhaps just shouldn't) change resolutions, there was a crap-ton of ghosting, and the colors and viewing angles sucked for like twice the price of a more capable CRT was enough to deter any thoughts of early adoption.
Funny enough most of those disadvantages are still there, but LCDs have caught on nonetheless. Manufacturers must have seen the potential in it because despite the lack of initial demand, they continued investments and advancements in the technology, and eventually we got to a point where you could have high res LCDs for as much or cheaper than CRTs (right before they completely disappeared from the face of the planet). The contrast, colors, and response time were good enough that people were satisfied with them once they factored in the other advantages LCDs have. And at least now they finally found an aspect ratio that makes sense.
But the most popular LCDs people are buying still have problems, the biggest being you can't hardly slouch in your computer chair without noticing the colors going disco. Not long after the LCD craze started taking off did manufacturers start working on that problem, if nothing else to ween the photo and media professionals off of the big bulky counterparts with something of comparable color accuracy. But as these higher-end panel types emerged their prices put them firmly out of reach of most consumers, and any attempts to lower costs would never be enough to put them within pissing range of the cheaper alternative. TN panels were here to stay.
Of the two higher end panels, most agree S-PVA/MVA had the advantage of contrast and black levels, with IPS getting the nod for viewing angles and latency. But with the problems of IPS being less formidable, a simple refining of its disadvantages would put it at the pinnacle of LCD technology, and that's essentially what's been happening. With full colors, great viewing angles, and latency the most comparable to TN, it is no doubt the best overall panel type of them all. In an ideal world, everyone would be using them, but the problem is still price.
Enter LG and their e-IPS initiative. Of the IPS types, S-IPS and H-IPS being the other big two, e-IPS seems to be the first to address the cost issue, allowing for less expensive and power hungry backlighting. Combined with the 16:9 ratio of current-generation displays, which allow for higher yields than older aspect ratios, a new wave of affordable IPS LCD monitors have emerged very recently to capture the hearts and imagination of everyday hardware enthusiasts everywhere. No longer is true color, wide viewing angle LCDs the exclusive right of the privileged few in the professional sector.
ViewSonic and NEC were the first to jump onboard the economy IPS bandwagon. Once reviews for the 23" Viewsonic model were published it was quickly dismissed on account of its dim, lifeless image. NEC has been the only other alternative for a while now, but just a couple weeks ago Dell announced the availability of their own 23" (and 22") e-IPS monitor, and once wind hit the airways of a 20% coupon, contrasted by the price hike on the NEC competitor, a sudden fervor was born over the new kid on the block.
As someone who's been watching this market segment since first being made aware of the original 23" NEC wonder, I immediately took interest as soon as the Dell competitor was announced. It was instantly apparent that the U2311H had the advantage in ergonomics; the EA231WMi from NEC had a utilitarian look about it that gave way to bulky bulges on the back and simple looking buttons. The U2311H also had simplicity, mixed with a slick modernistic style that gave it a clean, fashionable appearance. It's the sort of thing you wouldn't mind having on your desk at home just as much as the office. The only question was performance, and while information was scant, many took the blind plunge and divulged their experiences. It started to become evident that while it did not exhibit the dimness problem of the ViewSonic model, almost everyone's unit showed tinting issues, to varying degrees of intensity. Dell did have a zero tolerance policy on dead pixels, but you were stuck with a much higher rate of uniformity problems than the EA231WMi.
But power consumption was impressively low, image quality was otherwise good, and most importantly the price was right, especially with the coupon. Combined with the warranty advantages and superior design aesthetics, it looked like the better buy, so I made the leap. I pretty much thought myself an idiot for throwing away $255 for a new monitor when my old one was only a year old and didn't have anything wrong with it, but once you get excited about something it's hard to shake it. I bought my previous monitor under the premise that it was full HD and didn't have problems with inverted blacks, both being deficiencies of its predecessor. I had blu-rays to thank for that purchase, but this time I mostly blamed my friend. He has a TN panel, but it's the best damn TN panel I've ever seen, and it's no wonder, as it's made by Asus, a company with a reputation for having excellent TN panels. Watching movies on his display rendered colors that were bold, bright, and beautiful, and made everything, not just movies, look better. My monitor looked washed out compared to even my previous non-HD screen, and I grew jealous of the vibrancy I was lacking, the immersion and luster of it, the lifelike appearance that made you forget you were watching an LCD only for it to suddenly remind you of the dazzle it's capable of. It would help me derive more enjoyment from my entertainment, and that seemed good enough reason for me.
When I finally received my monitor, the difference was jaw-dropping. Having expected the improvement to be subtle and distinguishable only under close inspection, I was awed when it proved a change of night-and-day. Everything popped, everything glowed, everything seduced me with its sultry deep hues. It was the kind of excitement you get when you upgrade your graphics card, and suddenly you can enable all the settings and games look glorious and run silky smooth. But this affected everything. Things you've seen hundreds of times looked like they just got a fresh coat of paint.
But like all things in life, there were flaws. One corner exhibited significant backlight bleeding in really dark tones, though mostly only black. The tinting, while fortunately vague enough to only be discernable when specifically sought after, was still there. The viewing angles weren't as good as I expected either. Contrast and brightness decreased quite a bit when looking from somewhat extreme angles, but the colors didn't invert, and you could still easily read text. Uniformity was much better than either of my old TN panels, and contrast was amazing. Best of all input lag was nonexistent and motion blur wasn't hardly any worse either. Most importantly, the colors were better than I ever imagined they would be, and even the sharpness seemed to improve, despite the added inch and a half reducing the pixel pitch size.
Overall I'm extremely happy with this new IPS display, and happier still that I was able to buy it for under $300, a notion that was unheard of just a year ago. I believe it to be a sign that these professional panels are going to start trickling down to within reach of the mainstream market. They're just right for those who consume a lot of media on their computers, play games or do light photo editing, and it may even surprise these companies the amount of interest they receive from the regular buying public despite positioning these monitors more towards businesses and schools. It may open the floodgates once they take a greater initiative to market IPS panels towards the masses, further reducing prices and improving performance as it has for TN panels.
Originally I thought to wait for an LED 120Hz display or an OLED monitor, but I realized that 120Hz displays are expensive, and LED will only increase the price while not affecting image quality. OLED are much further out than I had anticipated at first, but breakthroughs are being made and we might eventually get sanely priced production models at reasonable sizes, but as long as it took IPS to reach this point, it'll take OLED all the longer to achieve prices the humble computer enthusiast is willing and/or able to pay. They still have yet to take that first step into the professional market.
