From: rash@access.digex.com (Wayne Rash)
Subject: Re: 17" Monitors
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 50
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.net

mreamy@rock.concert.net (Michael G Reamy -- Support) writes:

>>and they too said that the Nanao T560i was the best monitor to get if
>>you had the money. But they also said that the Mitsubishi Diamond Pro
>>17 is the next best choice and that it has superb picture quality.
>>This monitor can be had for around $1070.
>>
>>Has anyone actually seen any of these? 

>I am responsible for choosing standard components in my company and as part
>of my review i got the Viewsonic 7, Mitsubishi 17, and Nanao F550is.  I picked
>the F550i even though it costs more than the other two choices because it
>has a the best clarity and text is not fuzzy at all.  The Viewsonic 7 is the
>worst, the Mitsubishi 17 is much better but the Nanao F550i blows both of
>them out of the water.  I don't understand why the Nanao is so much better 
>since one would think that the Mitsubishi 17 with it's Trinitron tube would
>be better.  I can only imagine that the Nanao T560i must be incredible if it
>is beter than the F550i.
>-- 

>Michael G. Reamy (mreamy@rock.concert.net)

>The light at the end of the tunnel may be an oncoming dragon.

One of the monitors I reviewed for the June issue of Windows Magazine was
the Mitsubishi.  I also reviewed a new Nanao, the F550iW, which has just
been released.  Last year for the May '92 issue of Windows, I reviewed
several monitors, including the Nanao T560i.  There's no question that the
Nanao monitors are the best available this year, just as they were last
year.  The difference between my ranking of the best in Windows and the
ranking in Windows Sources is due mainly to a difference in the testing
criteria and the scoring.  I used different tests than they did, and I
scored differently.  There's nothing wrong with the Mitsubishi, and it
scored very highly in my tests, but it was a few points shy of perfect.

Incidentally, one of the things everyone should do when they're reading
reviews of any product, whether it's monitors or mice, is to read the
criteria and methodology carefully.  Unless you know how the product
testing was done, and on what the scores are based, you can't possibly
know what they really mean.  Just seeing that I rank a monitor differently
from Windows Sources is meaningless without knowing how we did the
ranking.  Likewise, it's impossible to tell whether a monitor will meet
your needs unless you know how we did the testing.  After all, some of
what we do may not apply to you.  Likewise, some of what we do may apply
more closely in one review than in another.  You can't always tell
anything from reading the 300 or so words of commentary we write if you
don't also understand the scoring.

Wayne Rash

