home links tools blog about
home

June 03, 2009

Dell 20" 2009W 'UltraSharp' Panels SUCK

I've got 3 20" monitors on my desk.

The Good
2 of them are Dell 20" 2007WFPs. Some tech reviews of those monitors said they were good – but had slow response times for when it came to games. I figured that was crap before I ended up buying one, and it was SUCH an awesome monitor I bought another. dell-2009w-lcd-1I also bought a 17" 'UltraSharp' around the same time. It's viewing angle wasn't spectactacular, and I hated having 2 monitors at 1680x1050 and a third at 1280x1024. (The missing 26 pixels in height really messed with my anal-retentive tendencies.)

The Bad
So, fast-forward a few years, and I snagged what I assumed was the new 'version' of these same monitors: a Dell 2009W. Same KILLER housing/mounting equipment. Same awesome stand, same fantastic built-in USB hub. And hell, the specs looked better. Much better – at least on paper.

Only it was all lies.

The Ugly
My buddy Carson bought one of these pigs too at about the same time I did. Within a few days we both noticed that these new monitors just… sucked. They couldn't hold their color very well, couldn't come CLOSE to generating anything remotely close to rich greys like their predecessors, and (to make matters worse) colors/visibility changed depending upon what angle you were looking at them from.

And, frankly, that last point is such a crime. Used to be that 'UltraSharp' meant that you were getting a monitor with a solid viewing angle. With my older 2007WFPs no matter which direction/angle I look at something from, the colors stay the same. With these new replacements, I can shift my head just a bit, and everything is different. Let alone the fact that these monitors are seriously over-saturated (even after turning contrast and brightness WAY down).

More Ugly Still
And… of course, we all know that I'm a bit hyper-critical some times and prone to be a bit cranky (hey, that's just branding right – the site IS called AngryPets.com). But I'm not the only person complaining about it.

This review NAILS it:

Shame on Dell for not using S-IPS panels anymore. I bought this monitor coming out of a 2001FP. WOW did i get jipped.
Don't be fooled by the specs. This LCD sounds amazing on paper for the money.
2000:1 dynamic contrast, 102% color gamut, 1680 x 1050 pixels tightly packed into 20 inches. All for 259 bucks?? Sure I'll take one.
Bad idea. All I was left with was an over- saturated (and trust me the colours are wayyy intense) Almost too contrasty monitor that has a bad viewing angle.
Now more about the viewing angle. Sure it touts 170 degrees. but that's just the image. Not the colour. There's MAJOR colour shifting even at a slight angle.
When in portrait mode, the viewing angles are even worse-to-unusable(unless you don't move your head AT ALL)
      (source: cnet.com)

Likewise, geeks/readers out at Engadget nailed the craptastic choices Dell made when bolting this bucket of crap together down in their comments – where statements like this NAIL what went wrong:

Another TN panel. *sigh*
I really hate that Dell is now calling their sub-par monitors "UltraSharps". What it used to mean was a better-quality IPS or VA panel which offered better viewing angles and better colour depth. The older 2007WFP is a far better LCD than this 2009W.

So if you're in the market for a new 20" – skip past the GREAT looks of these 2009W's – they're total crap.

Shame On Dell
Yeah, I know. Shame on me for not doing a bit more homework. Especially with Dell – whose company motto seems to be: "The consumer will get over it…".

But honestly, despite the fact that I'm a fairly geeky guy and I could have done some research on these new models, why would I have needed to? The predecessor 'UltraSharps' were exactly that. These monitors (apart from their gorgeous hardware) are PURE crap.

And Dell, since you're going to find this post via Google or whatever, here's what I'm hoping: Either send me a 20" that's TRULY UltraSharp along with an apology, or I hope that someone mounts a class-action suit because you've patently decided to pull a bait-and-switch with your own 'UltraSharp' brand name.

Posted on June 03, 2009 | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

March 06, 2009

Why Live Writer Sucks

Video is worth a thousand words.

And yes. This is the last post I’ll do with Windows Live Writer. (Sorry guys, I’d be fine with it if it were second… it’s a distant last at this point.)

Going to try out BlogJet. Wonder why MS thought it was a good idea to get rid of NORMAL view. That thing was perfect. I could write up an entire post with it, preview it… and everything would be spiffy.

Oh well...instead Live Writer now just throws <p> tags EVERYWHERE (and sometimes arbitrarily double-nests them around your paragraphs such that hitting enter causes a new paragraph to be started ABOVE where you were working). Quite sad really.

UPDATE: Scott Lovegrove posted a solution (in the comments) to the evil I encountered by pointing out how to turn off the ‘Edit usingTheme’ functionality. That effectively turns ‘Normal View’ editing back on – which is exactly what I want.

Posted on March 06, 2009 | | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

December 29, 2008

I'm Not Sure

Frankly, I'm not sure who's more stoooopid:

Exhibit A: Politicians
They couldn't wait to shell out $4 Trillion to MAKE SURE that we wouldn't go into a recession.

Well, it didn't work.

That, and while I SUCK at math, the way I see it, 300M Americans and $1T equals more than $3K for every man, woman, and child in this country that will eventually have to be paid back. For my family of 6, that amounts to a paltry $72,000  ($4T/300M x 6).

Exhibit B: Environmentalists
While my idea of a good time isn't burning styrofoam or acres of tires, I'm SICK TO DEATH of environmentalists pushing their religion off on me.

That, and how stupid do they think I am?

Once again, we see another group of hand-wringing, "let's save the POLAR BEARS", self-righteous, knuckle-dragging, numbskull, environmentalists trying to equate human calamity and misery with Global Warming.

And, once again - they're trying to equate EARTHQUAKES as proof of global warming:

Natural disasters killed over 220,000 people in 2008, making it one of the most devastating years on record and underlining the need for a global climate deal, the world's number two reinsurer said Monday.
...
Just days later an earthquake shook China's Sichuan province, leaving 70,000 dead, 18,000 missing and almost five million homeless, according to official figures, Munich Re said.  

Uh... yeah. The way I see it, nearly 1/3rd of those deaths were tragically caused by human negligence. But not of the sinful carbon-emissions kind. (Unless those corrupt Chinese builders wasted the money they should have spent on building strong buildings on gleeful and wanton tire, coal, and jet-fuel burning. Bastards!)

A Fitting Solution
My guess though is that there's probably some way we can get American Tax Payers to bail out German Re-Insurers - given the HELL that volcanoes, earthquakes, and meteor-strikes are going to cause with humanity's refusal to pay attention to global warming ...

Posted on December 29, 2008 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 27, 2008

On Acronyms and the IRS

Acronyms are pretty cool.

Some pretty faithfully match the words they're comprised of:
SCUBA - Self Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus
TLA - Three (or Two) Letter Acronym

Others a bit more of a stretch:
MDX - Multidimensional eXpressions
DNA - Deoxyribonucleic Acid

And a few don't come even close:
IRS - Blood Sucking Bastards

Me? I'm just a wee bit bitter that they 100% robbed me of $1068 this year - and that if I don't pay THEM (the robbers/thieves) then, ironically, I go to jail.

Early 2008 I filed, retroactively, as an S-Corp for 2007. Congress specifically instructed the IRS BSB to allow these late filings. And, happily, they accepted my election without issue.

Only, all during 2007 I was paying estimated personal taxes. To keep things simple, let's say that was $15k. Meaning, that at the end of 2007, the IRS had $15k of my $$ in their grubby little hands. By changing to an S-Corp, the way I pay taxes as a corporation radically changed - and instead of paying quarterly estimated taxes, I now need to pay monthly withholding taxes (i.e. the kind of tax you pay to an employee).

The problem, by retroactively becoming an S-Corp for 2007 the IRS was expecting (let's say) $15k in withholding taxes. I didn't have that. As far as they were concerned, I was Wesley Snipes.

So they fined me.

Yeah, I could get an expensive lawyer and fight this - but I'd lose way more than what I've already lost.

Yeah, they're a gigantic bureaucracy, and I'm not surprised that I got screwed this way.

But by the same token, they're immoral. No other business or organization would operate this way. (If you had a $15k tab with the hospital, and owed $15k ... I'm sure they could figure out how to make that just work.)

I asked that they review my records, and note that I always pay on time, and abate or remove the penalty. They sent me a trial-size package of Vaseline, and told me to pay up. Blood Sucking Bastards....

UPDATE: After contacting the IRS... it looks like they're still trying to decide whether I have to pay the fines or not. i.e. they haven't yet processed my letter asking them to remove the fines. (Hmm... maybe I should take this post down while they're considering... )

Posted on May 27, 2008 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 01, 2008

Another Open Letter to Microsoft

Dear Microsoft,

I know you're busy formulating a hostile take-over of Yahoo right now. So you're probably swamped. And since I think your proposed take-over Yahoo is a swell idea - and a great way to improve your image after the whole vista-capable debacle, I've been giving some thought to some of the great things you can do once you convince Yahoo that this will be a great experience.

For example... you could use Yahoo's search-engine functionality to keep track of all the documentation, white-papers, and KB articles that you keep MOVING around on your damned site.

Me? I LOVE getting the "We're sorry for the inconvenience...." 404 page that you use to tell me that you willy-nilly just removed a resource that I was looking for - because it tells me that you care. Other people might get crabby about that though.

And here's the thing, people are linking to these resources - quite a bit too. Heck, I figure I bump into 2-3 of these little 'love notes' every day. But hey... I get you, you're saying that I don't really need access to documentation, white papers, and to KB articles. Cuz if I did, you wouldn't keep MOVING and DELETING those resources from your site.

But hey, like I said, I know you're really focused on that Yahoo buyout - so'z you can be more focused on providing people with a stronger and more friendly 'intarweb' experience...  I know I'd really like to see something like that from you - so good luck on the buyout as all our hopes and dreams are resting on it!

--Mike

Posted on May 01, 2008 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

March 21, 2008

An Open Letter to Microsoft

Microsoft,

Maybe it's just me, but it's probably time to come to grips with the fact that a lot of YOUR customers actually use FireFox.

As such, pages like this one are beyond ridiculous:
https://partner.microsoft.com/40052721?msp_id=vistasp1

And I don't know what's funnier/worse:
- the fact that I have to accept two different SSL certs that you guys issued to yourself for this site,
- or the fact that you apparently don't know how to do any type of standards testing on your markup/css
- or the fact that there are 78 319 javascript errors on that page in FF.

And actually, pages like that (which litter your site) are actually quite arrogant. You guys keep telling us that you get web standards. And in many ways you really do a great job of listening to customers. But I'm a small shop - and I can be 'bothered' to test my own sites in IE 6, IE 7, FF and sometimes even in Safari/Opera. Why can't you?

--Mike

Posted on March 21, 2008 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

March 10, 2008

Suddenly, the iPhone just got less cool

Well, it gets a lot less cool if anyone is dumb enough to fall for it:

Sun to put Java on the iPhone

Posted on March 10, 2008 | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

February 14, 2008

The Next StarWars Movie

Did you hear the great news? The next Star Wars(TM) movie is going to be animated. And then a whole slew of animated TV episodes will follow. Not to mention an entire bevy of newly colored $12.99 'light sabers' at walmart, and more cheap plastic crap Star Wars toys retailing at WELL beyond what we all know to be even remotely reasonable.

For his part, Lucas says:

"I felt there were a lot more 'Star Wars' stories left to tell," said "Star Wars" creator George Lucas in a statement. "I was eager to start telling some of them through animation and, at the same time, push the animation forward."

What he doesn't say though is that by making this movie animated, he's finally gotten rid of those pesky actors. As we all know, they totally got in the way in the last three Star Wars movies.

Hopefully the release of this new animated film will also let Mr. Lucas finally let go of the need for a plot as well. Audiences made him TRY to cling to one of those in all three of his latest films, but I think that with an animated film and series under his belt that he'll now be able to show people who knows better.

As for the 'stories' these new ventures will be taking:

A new character named Ahsoka, Anakin's padawan, will be the first female Jedi to be a character of focus.

Which brings us to another hopeful point: Continuity. It looks like that too is completely over-rated in Mr. Lucas' world, and will therefore be completely discarded in this new series of Star Wars 'stories'.

Posted on February 14, 2008 | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 28, 2008

Another Outlook Stupidity

Some day I'd love an explanation for what the hell the folks at MS were thinking when they did this one...

Scenario
- I've installed Outlook on a machine and had it running fine.
- Then I've either f-disked my box and re-installed windows, or installed another version of windows (Vista), or moved to another machine, etc.
- The point, though, is that I'm using my .PST on another 'machine' or OS from where a rule was created.

Issue
- My rules don't work.
Why? Because they're set to run, no kidding, on 'this machine only' - which, apparently, in MS-ese means anything BUT 'this machine only'. Here's a screencap:

ThisMachineOnly

(Not the rule above the one in question - that one's only set for 'other machine' - whatever that means.)

The Fix
Yeah, it's ridiculously stupid, but I have to go in and uncheck the box that forces the rule to work 'on this machine only':

stoopidStupids

Like I said, I'd love to see what they were thinking... (and it's been like this since Outlook 2003 - at least).

Posted on January 28, 2008 | | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

January 19, 2008

An Open Letter to Windows Media Player

Windows Media Player,

Honestly, could you be more stupid?

Why can't you figure out that if
a) I'm not watching video and
b) My mouse hasn't moved in the last hour

that it's okay to turn on the screen-saver and then power down the monitors after a while (like normal)?

But no, I've got to go in and check the 'Allow Screensaver during playback' Option. Which is idiotic. Not just because I have to specify that (and no, there are no visualizations being run either), but because we both know, that a week from now, when I'm actually watching some video, and get into it enough to take my hand away from the mouse for more than 10 minutes, the screensaver will click in.

If you were written by some hick who only knew VB 6, then I guess you could be forgiven for not being able to know a BIT more about your environment. But since you were, last time I checked, made by the same folks who SWEAR that you're better because a) you were built by the people who made Windows and b) 'work better' as an integrated media player, there's just no excuse.

And it's not like we haven't known about this 'feature' since, oh... say... at least WMP 9.

--Mike

Posted on January 19, 2008 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Next »