I have a 15" wide 1680 x 1050. That's awesome.

I don't know of a 1400x1050 panel, but the Dell 2005FPW flat-panel is a wide-screen 20.1" 1600x1050 that rotates to 1050x1600. Currently, http://cheap.typepad.com/cheapster/2005/04/dell_lcd_flat_p.html has coupon codes to get it for under $500.

If you really wanted to be different:
http://www.geeks.com/pix/roundmonitor.html

A few days late there, CFlakes :)

Daniel, yeah, that's the WSXGA+ widescreen. My problem is that I don't like having to redo my window placement and desktop arrangement as I plug in and unplug from an external monitor several times a day.

- A

Ben, yeah, that's the same resolution as Daniel's screen. In addition to the widescreen (which I could just not use, leaving my resolution at 1400 (leaving about an inch and a half of unused pixels on each end)) another problem is that this monitor is getting just large enough that the resolution doesn't suit it for me. The problem there is that this monitor is a couple inches taller than mine which stretches out those 1400 lines of resolution just beyond where it's comfortable for me :| If this was a standard aspect ratio, it'd be a 19" screen and I sure would prefer about 17" Thanks for the pointer though. It's the closest I've seen so far.

- A

I have a Kogi 17" that was very reasonably priced at BestBuy when I got it over a year ago:

If you can't find one let me know, I've been toying with auctioning it since it is underutlized at the moment...

-J

I happen to have the 14" T40P, which is also 1400 x 1050, with a docking station. You are talking to one of the more anal people when it comes to displays. If you're trying to drive a monitor with your laptop - it might have changed with the T42 - I couldn't go beyond 1280 x 1024 if in DVI mode. Analog mode at 1600 x 1200 is VERY FUZZY (read: crappy). Before you dismiss 1600 x 1200, I think if you do the math, if you buy a 21" monitor, the pixel size will be larger than your 15" laptop at 1400 x 1050. I'm using a 19" display with a desktop and DVI and it's rock solid beautiful for development - and I can live with the font sizes. I keep my editor (codewright) on about half of the screen and the command line on the other half (Korn shell, of course).

SB

Going up to 1200 lines makes the fonts look too small for me

Whenever somebody says something like this, it makes me angry. Not at the person saying it, but at the situation. In this day and age, nobody should have to settle for a lower monitor resolution just to make fonts look bigger. Inflexibly coded font sizes are holding us back.

Matt, I know where you're coming from. It's not just font sizes though, it's widget sizes and and pointer target areas. It's everything. I'm happy with higher resolution, I just need a little bigger screen for it :-) and my laptop has the biggest screen that I'd be comfortable carrying around so I'm kind of stuck at that resolution if I want everything to be in the right place when I connect to an external screen.

- A

Everything should be resolution-independent! Viva la resolution!

Please don't shoot the messenger (it's been awhile since I've been able to tell the Borg what to do). Just yesterday, I heard from a client that won't use 1280x1024 displays, and will only use 1024x768 (they want BIG BUTTONS and BIG FONTS). Yes, yes, yes, you're all correct re: font sizes. But, let me repeat - I don't make the rules. So, once we get over the unfairness of the world, we wake the the next morning and say what's the best monitor to buy for a developer? My new vote is for the the Dell 2405FPW, which is a 24" 1920 x 1200 display (I do not have one). I'd say it's a bargain at $1200.