You can get 21" CRTs that run at decent rez. My old and decrepit KDS Avitrons can run 2k (that's 2048 to you youngens) by 1536. I don't run that rez, on account of how my eyes are too worn out from countin' money.
Mine were $750 (I think) and that was about 3 years ago (or more). I know you can get a very nice Sony 19" CPD-E440 for about $300 now.
Forget about whatever the "native" resolution is of the monitor. Go with what is "easiest" on your eyeballs!
Some of us have screen real estate issues. So the resolution does matter. I find that making the charts with a black background will solve many problems for the eyes. Michael B.
Digital vs Analog LCD inputs - I've seen a few posts on ET stating that analog-driven LCDs give as good an image as digital. I have to disagree big time. I've found with 3 different panel mfr's that no matter how good you adjust the clock and phase settings there's nothing like a true digital image. Every pixel is sharp and true, whereas the analog conversion often causes a slight blur/shadow in one area of the screen or another. You can sit and fiddle all day with the clock settings and still never have the perfection you get with digital (DVI) on the first try. Digital rocks! Those candlesticks never looked so good. Just my 2c
"I have said it before and I will say it again. Analog technology is getting better by leaps and bounds and it's almost matching the quality of its more expensive DVI digital partner." -- Nathan Glentworth, TweakNews.net, 9-8-03