Greetings again Paul,<<there's a review of 19" CRTs, with the Iiyama VM Pro 454 coming out on top (no surprise there perhaps) However, what caught my eye was that its optimum resolution is quoted as 1280x1024.>>
Spotted that as well! Good choice eh? I think the reason they suggested 1280*1024 rather than 960 is that the 4:3 ratio probably isn't important unless you are running specialist software like what we are.
The reason they quoted 1280*1024 rather than 1600*1200 is that the geometry struggles a bit at that higher resolution. I can run FS2002 quite successfully at 1600*1200 and very nice it is too (with no reduction in frame rates) but the differences are small and if I load any other software the font is miniscule making it difficult to read. So, I tend to stick to 1280*1024 ... woops I mean 960! <g>
There is always a recommended resolution for CRTs but for different reasons to TFTs. For 17" it's 1024*768, 19" is 1280*1024 and 1600*1200 for 21". It's just the resolution that the monitor works best with. They can go higher but even with top quality CRTs it places extreme demands on the tube.
I think your logic still hold water
Cheers,
Ray Proudfoot,
Cheshire, England