Electronics & Computers Deals here!
- Average user rating: 4.0 stars out of 80 reviews Back to product review
- My rating: 0 stars
Full user review
-
25 out of 41 people found this review helpful
2.0 stars
"I'm taking mine back"
Pros: Big, bright, inexpensive
Cons: Software!!!, color rendering/fade
Summary: I bought mine yesterday and spent several HOURS trying to get it "right" last night.
The editors at CNET harped briefly about the "HP MyDisplay" software, but they didn't harp quite enough. Maybe it's better if you're running Vista, but you know what? Most people aren't running Vista. I use XP and the software was so troublesome that I uninstalled it and downloaded the latest one from the website. That wouldn't work either, so I eventually uninstalled it gave up on the software completely.
One of the more aggrivating bugs involves the fact that the software WILL NOT set the monitor's resolution to its maximum settings despite having a beautifully-rendered little button on the screen to do so. Click that pretty little button all you want. Your resolution won't change. If I can't take advantage of the resolution, then what's the point?
And after you run through the software once and try to use it again later, nothing works at all!!!! You can move that little contrast slider all you want. Your contrast won't change.
Okay, so the software sucks. I'll just use the manual buttons to operate the OSD, right? Nope. Apparently the OSD conflicts with the software and the OSD menu disappears almost immediately after you access it (less than one second). After I uninstalled the software for good, the OSD worked fine. (sigh)
So I eventually used my Gretag Macbeth Eye-1 monitor calibrator (which I love) to get the colors right. But wait... what's this? When the screen is viewed straight-on (not at an angle), the top of the screen is darker than the bottom. In other words, it fades gradually from top to bottom. This will not be a big deal to most users and can be ignored if you just want a big pretty monitor. But for those of us who do serious photographic editing on our computers (e.g. for money), this fault is absolutely NOT acceptable. Not by a long shot.
Because of the inability to utilize the maximum resolution settings, I have to use the 1280x1024 option available in Windows. The 1600x1200 setting is outiside the monitor's cabaility and results in a remarkably annoying error message that stays in the center of your screen indefinitely until you change the resolution settings back.
So with the 1280x1024 resolution, if you choose to fill the screen, everything gets stretched. Circles look like ovals. Squares looks like rectagles. This may not be a big deal unless, again, you just happen to derive income from editing photographs. Not cool. Not cool at all. If that darn "preferred resolution" button would work...
So to prevent the distortion, you can use the OSD to squeeze the aspect ratio back to "normal", but then why bother having the wide monitor?
(sigh) I'll return mine tomorrow for a refund. I hope all this ranting proves useful for some of you.
- 22 replies to this review
-
I am running XP, have the software installed, and have no problem with the monitor running at native resolution. i can easily switch the screen resolution to the 1680x1050 native res using the Windows desktop properties anytime i want to. also, my screen has no fade from top to bottom. i believe that you have either a bad vid card or a defective monitor. (mine is a Geforce 8600 GT)
-
Update: Just for kicks, I set the resolution to 1280x768. Surely the card that has been working on the laptop screen at 1680x1050 can do that... Guess what: The monitor is still running in 1280x1024. "Great" product...
-
I should have paid attention to this review, it would have saved me a lot of aggravation. YES, my card supports well more than 1680x1050; YES, I'm using the latest card and monitor drivers, but the monitor simply refuses to budge from 1280x1024. The card works well in 1680x1050, and the stuck monitor manages this in 1280x1024 with PANNING. Since many people have had no problems with setup, I can only assume that it's a compatibility issue, and the blame is squarely on HP. I have an HP laptop, and choose this monitor partly in order to avoid exactly this kind of problem. It seems that HP simply can't be bothered to ensure backward compatibility with their own products. I'm taking mine back, too.
-
excelguru, you may find this link helpful: ;)
http://www.amazon.com/PCs-Dummies-Dan-******/dp/0764508385 -
I managed to get mine on sale for a little under $200. I'm seriously considering buying 3 more (plus one for my home system) if I can find them for less than $250 each.
The resolution problems reported by excelguru are probably the fault of the display adapter, not the monitor. My display adapter will drive four of these beasties at the rated resolution under XP pro. It would actually handle 4 30-inch monitors at 2560 x 1600 -- but the adapter I'm using cost about $2000, or about 4 times the cost of the rest of the box (I do high-performance video simulation software for a living). You can get a very nice digital adapter for about $150 that will handle this display, provided your motherboard will accept it. If you have to upgrade your motherboard, well that's another layer of hassle, but I seem to go through that every other year or so anyway. -
problem with your comment is there are two components on what the maximum resolution of a monitor is. The monitor itself and the graphic card in your machine. If the card cant put out that resolution then your going to get an error message like you did. The other issue with the fading could be a conflict with your g-card or the monitor itself.
So any further reviews regarding issues like this should include the card you are running. Being that you do graphic arts etc for a living I would hope you had a high end card but maybe not. -
The HP w2207 native resolution is 1680 x 1050 and it will automatically default to that.
The previous poster, excelguru, probably has a video card that is not capable of such a high resolution. The software has been modified and works correctly.
Setting your monitor using a calibrator is certainly the wise thing to do, however I have not yet found a monitor, at any price, that has perfect back lighting at all points on the screen. I also perform "serious photographic editing" on my computer (e.g. for money) and find the HP w2207 to be a good balance of price and performance. The one thing to be aware of is the reflection from the glossy screen. This makes it perfect for viewing and editing photographs but if you work in an area that has bright lighting, such as an office where you cannot control the lighting, you would be better to invest in a matte surface monitor as the reflections from the HP w2207's large glossy screen will be distracting. -
I got th HP w2207 yesterday and set up was easy. My colors are fine. I also use it for graphics work BTW. The optimum resolution is 1680x1050. It says so in BIG BOLD PRINT right on the instruction leaflet taped to the screen. I configured it fine using my nvidia graphic card GUI, no prob. I didn't really try the monitor's soft since they're pretty basic usually. As for stretching the image, I would say that depends on what you're viewing, just like when you view a 4:3 movie on a panoramic TV screen.
In conclusion, this monitor is just what is says, great definition, contrast, brightness and colors. A pleasure to look at. -
I was about to hastily buy this after reading the CNET review, thinking the software issues are fairly minor and would no doubt be ironed out soon. But after reading your comment I asked around in the office, and found other ppl having the exact same problems.
Now I'm going for the Gateway FPD2275W, which looks like a much better option. -
In reading these comments, I can't help but notice a huge split in opinions. One common thread stands out though - those who hate the monitor seem to have other issues. Video card issues, video driver issues, viewing angle issues, just don't understand settings issues.
I have this monitor, and like it very much. My older Dell XPS Gen2 machine with a (now outdated) ATI 9800XT card didn't have a bit of trouble from the moment I connected it. My PowerMac works even better - I have both on the same monitor.
I have just 2 issues. I also have the halo issue around small text in all modes when using the Dell via the DVI input - which is not there with the Mac at the analog feed. I am blaming the card for this, not the monitor. Secondly I have to agree that the software is a joke. -
Firstly, if you could only get your resolution up to 1280x1024, you need to upgrade your video card. 1600x1200 is not claimed to be supported on any native 1680x1050 monitor.
Secondly, if you are doing enough for-profit photo work that you need a colorimiter, you should either learn how to shop for S-IPS panel technology, or return your colorimiter and invest in some more training classes. Or give your clients some serious refunds. -
How about blaming your own hardware?
If your graphics prcoessor does not allow 1680*1050 res, don't buy this monitor.
How can you blame the monitor for supporting too high of a resolution that your machine can't support? It's like blaming poor picture quality on your new 1080p HDTV when your using analog cable. What a moron!! A simple GPU upgrade would solve your problem. How about posting for help next time instead of ranting and showing your lack of knowledge...?
By the way, I am using this monitor and it is hands down beautiful! -
I didn't install the drivers on mine because for Windows it is always better not to use extra drivers if you don't have to. In other wards, if it isn't broke don't fix it. Mine works great without the drivers. I am not going to use Vertical mode ether because it's useless to me. As for the upper part being the darker part, that depends on your vertical viewing angle in which all LCDs have that problem. This is a big monitor with a very large viewing area, so you will notice a difference from top to bottom because of the viewing angle. It's not the monitor itself, it's just you have to look up farther than you would a smaller monitor.
-
you are a nub. maybe u should go to linux and learn how to use a real OS.
-
I have exactly teh same problem, so half the text on my screen is blurry because the resolution is not right. works on vista, but sucks on XP, why o why
-
I understand that the HP software sucks. Solution: don't use it. I also understand that your monitor has a fade problem- obviously you got a bad one and should exchange it. BUT, WHY would you EVER set a widescreen monitor to 1280x1024? OF COURSE you're going to stretch everything, that's a resolution designed for 4:3 monitors. The top resolution on this thing is 1680x1050, and everything looks AWESOME on mine when you set it to that.
-
"the screen fades gradually from top to bottom". I though that was a problem with my sample so I wanted it exchanged, the fact that you see the same thing means that fading was "designed in", which truly make this monitor unacceptable.
-
I'm running my HPw2207 at the maximum settings right out of the box. I'm not using Vista either - just straight up XP. I had the benefit of reading the CNET review before buying this monitor though (it really is the best in it's class)and didn't bother to install the software (HP's software can be troublesome at times).
As far as the "fade" goes, I noticed that at first - then realized I hadn't actually tilted the monitor to properly align with my line of sight. Once done, there's absolutely no fade issues...the screen is clear, bright and consistent across the ENTIRE screen as you would expect.
I can't imagine why you were having so many issues with this monitor. All I can recommend is a little more patience and perhaps using a little more common sense. -
Always blame the monitor. Typical. You people need to make sure you're using the latest driver from your GRAPHICS CARD mfr.. And even then there's no guarantee. Not all of them are completely DDC/CI compliant. It's a recent MS requirement and the graphics suppliers are taking their time in upgrading. This is what happens when your graphics technology is running behind the monitor technology. Usually it's the other way around.
Excelguru needs to chill. -
I really meant that 22" monitors have 1680x1050 and not 1600x1050 resolution. Sorry for the mistake.
Another thing, have you tried the monitor with DVI connection? The difference with VGA is very pronounced. True, you won't find that cable in the box, have to order it separately ($10 at Radio Shack, very good quality). When I bought my w2207 it was $390 at Circuit City. Now, a week later, it's $329. I'm going back to them to raise hell about it, after all the difference is $60. Even if I had good luck with the monitor, this drop oly after one week is completely unfair. I second tristan44's opinion and good advice and am myself of the opinion that installing the drivers only is more than sufficient to give you a good start. Even that's not necessary, since XP's drivers are quite good. More important would be that DVI cable because of the radical improvement in picture quality.
However, my opinion remains, this monitor is exceptional in its class as far as image quality is concerned. Too, ergonomics are very good compared to other 22" monitors, except perhaps Viewsonic's VX2230w. -
I agree that the software is buggy. More than the gentleman is talking about, when you're trying to reinstall XP the monitor, if previousely configured in XP, flickers during installation and image disappears completely. You have to reboot and go into Safe Mode, lower resolution to what XP requires and go from there. The monitor won't recognize XP's resolution, period. And yes, the OSD will NOT work unless drivers are installed. My Display also interferes with NORTON's Virus software to the extent that I had to reinstall XP in order to be able to install NORTON.
HOWEVER, the monitor is absolutely splendid as far as performance is concerned. Colors, characters and graphics are outstanding. Thrue, I could overcome the software's problems because I am at a good level of expertise as far as computers are concerned. Because of the software shortcomings, this monitor is not for your average user till HP works out the above problems. I am not sure that will completely be possible since many a software are done expeditiously from the get go and have to be rewritten completely to function properly, something I am not sure HP will be willing to do.
But, in all fairness, ALL 22" monitors have their native resolution at 1600x1050. None go to 1600x1200 or 1900x1080. For that to be had, one must go up to 24" monitors which cost at least twice. You can't get away on the cheap if you do professional work.
As an advice to the gentlemen, be patient and work on the monitor. I have it for the past 10 days and truly love it, but it took a lot of tweaking. It's a stunning machine. -
I think you need help
You dont need a software to configure your resolution
Widescreen native resolution for that monitor is 1680*1050 not 1600*1200... 1600*1200 1280*1024 are NOT widescreen resolution... no wonder everything look strech....
right click on your desktop-- choose properties-- go in Setting TAb--- put your screen resolution to 1680*1050 and click OK
I think you are a bit too noob to properly configure a monitor... sorry im not trying to be a smartass but its true
Go there http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareList?os=228&lc=en&cc=us&dlc=en&product=3363837&lang=en
and download ONLY the driver... install it then set your desktop resolution to 1880*1050 and come back here and give us a PROPER REVIEW
PS: If there is no auto setup for the driver youll have to open system properties, go in device manager and right click on Monitor... From there you choose Update driver... and point to where you extracted the driver files.
Thx and have a good day
HP w2207 LCD monitor:
