We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Currys monitor
Comments
-
Having worked in a hot desk work environment. Where it is not uncommon for monitors to be running well over 12 hours a day. Can't ever remember having to have one replaced.
Current are 21" Philips which are over 4 years old.Life in the slow lane0 -
It depends what "high end" means... it can mean its just a high quality item in which case longevity should be expected but it can also mean bleeding edge with some ridiculously high resolution/refresh rate using just released display tech in which case longevity may actually be lower than a no bells/whistles workhorse screen.eskbanker said:
There isn't consensus on that point - one or two posters may have opined that a couple of years of intensive use is a decent innings, but the opposite view remains valid, i.e. that a high-end quality monitor should be expected to last longer than that.hrawlins said:My takeaway is that when using an expensive PC monitor for over 12 hours a day it is considered reasonable for it to last only 2 years, since it seems to be considered excessive use.
I won't pursue a claim that it should have lasted longer.0 -
True, I was just working on the basis that a monitor costing £749 is clearly not an entry-level cheap and cheerful one, but whether it's high build quality or high spec, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to expect more than two years out of it!DullGreyGuy said:
It depends what "high end" means... it can mean its just a high quality item in which case longevity should be expected but it can also mean bleeding edge with some ridiculously high resolution/refresh rate using just released display tech in which case longevity may actually be lower than a no bells/whistles workhorse screen.eskbanker said:
There isn't consensus on that point - one or two posters may have opined that a couple of years of intensive use is a decent innings, but the opposite view remains valid, i.e. that a high-end quality monitor should be expected to last longer than that.hrawlins said:My takeaway is that when using an expensive PC monitor for over 12 hours a day it is considered reasonable for it to last only 2 years, since it seems to be considered excessive use.
I won't pursue a claim that it should have lasted longer.1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
