Originally Posted by MrCoffee
Yeah TV as a monitor is a bad idea as the resolution just sucks, and perhaps more importantly the dot pitch is horrible. Unless you will only use the computer as a games (with controller) and media machine, otherwise monitor is the only sensible choice - also would be a bit of a waste of any half decent graphics card.
I wouldn't say the resolution of a TV as a monitor "sucks".
While I'm no expert in the matter, and have not compared a TV and a monitor side-by-side, I could give my own experience; I've been using a 720p 32" Samsung LCD with my desktop. I got it several years ago, when LCDs were just coming out (and were quite expensive; I paid for that more than what a much larger 1080p LED costs today). So I can only imagine how much better a much newer 1080p LED would be.
Maybe if put side-by-side next to a monitor, the resolution on the monitor might be better. Maybe. Maybe not. I cannot argue with that. But what I can say is I find nothing wrong with the resolution, and it certainly doesn't suck (at least by my standards). When I use computers with monitors, I notice no difference in resolution (again, out of memory, not side-by-side. But then again, if my LCD TV "sucked", I should be able to notice how significantly better a monitor is, even out of memory).
While some might argue that 32" for a computer monitor is "too big", I have gotten used to it. I find it weird when I work on smaller monitors. And it doubles as a TV, which is a plus for me. I'm sometimes working on my PC and watching a movie/a football game in a PIP window in the corner of the screen.
Again, not an expert opinion. Just an opinion. Hope it helps.