Acer T232HL - Touch Comes to the Desktop
by Chris Heinonen on February 6, 2013 9:00 AM ESTAcer T232HL Conclusions
I’ve tried hard to separate my feelings for Windows 8 from the Acer T232HL display, but they are still linked together somewhat. Anyone buying a touchscreen display is likely buying it for Windows 8 now, and if the interface only supports it so well, and not that well with multiple-displays, that could be a killer for some people. Even beyond that, there are issues with the T232HL that go beyond Windows 8.
The glossy screen is a choice that I am not a huge fan of, but I understand that some people will be. The fact is that with only a tilt adjustment available to the user, there is a higher likelihood of reflections than with other displays. Some people will be happy with this screen finish choice, but I’m not one of them. I’d be happier with it if the Acer could produce 300-350 nits of light output to help overcome the extra glare, but it peaks at 219 nits, making overpowering lights something that is unlikely to happen.
The larger concern is the big uniformity issues that I ran into with my sample. We have areas of the screen that are more than 50 nits different from each other, and when we are trying to hit 200 nits, that means one section of the screen might be 25% darker than another area. This sort of variability is clearly visible to users and is not an acceptable level to me. I find 10-15% to be the most that I can accept in a consumer display, but 25% is just too much.
Finally we have the issue of value here. For $500 I would expect a display with greater than 1080p resolution and with a highly adjustable stand, and DisplayPort inputs should come standard as well. I am certain that being a touch display is adding a good amount to the cost, but $500 is really high for a 23” monitor. The Dell U2312HM, which is also IPS and performs better on all tests, is available for $225 online. It lacks touchscreen capability but is better as a display. You can also pick up a 27” WQHD display for under $500 now which will also lack touch capability, but will offer far more room for working in comparison to the Acer.
With how Windows 8 is designed, I feel the Acer needs to either be your only monitor, or be a secondary display to better use the updated Start screen and its Metro apps. As a dedicated display, the uniformity issues make me not want to use it, as well as the glossy appearance. As a secondary display, I have a hard time recommending a $500 1080p display for that purpose.
Maybe I’m just an old guy that doesn’t want to touch his monitor that often on a desktop, but unless the price:performance ratio improves on the Acer, I can’t really recommend it unless you really need a touch sensitive display. If that's the case, while I suspect there are better touchscreens out there, the only options that currently cost less appear to be using TN panel. A better approach right now would likely be waiting for additional offerings and competition to drive prices down, and perhaps once WIndows 8 SP1 comes out some of the concerns I have with multiple monitor setups will get addressed.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
View All Comments
pandemonium - Wednesday, February 6, 2013 - link
The only way I can use a touchscreen for a desktop computer will be with a drawing table layout with the screen actually in the desk. *patent!!*Operandi - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
Bring on 4K IPS/VA panels and stop making worthless crap.Dribble - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
It just doesn't work. You want your arms relaxed in front of you - hence the design for mice + keyboards.Where touch screens work you tend to be looking down at them and have them close to your body so you arms stay relaxed. This is not the case for a desktop monitor - you cannot keep your arms vertically out in front of you for any length of time - it's very tiring.
Hence the whole concept is flawed which anyone with half a brain could have told MS/Acer.
Beaver M. - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
Exactly. Though I can imagine, that a hype would press it anyway. Doesnt matter that spine and arm problems will skyrocket after that.TheGreenFoX - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
If you have a primary gaming screen with a fullscreen game on, and a touch screen with the metro interface as 2. screen - will the game minimize if you make a touch input on the touchscreen, or can you use the metro apps without minimizing the game?chaoticlusts - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
Will be interesting too see how the interface devices due out this year compare with touch screen desktop monitors for convenience.I don't really see touch on a desktop screen being very convenient for most people unless you rearrange your setup around it... and even then it would hard not to be awkward. Touch works great on laptops and smaller devices but I really think if people want the 'hands on' approach with desktops things like Leap Motion or the Kinect 2 will take off rather than products like this. even more so when it means adding a $100 device rather than paying hundreds extra for a touch monitor.
beck2050 - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link
Touch my screen on a desktop is uncomfortable and unacceptable for me.I would never want a touchscreen there.
ypsylon - Friday, February 8, 2013 - link
It is really one environment where touch screen is nothing more than a nuisance. Imagine situation like this.You have a desk, on a desk is LCD 27"-30". LCD is standing as it should ~50-60 cm from user so his/her eyes won't bleed after 10 seconds. How the hell somebody thinks (Microsoft for that matter) that user will sit even closer, virtually next to a big LCD pushing buttons on the screen. Really laughable idea. Imagine writing something in the office or doing really complicated spreadsheet just with virtual keyboard stretching you arms across the desk. And if user must keep his/her beloved keyboard and mouse because nobody else on the market cares about touch screen software then idea of a touch screen for desktop is as dead as ISA slot on motherboards.
There are environment where touch screen is used for ages: manufacturing, finances (stock exchange), military, engineering and so on. For now home-desktop area is a no-go zone. We haven't exactly reached Star Trek level of computerization where with few taps on a pad you can run a starship. :D
JimmiG - Friday, February 8, 2013 - link
The whole reason Apple went with touch on the first iPhone was to get the most effective use of the limited screen real estate and surface area of a phone.It is *not* the best interface for large screens or desktop computers where a mouse and keyboard is available. This silliness needs to go away.
DagB - Friday, February 8, 2013 - link
Comments like this really bugs me, especially on a site like this... Where is the forward thinking? Do you actually think people will sit with a mouse and keyboard in 20 years to the same extent they do today? There are lots of interesting things happening; touch, motion sensors, haptic technologies and so on. I agree that this is probably not an optimal interface if you mainly type or do normal "office" work. But there are people doing other stuff as well on there desktops. For example all types of "creative" activities (film editing, photo editing, music producing etc).For me as a music producer this is something really interesting, that has the potential to totally change the way we produce, mix, create and edit music. Ipad is way to small/limited for more advanced work, but is still very interesting. If you put a large desktop screen (more) horizontally, you will not get tired after hours of work and would have all the real estate you need. Also, that is the work position producers and sound engineers have worked for decades. I hope this is just the beginning of a change to a more intuitive and "direct" way of interacting with our digital tools. We should embrace it!