Acer 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.

Input Lag and Power Use
Comments Locked

66 Comments

View All Comments

  • zero2dash - Wednesday, February 6, 2013 - link

    Horrible decision.
    That thing will be filthy in hours.
  • Flunk - Wednesday, February 6, 2013 - link

    You can't have a touchscreen with a matte finish, the two features have to go together. If you don't like it you can always get a matte non-touchscreen there are lots of those on the market.
  • JanieMartin - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link

    Love my job, since I've been bringing in $5600… I sit at home, music playing while I work in front of my new iMac that I got now that I'm making it online.(Click Home information)
    http://goo.gl/q9r5k
  • Beaver M. - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link

    Funny, I have one of those right here. Works fine. Given it is also transflexive, but it is matte.
  • Beaver M. - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link

    Transflective of course.
  • shtldr - Thursday, February 7, 2013 - link

    I've seen a matte touch desktop display about 7 years ago. It was probably the resistive type as one had to use some force.

    Not sure if they're still being produced with all this tablet/smartphone glass capacitive fad of late, but they can be had.
  • Tams80 - Friday, February 8, 2013 - link

    Absolute rubbish! I'm using a Tablet PC with a matte touchscreen right now.
  • roberto.tomas - Tuesday, February 19, 2013 - link

    Is that true for proj. capacitive as well as optical? 2-point multitouch systems should probably need glossy, because they are optical. But 10-point is usually more expensive projective capacitive (and I didn't know if they needed matted too).

    My take on the monitor: horrible, disturbingly bad color gamut for a monitor that is glossy. The sRGB % for this thing is as low as a $60 commodity 11.6" laptop matte from AUO. But; full 10-point multitouch in the sub-$1 grand range, good range of pivot, and not entirely small 23". I'm lukewarm to the thing, if it went onf half off sale I might pick one up ... maybe.
  • Homeles - Wednesday, February 6, 2013 - link

    Read the article, genius:

    "I worried a lot about fingerprints and smudges with the glossy finish, but I didn’t find myself having to clean it that often, and typically they were hidden away well."
  • zero2dash - Wednesday, February 6, 2013 - link

    When you grow up, have sex, and have kids, you'll realize that glossy screens get fingerprints all over them.

    Maybe this monitor works for 1 person who cleans their hands every five minutes.

    In a normal household with more than 1 person and normal use, the thing would be filthy in no more than 24 hours. I have fingerprints on all my monitors, flat screens, and every other glossy screen device in our house...and half of those devices aren't even touch screens.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now