I’m IT support for a non-profit university, tasked with getting a large display for a visually impaired user. The only requirements are 27" to 30".

For my standard users, I’ve always tended to getting the crispest display for the money, such as going with Dell’s Ultrasharp line rather then the E and S series. (My philosophy is to spend a few more $ on the things that people spend all day looking at or touching is worth it over the long term.)

Would that be a waste for a visually impaired user that’s planning on using ZoomText to enlarge the display?

A 27" Dell S2740LSAP runs $350 vs $700 for a U2713HM (both with 3-year warranty).

2

What I have done for my visually impaired users is I would simply turned down the resolution.

But for a screen 27" to 30" why not simply by a TV and use it as a monitor?

3

I can tell you from someone who has installed and trained on ZoomText, Magic and other screen magnification software, Bigger is usually better. As most of the magnifiers will lose quality as you go bigger due to basically being a magnifier (except for text in some cases) the higher quality model will be a waste.

4

Also, if you are using Windows 7 or Windows 8, the built in magnifier has gotten much better. If they don’t need some of the more advanced features, you would be better off using that.

Background on me: I trained visually impaired veterans for 3 years on how to use a computer with ZoomText or Magic.

5

There is a problem with going too big. You don’t want to get outside the users field of vision where they are having to move their head back and forth in order to see the entire screen. The bigger the screen, the farther back it has to be. Sometimes it is actually better to have a smaller screen where the user can control which part of the screen they are looking at via magnification than to have a huge screen and get a lot of neck strain from looking all over the screen itself.

6

Paul,

Is the user already accustomed to ZoomText? If not, I would recommend Freedom Scientific’s Magic over ZoomText. ZoomText has always been buggy for me.

7

Agreed. But that was addressing OP question.

I always stuck with no bigger than 20" - 24" for users. Any bigger is to big IMHO.

8

Oh I know. The clarification was more for the OP.

9

:smiley:

10

I bet you can tell but after spending 3 years working for a non-profit showing veterans how to use a computer, I have become quite engrossed in that field.

High end monitors are designed for high resolution. From an office standpoint, this means more desktop real estate. Every monitor has an optimum resolution. This is the resolution that gives the best quality image reproduction on the screen. Most high end monitors have an optimum resolution around 1920 x 1080. As the size and quality of the monitor increases, the higher the optimum resolution will be. The problem is that visually impaired users normally prefer resolutions around 1024 x 768 (or better yet, 800 x 600) regardless of the size of the monitor. The challenge you have is finding a new monitor that displays well at 1024 x 768. A lot of the monitors out now will begin to pixilate pretty badly at the lower ranges making it self defeating to the user. I’m sorry that I don’t have a recommendation for you. I have found that my older monitors (23") work better. I only buy the ultrasharps for those who want more desk space after explaining to them that the text on the screen will be sharper but smaller. The magnifiers work well but often get in the way.

12

why don’t you just increase the DPI from standard 100% to 200%. It maintains the aspect ratio but just makes everything very large. I did this with my timeclock kiosks and it works great.

13

I’ve got three users with 32" flatscreen TVs as monitors. While the supersized icons make my head hurt, those folks that need them love the arrangement.

14

I agree with Nick. Why not just buy a LED/LCD tv for the user. True they do not usually support the highest of resolution but someone who is visually impaired would not ever use a high resolution.

15

It really depends on the user’s vision. For someone with 20/200 vision or Macular Degeneration, just getting a large tv wont help them at all. Sometimes for them, a 19" non-widescreen monitor and some screen magnification software works 100% better then a larger monitor.

You really need to talk to the user and find out what they want to use. They will be able to tell you what works for them.

16

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I was just pointing out what’s worked for the folks we have with ^%$#'d up peepers. Hell, one of them has it on his desk, two feet from his face and loves it.

Just like finding a comfy chair (yes, THAT comfy chair) for them bad-back types. Not one approach fits all. Example: My issues are up top, so a nice lumbar support does %$# all for me.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I second this statement. Their are many different levels of visually impaired and working closely with the user may discover a more custom solution that could be less expensive, more enjoyable, and allow the user to maintain their dignity.

18

19

I have a user with macular degeneration. She uses Zoom Text and requires dual monitors set as a clone with Zoom 8x on her primary monitor and 1x on her secondary. She uses the secondary as navigation to see where her cursor is on the primary screen. Zoom Text rquires identical resolution on each monitor. Therefore, if i use a lower res moniotor for her secondary, her primary has to follow suit. I have several people ‘assisting’ in this and what i cant seem to get through to them is that getting her up to 1920x1080 would greatly improve her ability to see the promary monitor. They seem to think that an Apple monitor would be better, but everything i am reading says Apple monitors are 72 dpi as opposed to 96 dpi on a PC. She works in a PC environment so i am having a hard time understanding why a 72 dpi monitor would help her. Also, her current monitor can be dropped to 72 in the settings…but wouldn’t that lower her resolution? Thank you for your comment that you really need to work directly with the user and find a custom solution that will maintain their dignity. Well said.

20

At 8x magnification, the difference in DPI wont be a noticeable difference. What matters more is the total resolution, screen quality (contrast, brightness) and screen size.

Why are there people “assisting” with recommendations? Like I said above, the user should have the final say. Within the ADA requirements, you have to provide reasonable accommodations to the user. This does not mean that other employees/managers get to say what she gets. This means that she requests what she needs and as long as it does not put a strain on the business and can be justified for her position, she gets it.

If the user thinks the Apple monitors will work better, then get them. If the user is happy with what she has, then leave it alone. If she wants some other monitor with a higher resolution so she has more screen real estate, then get that one.

What is driving this conversation?