A) 16:10 is more of a PC aspect ratio (is the ratio of 2 A4 pages placed side by side). 16:9 is your typical TV format. If you are playing PC games, it doesn't really make a difference as you can choose your own resolution. For console/tv, either your image will be stretched or you will have black bars at the top and bottom of the screen.

B) Any screen that is 1440x900 (or 1680x1050) is 16:10.

C) All the screens you have listed, while they might support a 1080p signal, don't have 1080p panels. 1680x1050 is fairly close, but still falls short. Any that do support a 1080p signal will have to downscale the image. Just note that the 26" screen, while it is 720p, has a 1366x768 panel. This is pretty common in 720p tvs.

D) Unless you plan on sitting close (or using it as a PC monitor), 1080p on a screen less than about 40" is fairly pointless at comfortable viewing distances. I personally have a 24" screen which is a pc monitor that does 1920x1200, any more than about 1.5m away, while I can still read the screen, the detail really starts to disappear.

E) Generally, the lower the better. I can't comment on how 3ms difference affects it though.

F) If you are buying it as a TV, 16:9 is the way to go. Consoles, broadcast TV, blu-ray, etc... all are geared towards 16:9 aspect ratios. I purchased my screen as a monitor, so while I do use it for TV and consoles, I just deal with the fact the image is streched.

G) I'd prefer the bigger tv since the panel in the 19" will only be 1440x900. Any advantage would be lost due to the smaller size.

Mistershine gave the same answers I would for A - D, so here's e - i

E. I wouldn't think the difference would be too much - but it's best to always get the lower response time, assuming the display doesn't cost a whole lot more than the other option.

F. That's a really broad question. It depends on your budget, room size, needs, etc. The element's contrast ratio doesn't look very good...I try to look for a display that has at least a 1000:1 contrast ratio (not "dynamic" contrast ratio - those are fake/inflated numbers)

G. If I were using a computer with it, I'd always choose the 1080p one - assuming it was 16:9 and not 16:10 (which I don't think there are any 16:9 displays that small).

H. Sorry, I don't know of any stores with discounts. Usually the 360 and PS3 are never discounted (because they are sold at cost), but you may be able to find a sale on an hdtv if you look hard enough. If you can find a website that will let you return large hdtv's (in case of defects) you could try that route as well - most of my electronics (which were all bought online) were purchased for below MSRP.

I. Something like this will be just fine for HDMI. I use a longer (but still comparatively cheap) HDMI cable from monoprice - there's absolutely no reason to pay a premium for HDMI cables.

Any HDMI cable is compatible with the PS3/360.

OH AoA someone deserves an apology

Id pick the bigger screen size.
It is said you cant notice the difference between 1080p and 720p If your screen is below 32 inches, no matter how close you sit. It is said you cant even tell the difference from a 1080p-720p 40" HDTV if you're not sitting 4 feet away.

Though I guess if you plan to couple it as a PC monitor you might have to go for the 1080p one.

iclim4 said: OH AoA someone deserves an apology

Pffft it's just a mega advanced bot

ArtofAngels said: iclim4 said: OH AoA someone deserves an apology Pffft it's just a mega advanced bot

For real?

Damn Im reporting this thread then, im also going to suggest that luhuti gets banned!
You better pray you dont get permabanned luhuti.
We dont take kindly to the likes of you.

/bump
Thanks for the anwers, it would be nice if more ppl gives their opinion

PS: Im not a bot :(

We believe you. I just picked up a 32" LCD and hooked it up via DVI ... it's a thing of beauty. Now, if I can get someone to hang it for me ...

/bump
Still waiting for more opinions please :)
Oh, btw: Im buying the items in-store (not online).
The store near here are Best buy, Circuit city, Fry, officemax, staples, walmart, target, toyrus, gamestop, sam club, costco, sears.
Thanks again =)

@OT; don't buy European sets, they're way behind in tech and cost almost the same. Pioneer is the exception as far as I see it.
If budget allows it, look for anything LG, Samsung or Sony.
Steer clear of Viewsonic, Videoseven, Dantax and other semi-widespread brands, price may be low but so is quality (allthough Videoseven makes good PC monitors in the 17-20" range).
Just my 2 cents, I'm not an expert but I have lots of experience both good and bad and try to stay up to date on the market and various models/manufacturers (I'm on the lookout myself for a good HDTV, prolly buy me a Bravia W series 40" this year).

A) Yes there is, and a big one : 16:10 "TV" are not HDTV, they are monitors in disguise, which make VERY POOR TV. That's because in the best case, they have very poor logic for everything TV related. For console gaming, it makes a huge difference. Those TV are all very bad.

Every good HDTV is at least 16:9. 16:10 being mainly monitors, they are only good for PC gaming.

So don't be fooled, and avoid 16:10 so-called TV if you want a HDTV. 

 B) Yes it's true, you can take your calculator and find out for yourself, and no, they're no HDTV, they're monitors in disguise, which make very poor HDTV. One of the thing that make them so poor, is that they have to scale the image by a non integer number. Scaling correctly by an integer is hard enough, but with these resolutions, it will be very poor.

 C) 720p/1080i/1080p doesn't mean anything as long as you don't know what they're talking about. There are two very different things that can be called that: what signals the TV will accept, and what the TV actually displays. "Scaling from 16:9 to 16:10" is pure BS, there is no scaling to have, as it won't fit more than 16:9, and if they did that, it couldn't look perfect at all. Avoid these at all costs.

What you cited shows a confused consumer that don't understand what he bought, and who believes that because his TV shows 1080p (which is the signal the TV received) in a corner, it's displaying all the 1080p signal (it doesn't if it's a 720p TV, it downscales the signal, so lose A LOT of information). 

D) There's no TV that currently has 1920x1080 pixels below 26" anyway, as that's hard to do, and yes, there's no point. I saw they sell 1920x1080 monitors at 26", but I didn't verify if it was true. Anyway, there's no point in making or buying a 1080p TV below 40", that's why even SXRD TV, which uses 3 small 1920x1080 matrices the size of a thumb, actually start at 50", while they could make even 10" TV. So no, there's no difference.

E) Yes, the difference is huge, especially for consoles like the Wii. You'll see some people complain that the Wii is no 1:1 because they see lag in the controller, when in fact that's their TV that's too slow.

You also have to understand that the response times TV makers give you, are without any treatment applied to the image. The logic applied to the image by every TV adds several ms to your response time depending on the technology. The game mode of some TV actually removes lots of logic, sometimes downgrading the image a lot.

F) 16:9, true 720p in your case, as you have a limited budget. That means a 1280x720 TV. Not ever the worst HDTV, which are the LCD at 1366x768. You can tell these are the worst TV, as most people who have them complain that SD content (like the Wii) looks very bad on them. I've yet to understand how people can buy defective TV that can't at least display old content as good as SDTV, but it seems these are those that sell the most, making the most money to TV makers, as they're the poorest TV, so need less engineering. Don't be fooled, SD content on your future HDTV should look at least as good as on a SDTV.

G) 26" HDTV. There's no way the 19" can show 1080p anyway.