Do we really need to have a proprietary monitor stand every time we buy a monitor?

[Allyxxx]

Just about every time I buy a new monitor for my main computers I mount them to a vertical stand for 2 monitors or to a single mount I have, because it gives me the option to raise the monitor higher or rotate the monitors 90 degrees. The monitor poles I have are far more ideal, and reusable than the monitor stands that comes with most typical monitors. Why can't manufactures just use some standard so we don't need to always buy a stand we will never use? Would production costs be reduced if stands were not provided, and instead it had vesa or some standard mounting? Some times the mounting won't even fit normally without some extra adapter. My very first Samsung LCD monitor I bought 15 years ago actually had a good reusable monitor stand that I still have to this day and I use reuse it when I replace the monitor.

 

Am I the only one that feels this way about monitor stands that are included with most montors?

 

 

 

[IPD]

Nope.  I would be happy to save a few bucks on shipping/MFG with a "no stand" option.  And at the display sizes I'm using--a factory stand would be an extreme impediment.  And impractical & dangerous (glass desk).

[Hybris5112]

I would agree. It would be different if the base of the monitor stand was the power brick or maybe where the controls were placed but otherwise a good full motion (tilt/swivel/height/360noscope) stand with a large base and a VESA mount would be something I think there would be a market for. 

[SolarNova]

Chances are the cost of providing that option would outweigh sales and any profits it might give.

 

What u'd likely end up with is Display sold with 'optional extras' at added cost. You wouldn't end up saving money they would likely use the opportunity to charge the same for just the display, then add on charges for the stand.

 

The last thing we need is another opportunity given to retailers and manufacturers to sponge more money out of consumers that they know full well will just have to 'deal with it'.

[Philburke1]

On 4/9/2022 at 6:12 PM, Allyxxx said:

Just about every time I buy a new monitor for my main computers I mount them to a vertical stand for 2 monitors or to a single mount I have, because it gives me the option to raise the monitor higher or rotate the monitors 90 degrees. The monitor poles I have are far more ideal, and reusable than the monitor stands that comes with most typical monitors. Why can't manufactures just use some standard so we don't need to always buy a stand we will never use? Would production costs be reduced if stands were not provided, and instead it had vesa or some standard mounting? Some times the mounting won't even fit normally without some extra adapter. My very first Samsung LCD monitor I bought 15 years ago actually had a good reusable monitor stand that I still have to this day and I use reuse it when I replace the monitor.

 

Am I the only one that feels this way about monitor stands that are included with most montors?

 

 

 

I was under the impression that TV's and monitors do use a standard. Am I wrong here?

 

[Philburke1]

1 minute ago, Philburke1 said:

I was under the impression that TV's and monitors do use a standard. Am I wrong here?

 

[Stahlmann]

Most brands do it like Apple does now: Charge the same for the monitor without the stand, and ADD the (extremely overpriced) stand back on top of that. Eve does the same with their spectrum series: They're already too expensive without the stand, adding another $100 or so when they have to include one. A stand should not be an addon, as MOST people will use their monitor with the included stand. Still, people using a wall or desk mount can take advantage of the standardized VESA mounting holes.

 

In the end the savings from leaving out the stand will not translate to a lower price for the consumer, but lower cost for the manufacturer.