The link:
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/v3d231.htm

The specs:
LCD
Type 23" LED panel
Optimum Resolution 1920x1080 Full HD
Contrast Ratio 20M:1 DCR
Viewing Angles 170º horizontal, 160º vertical
Response Time 2ms (GTG)
Brightness 250 cd/m2 (typ)
VIDEO INPUT
Analog RGB analog (75 ohms, 0.7/1.0 Vp-p)
Digital DVI-D/HDMI (TMDS, 100 ohms)
Sync Separate Sync/Composite Sync/SOG
COMPATIBILITY
PC VGA up to 1920x1080 non-interlaced
Mac® Up to 1920x1080
CONNECTOR
Analog D-Sub
Digital DVI/HDMI 1.4/ 3D spec
Audio 3.5mm jack (blue/green)
AUDIO
Speakers 2W x 2 (SRS Premium Sound®)
POWER
Voltage AC 100–240V; 50/60Hz
Consumption 36W
Eco Mode 26W
Save Mode (W) <1W
DIMENSIONS (WxHxD)
Physical With Stand 21.6 x 15.3 x 7.5 (in) / 548 x 388 x 190 (mm)
Physical Without Stand 21.6 x 13.4 x 1.5 (in) / 548 x 340 x 38 (mm)
Packaging 23.8 x 16.5 x 4.4 (in) / 604 x 419 x 113 (mm)
WEIGHT
Net With Stand 7.9 lbs. (3.58 kg)
Net Without Stand 6.7 lbs. (3.33 kg)
PACKAGE CONTENTS
V3D231, power cable, audio cable, VGA cable, DVI cable, 3D glasses, clip on polarized lenses, Quick Start Guide, ViewSonic Wizard CD-ROM, TriDef 3D software
WARRANTY
Three-year limited warranty on parts, labor and backlight.
3D Requirements
VGA or DVI Operatating System: Windows® XP (SP3) (32 bit only), Windows® (TriDef Software) Vista (32 bit only) or Windows® 7 (32 or 64 bit) CPU: Intel® Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual-Core CPU or better Memory: 1GB RAM GPU: NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600 GT or ATI X1650 XT HDMI 3D Supports: HDMI compatible PC, 3D Blu-ray player or PS3 (Source device must support HDMI 1.4a 3D)
3D Glasses
Type: Polarized Battery: None


I guess mostly it is the part that says non-interlaced that makes me wonder if it is really just the same as current passive glasses models or what??? I couldn't find anything review-wise or if is differnet in some way to normal passive displays.

Its an interleaved monitor, and accepts a progressive signal (ie full 1080P). Interlaced does not equal interleaved.

Thanks for the response.

So it looks like just an LED lit model then.

Its probably a decent monitor, especially for $300. I am pretty happy with the Zalman, and I paid over $700 for that (though it was like 3 years ago). Of course, you will not be getting the full HD 1080P image as you would with some active monitors, but the quality should still be alright.