--- coder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I found some info which may or may not be of interest:
>
> Concerning size and viewable size:
> http://www.pcguide.com/ref/crt/sizeNominal-c.html
>
> Other Misc. Monitor info:
> http://www.pctechguide.com/06crt2.htm
> http://www.pctechguide.com/06crtmon.
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 08:58:21 -, "Ian Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>In adverts at least you usually see monitors advertised as, say, 21"
>and then in the small print it says something like "actual viewable
>size 19.7"". I think I've seen this in US mags as well.
Yes, the "actual viewab
I found some info which may or may not be of interest:
Concerning size and viewable size:
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/crt/sizeNominal-c.html
Other Misc. Monitor info:
http://www.pctechguide.com/06crt2.htm
http://www.pctechguide.com/06crtmon.htm
--
.oO()Oo.oO()Oo.oO()Oo.oO()Oo.oO()Oo.oO()Oo.oO
> I'm pretty sure that the thing I described was capable of doing CAD,
> otherwise why would it be a CAD workstation? I think that at least half of
> the price was for the monitor, so it must have been something good.
Some of the larger monitors can certainly run at 2400x1800 res. So a 28" screen
> > Don't bother getting into fights with salesmen over it - just use it
> > so you're comparing apples to apples.
> This shouldn't be happening anymore, at least in the US; there was a
> -massive- consumer fraud suit filed against virtually the entire
> industry by something like 37 state attorn
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Nils Philippsen
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 9:14 AM
> To: J B
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [techtalk] Monitor Size
>
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, J B
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, J B wrote:
> trueand the resolutions on those screens are comparable to the
> resolution on a TVpretty sucky, not adaquate for AutoCAD at all.
I'm pretty sure that the thing I described was capable of doing CAD,
otherwise why would it be a CAD workstation? I think t
trueand the resolutions on those screens are comparable to the
resolution on a TVpretty sucky, not adaquate for AutoCAD at all.
-
Objections :-). I once read a test of a CAD workstation (PC hardware)
which had a monitor with an
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Sunnanvind wrote:
> CRT screens are *never* 21" of usable screen.
Objections :-). I once read a test of a CAD workstation (PC hardware)
which had a monitor with an 28" tube which might give some 26" or 27"
usable screen. That thing almost looked like one of those TVs of the
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 06:29:40 +1100
"Jenn V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> J B wrote:
> >
> > If you are going to buy a new monitor, go ahead and shell out the small
> > extra amount to go up to a 21"...you can find good ones at good
> > prices...look through the archives, we had a discussion on p
On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Jenn V. wrote:
> Carry a tape measure. Measure them yourself - they did this at my husband's
> work one day, and found a massive disparity in size-of-usable-screen
> between two allegedly 21" monitors. Neither of which was 21"
> corner-to-corner of usable screen.
CRT screens
But, you have to be careful of the trinitron anywhere where there might be
electrical interference, or vibration. The type of mask that Sony uses on
the tubes is highly susceptible to said interference.
I've noticed the skew and fuzz less on Trinitron-based monitors. I
forget the technical d
Excerpts from linuxchix: 13-Jan-100 Re: [techtalk] Monitor Size by Linda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Another option -- flat panels of the same size are usually sharper
> imaged than CRT's. The CRT's almost always have some skew at the
> edges and it's difficult to keep all 3 g
Linda Walsh wrote:
> Also -- cables and cable length make a difference -- unshielded long cables
> result
> in bleeding and/or fuzzy character.
Yep - my dad has exactly this. He runs a 21" monitor in 1280x1024 with a
two or three metre extension cable and the picture looks absolutely
_disgus
> I only have a 15" Philips monitor (very nice by 15" standards, but still
> only 15") and thought it was the limiting factor. Then I bought myself a
> new TNT2 card and the improvement in visual quality was _very_
> noticeable. It's no good seeing your monitor in the shop if the shop has
> a much
"Jenn V." wrote:
> As for the original question: go to shops. Look at monitors. The only
> person with your eyes is you, and what's perfectly acceptable to me can be
> absolutely useless to someone else. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Unfortunately if you _really_ want to see what you're getting,
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 06:29:40 +1100, "Jenn V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Carry a tape measure. Measure them yourself - they did this at my
>husband's work one day, and found a massive disparity in
>size-of-usable-screen between two allegedly 21" monitors. Neither of
>which was 21" corner-to-corne
GJS wrote:
>
> I'm using a 15" monitor. The text size is often smaller than I
> want, but it gets too heavy if I increase it too much (and
> without anti-aliasing that ain't too purty). Would a 17" monitor
> make much difference to my aging eyes or would the change be
> minimal? Is it worth shell
Also...most of the larger monitors will tell you exactly wht the viewable
area of the CRT is. (I have yet to figure out why a 15" LCD has a 14"
viewable) Average is...21"- from 18.5"-19", 19" has 18", 17" has 15.7-16",
15" has 13.4-14" Hope this helps...
But, as stated, you are the one tha
J B wrote:
>
> If you are going to buy a new monitor, go ahead and shell out the small
> extra amount to go up to a 21"...you can find good ones at good
> prices...look through the archives, we had a discussion on prices and
> quality early on in the life of techtalk...
Carry a tape measure. M
If you are going to buy a new monitor, go ahead and shell out the small
extra amount to go up to a 21"...you can find good ones at good
prices...look through the archives, we had a discussion on prices and
quality early on in the life of techtalk...
I'm using a 15" monitor. The text size is often smaller than I
want, but it gets too heavy if I increase it too much (and
without anti-aliasing that ain't too purty). Would a 17" monitor
make much difference to my aging eyes or would the change be
minimal? Is it worth shelling out the bucks?
=
22 matches
Mail list logo
