home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.hardware
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!iat.holonet.net!bwilliam
- From: bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)
- Subject: Re: Mono Monitor Size: 17" or 16" or 15.5" ?
- Message-ID: <BuAnry.79L@iat.holonet.net>
- Organization: HoloNet (BBS: 510-704-1058)
- References: <1992Sep8.145527.23481@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 04:43:09 GMT
- Lines: 32
-
-
- RE: "Seventh grade geometry wasnt your specialty eh? "
-
- I know that talking about pixel size and monitor size in the same
- discussion can be mildly confusing to follow but my point was that my
- monitor was "the biggest". The concept I am promoting is not only that it
- is 24" but that it has over for times as many pixels at a perfect square
- aspect ratio than a 640*480 grid on the more common 35 inch Mitsubishis.
-
- RE "10 foot diagonal screen"
- That is not a glass tube....a "monitor"
-
- RE: "The first was the 2048x2048 monitor"
-
- I would like to know its shadow mask size. evidentally it is much finer
- than the tension mask allows on the CPD1302 (a 0.25 mm * 0.4(est.)mm) rect.
- It is conceivable that you are right, and that at least one pel exists for
- each pixel the system wishes to display, but I am skeptical. The only
- factor that lends credibility is the fact that it was Sony and that it was
- $40,000.00.
-
- Driving a 2048*2048 display at 60 Hz, non-interlaced, with 8 bits of "data"
- for driving each of the three guns sure does add up to a hell of a lot of
- bandwidth.
-
- Sadly, many of the large monitors, especially those for nearly static
- displays, have a very long persistence and a slow refresh rate and are
- unsuitable for even using a mouse indicator. I hope this 2048*2048 20inch
- by 20inch tube does not suffer from that.
-
- BWilliams
-
-