🚀 go-pugleaf

I'm glad you replied to my post because it gives me the opportunity to
correct something I wrote in an earlier post. What I meant to say - and
should have written - is this: 120 billion bytes is a lot less than 120 GB.

Rocky

"John J. Burness" <JohnJBurnessAT@ieeDOT.org> wrote in message
news:0gbSb.19874$tQ6.1176139@wards.force9.net...
> Rocket J. Squirrel wrote:
>
>   In those days, a 15-inch monitor was actually less than 15
> > inches in size.
> >
> > Rocky
> ------------snip----------------------
>
>
> That is another thing that is/was extremely confusing (but contary to
> some people's wrong allegations), not deliberately mis-leading!!
>
> A 15" Monitor has always been a 15" Monitor!! The problem was (& it goes
> back to the original days of early CRTs, which were circular) this
> dimension ONLY descibed the physical external dimensions & had NOTHING
> to do with viewable area. This goes back to the days when CRTs were a
> non-Consumer item (i.e. it even pre-dates TVs).
>
> The real complication of this came about when LCD screens started to be
> made, which DIDN'T have the equivalent physical dimensions, accordingly
> thier Manufacturers started using "Viewable Area". In other words a 15"
> screen in one Technology was a TOTALLY different size to the other
> Technology - now that WAS confusing.
>
> Ultimately common-sense prevailed & ALL Manufacturers now quote the
> dimension on viewing area.
>
> Regards,
> John