Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Article #2627Re: 1024x768 monitors: 14" vs. 16+"
From: Bob Piety
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 1990 19:14
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 1990 19:14
10 lines
884 bytes
884 bytes
I have a Seiko CM-1430, which only does *interlaced* 1024x768. So, I was ready to sell it and buy the Sony 1304 for non-interlaced hi-res. But, when I went to look at one, I noticed that the VGA (640x480) mode was no where near as crisp as I'm used to seeing on my Seiko. So, I'm still using the Seiko and foregoing 1024x768 non-interlaced. But, if I had to have the hi-res, non-interlaced, I'd seriously look into the NEC-4D or other monitor. I did *not* like the Sony 1304. Bob
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<100010001@hplred.HP.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hplred!pietyReferences:
<19265@ttidca.TTI.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hplred!piety From: piety@hplred.HP.COM (Bob Piety) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: 1024x768 monitors: 14" vs. 16+" Message-ID: <100010001@hplred.HP.COM> Date: 22 Aug 90 19:14:48 GMT References: <19265@ttidca.TTI.COM> Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs, Palo Alto CA Lines: 10