🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5072@ihlpf.ATT.COM> straka@ihlpf.UUCP (55223-Straka,R.J.) writes:
>In article <76000231@uiucdcsp> gillies@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>|I didn't say it was the same monitor, I said it had the same picture
>|tube.  Both are TRINITRON picture tubes, and you can verify it by looking
>|
>|I don't see how Apple can throw away pictures tubes looking for a
>|"good" one for each monitor they produce.  Besides, I was under the
>|impression that the AppleColor monitor was manufactured by Sony for
>|Apple, but I may be wrong.
(lines deleted)
 
>I would assume that the Apple monitor is just a rather tightly spec'd
>Trinitron tube.  When you make a whole bunch of tubes like Sony, some are...
(lines deleted)

When the Trinitron tube for the Apple Monitor was first announced, I recall
reading that Apple had Sony perform some modifications on so that the tube
would work better than a stock Trinitron with a Mac II.  I also remember that
the reason that the Apple Color Monitor was delayed relative to the
introduction of the Mac II was that Apple was unhappy with the samples they
were getting from Sony and hence made Sony do some more work on the tube to
get it up to Apple's expectations.

If Apple was merely using "top of the line" Trintron's, we should not have
seen the delay in widespread availability of the Apple Monitor.

Jim

(is this enough lines yet?)
(is this enough lines yet?)

-- 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Jim -->  macak@lakesys.UUCP (Jim Macak)  {Standard disclaimer, nothin' fancy!}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<