Article View: uk.comp.os.win95
Article #246Re: Buying a monitor
From: Mike
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 17:39
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 17:39
46 lines
3404 bytes
3404 bytes
marula31@hootmail.com (---) wrote: >On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:14:31 +0100, John Chapple <jc@ch-w.demon.co.uk> >wrote: > >>How can an Liquid Crystal Display type be low radation, or even high >>radiation? Radiation applies only to Cathode Ray Tube types > >They can still radiate nasties. If not electromagnetic radiation, >then some sort of ionisation. > >Apple is having problems in this respect, or so I'm told. > >The last one I bought has a 'TCO 99' sticker, which is >supposed to guarantee the thing against throwing out nasties. Firstly, it's worth pointing out that visible light *IS* electromagnetic radiation. Secondly, LCD displays get their brightness by means of illumination with miniature cold cathode fluorescent light tubes placed at the sides of the LCD panel. The fluorescent light is diffused across the screen by inclusion of a diffusion screen behind the LCD panel. The LCD panel itself emits nothing, although some LCD technologies use a very small magnetic field within the panel. It's just a mechanism for filtering the transmission of light. The stories about "nasties" with LCD's seems to relate to the fact that some people don't seem to get on too well with fluorescent light. This problem isn't specific to LCD displays; some people claim to get headaches when working under fluorescent lights. The reason why isn't clear although there has been some surmise that it might be due to the fact that fluorescent lights flicker at a rate of 100 hertz. However, the problem may be more to do with bad workplace design rather than with the type of lighting. I wouldn't mind betting that the story about Apple displays is just marketing FUD created by one of Apple's competitors. It's also very easy to get TCO 99 certification for a device which doesn't emit any radiation at wavelengths that are usually considered harmful (eg X-rays, UVC and microwaves). I rather suspect that you would be very hard pressed to find an LCD PC display which hasn't been certified to TCO 99. -- Mike Humberston unbar email address to reply.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<poauau4aq6v6ljs9f1lvrfrbu61s5s9np6@4ax.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!philomel.demon.co.uk!not-for-mailReferences:
<iFNqp6HdTvY8Ewcx@pigsonthewing.org.uk> <3c64e25b.1311955@news.freeserve.net> <3kzP3ZIslPp8EwVn@soft255.demon.co.uk> <3ca9d811.1727036@news.freeserve.net> <VtGn$CAXvqq8EwYM@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <3cac7a63.1285057@news.freeserve.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025cc,527906d56d6f1ea2 X-Google-Attributes: gid1025cc,public X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,527906d56d6f1ea2 X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-06 09:40:06 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!philomel.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: mike-barred@philomel.demon.co.uk (Mike) Newsgroups: uk.comp.os.win95,demon.tech.pc Subject: Re: Buying a monitor Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 18:39:00 +0100 Message-ID: <poauau4aq6v6ljs9f1lvrfrbu61s5s9np6@4ax.com> References: <iFNqp6HdTvY8Ewcx@pigsonthewing.org.uk> <3c64e25b.1311955@news.freeserve.net> <3kzP3ZIslPp8EwVn@soft255.demon.co.uk> <3ca9d811.1727036@news.freeserve.net> <VtGn$CAXvqq8EwYM@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <3cac7a63.1285057@news.freeserve.net> Reply-To: mike-barred@philomel.demon.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Host: philomel.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: philomel.demon.co.uk:158.152.192.106 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1018114741 nnrp-10:11511 NO-IDENT philomel.demon.co.uk:158.152.192.106 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 46