|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Not the first time I've read that a single 21" monitor displays more data
than a herd of monitors at 1024x768 but whenever I do the math it never
seems to compute: 1600x1200 (1,920,000 pixels) versus 4 (17" monitors) @
1024x768 (3,145,728 pixels) or put in square inches of viewing area
comparison would be roughly 19" squared (361 square inches) versus 4 @ 15"
squared (900 square inches). Looking at pixels it might be realistic to
expect one 21" would replace two 17" monitors however the type size and
charts would be a tad smaller. I'm assuming that 15" monitors would not be
suitable for resolutions of 1024x768 but my eyes are not as young as some.
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Josslin <olfogey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Paul A. <paulha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: Multiple monitors --- a 21" monitor, perhaps?
> just don't seem to be able practically to use a resolution greater than
1224x 768
> (or whatever it is around there), while the guys with 21" monitors say
that they
> can use 1600X1200 without problems --- with the result that the 21"
monitors can
> hold as much info on its screen as 4 smaller monitors at the lesser
resolution.
> Consequently, were I to expand the monitor potential of my NT computer, I
imagine
> that I would wind up opting for a 21" monitor, instead of duplicating the
> MM-pathway that I followed several years ago. [I remember a post of a
year or two
> ago of a guy who had the $ and wanted to go 1st class, so he bought a
2-monitor
> card and two 21" monitors. In some sense, I am doing the same thing,
using
> mulitple computers. I prefer the multiple computer idea as I have
dedicated one
> computer solely to gathering real-time data - no other programs, such as
Internet
> useage, are on it. I haven't had a glitch in my data or any downtime with
that
> computer in as long as I can remember.] I am curious as to the reasons
behind
> your preference. Would you care to describe them, please.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Richard Josslin
>
> Paul A. wrote:
>
> > Folks:
> >
> > I'm researching 4-port multi-monitor cards. I may eventually want to go
to 8
> > or more. From previous posts I've learned there's STB, Matrox, Appian,
> > Colorgrafix, and perhaps more.
> >
> > I'm running NT40 SP3 and I want to get up and running, without
researching
> > every darned detail about their graphics engines. I'm not a game player
or
> > doing any major 3D work, so if the screen repaints and refreshes
reasonably
> > fast I'm happy.
> >
> > 1) Can someone recommend a vendor that discounts and carries all or at
least
> > some of these cards? It would be nice to talk to a human who could do a
quick
> > and dirty comparison for me.
> >
> > 2) How important are the drivers? Appian is telling me that _their_
drivers
> > are perfect, take care of a number of potential annoyances, and will
replace
> > any love I missed out on as a child. I assume that all the
manufacturers
> > would
> > be willing to promise such things, if given the chance.
> >
> > 3) Is there a "right" card to purchase, that's a lot of bang for the
buck?
> > Again, I want to get up and running, not spend days learning about the
card
> > technologies.
> >
> > Thanks for any help.
> >
> > Paul
>
>
>
|