acm@grendal.Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae) (01/12/90)
I've written an application that a number of people want to run. I wrote it in plain CGA text mode, making use of color text. Because I use a VGA card and monitor at home the text looked fine while I was developing it, but when I run it on a stock CGA card with an el cheapo CGA RGB monitor the text is almost unreadable. I have tried it on an EGA card/monitor system and it looks fine. So, my question is... Do my users have to use an EGA card *and* EGA monitor to use my program or could they just use an EGA monitor hooked up to their existing CGA cards? I've visited several computer stores but *none* of them have any machines with CGA cards anymore. (Very few of them have EGA monitors either.) So if anyone out there has some experience with this please let me know. Andrew MacRae (This query has nothing to do with my employer.)
rob@prism.TMC.COM (01/15/90)
acm@grendal.UUCP writes: >I've written an application that a number of people want to run. I wrote >it in plain CGA text mode, making use of color text. Because I use a >VGA card and monitor at home the text looked fine while I was developing >it, but when I run it on a stock CGA card with an el cheapo CGA RGB monitor >the text is almost unreadable. I have tried it on an EGA card/monitor >system and it looks fine. It depends on what you mean by 'unreadable'. To someone used to an EGA or VGA, CGA text will seem very fuzzy. Depending on how your program is written, you may also get 'snow' on a CGA screen. The 'snow' can be avoided with proper programming. The fuzziness of the text is a result of the CGA's lower resolution. Short of upgrading to an EGA or VGA, not much can be done about it. >So, my question is... Do my users have to use an EGA card *and* EGA monitor >to use my program or could they just use an EGA monitor hooked up to their >existing CGA cards? An EGA monitor by itself won't help things, nor will an EGA or VGA card hooked to a CGA screen (some of these combinations won't work at all). You'll need to upgrade both the screen and the video board. It's possible that your CGA monitor is poor, and that a new one would make the text at least tolerable. 'Tolerable' is about the best any CGA can do, however.
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (01/16/90)
On a real IBM CGA there is ajumper for monitor or TV set. If the
jumper is open the signal is great for TV use (must be 7-10 people left
in the world doing that), while for monitor use the jumper should be
installed. The later versions of the board had the jumper solder pads
but no pins, and you install the jumper with a soldering iron.
I went EGA over three years ago, so I can't remember the number, but
it is right under a large DIP package, and is marked J??.
Installing this jumper does not make you forget that the text mode
stinks, but it will prevent nausea in most cases. I make no claims that
clone boards have this feature.
--
bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -mejohnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (01/16/90)
acm@grendal.UUCP writes: >when I run it on a stock CGA card with an el cheapo CGA RGB monitor >the text is almost unreadable. Your problem is probably the el cheapo monitor. When they cut the price, focus and convergence are the first things to go. A better screen would help a great deal unless the CGA card is unusually bad. If you want a low-priced system that doesn't make you go blind, use a mono monitor and a Hercules clone card. Cheap mono monitors such as the amber Amdek are quite readable. -- John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650 johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl "Now, we are all jelly doughnuts."
acm@grendal.Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae) (01/17/90)
My thanks to all who responded with suggestions. As usual with the net, I receive a wide range of responses, most very usefull. It is interesting that I received assurances both that an EGA monitor would improve the output of a CGA card and that it would not. Since these messages were from people citing their own, real, experiences, it seems to illustrate just how varied IBM compatible hardware is.