[comp.sys.atari.st] Color Monitors

mjohnson@druhi.ATT.COM (Mark A. Johnson) (08/04/88)

I have an Atari ST with a monochrome monitor and a Toshiba T1000 with a
puny little LCD screen.  I would like to buy a single color monitor that
I can use with both systems.  The T1000 is a PC-compatible with a
built-in CGA 9-pin RGB connector in the back.  Has anyone successfully
adapted either the ST color monitor to work with a PC-compatible or a 
"standard" RGB monitor to work with the ST?   Advice, speculation, or
even hard, cold facts are all welcome.

	Mark A. Johnson
	mjohnson@druhi.uucp
	att!druhi!mjohnson

coffey@sdsuelx.uucp (pat coffey) (09/23/88)

Jos Vermaseren asks:
.
.
.

> This leaves the question: why is the American preference for color so much
> greater than in Europe? I posed this question a long time ago, but nobody
> could come up with an explanation. Anybody has one?

I bought an Atari 520 ST when they first came out.  I wanted a good, clear
monitor, so I got a monochrome monitor, which was much better than what
IBM had to offer at the time.  I soon discovered, however, that most of the
software available in the U.S., especially the PD stuff, was not runnable on
my system.  After several years, I broke down and bought a color monitor
so that I could run some of these programs.  When I do my real computer work,
I always use the monochrome monitor.

When I joined our local Atari user group, I discovered that most of the
early members were former owners of 8-bit atari machines.  I think all of
them had color monitors and all of them loved computer games.  None of the
games worked on monochrome at that time.  I don't know if that's the reason,
but I recently heard that U.S. dealers are having a hard time finding color
monitors, so the picture in the U.S. may soon change.

     _   _        Pat Coffey    
    |_) (_        San Diego State University
    |     

richard@pande.UUCP (richard) (10/01/88)

>Jos Vermaseren asks:
>> This leaves the question: why is the American preference for color so much
>> greater than in Europe? I posed this question a long time ago, but nobody
>> could come up with an explanation. Anybody has one?

Americans, in general, have more disposible income than the rest of
the world.

I'm sure the European preference for colour is just as great, but
the *relative* cost is higher. Same for other toys like CD players.

                      I'm only in this for the mummy.
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM                  {well connected site}!gryphon!richard

t68@nikhefh.hep.nl (Jos Vermaseren) (10/04/88)

In article <120@pande.UUCP>, richard@pande.UUCP (richard) writes:
> >> This leaves the question: why is the American preference for color so much
> >> greater than in Europe? I posed this question a long time ago, but nobody
> >> could come up with an explanation. Anybody has one?
> 
> Americans, in general, have more disposible income than the rest of
> the world.
> 
> I'm sure the European preference for colour is just as great, but
> the *relative* cost is higher. Same for other toys like CD players.
> 

If it were that simple I wouldn't have asked. For your information:
CD players were available in Europe before they could be bought in the US.

The best theory I have heard thusfar is:
Americans want to have something they can show off with, even when it means
that their everyday comfort is less. Europeans place everyday comfort higher
on their list.
It still doesn't sound convincing.

Jos Vermaseren

jbe@pcsbst.UUCP (John_Brown Evans) (10/06/88)

In article <120@pande.UUCP> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Ricardo Autobahn) writes:
>Americans, in general, have more disposible income than the rest of
>the world.
>
>I'm sure the European preference for colour is just as great, but
>the *relative* cost is higher. Same for other toys like CD players.

I'm not sure how much *disposable income* you have, but here the
general consensus seems to be - you use a color monitor to *play*
and a monochrome to *work*. Ever tried text-processing on your
color monitor?

Name    : John-Brown Evans      Company : PCS GmbH, Munich W-Germany.
UUCP  : ..uunet!unido!pcsbst!jbe;       jbe!sws4@pcsbst.UUCP

-----   Language without meaning would be meaningless -----

me@pcsbst.UUCP (me) (10/06/88)

In article <120@pande.UUCP> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Ricardo Autobahn) writes:
>>Jos Vermaseren asks:
>>> This leaves the question: why is the American preference for color so much
>>> greater than in Europe? I posed this question a long time ago, but nobody
>>> could come up with an explanation. Anybody has one?
>
>Americans, in general, have more disposible income than the rest of
>the world.
>
>I'm sure the European preference for colour is just as great, but
>the *relative* cost is higher. Same for other toys like CD players.
>

  No, this is not the reason. Maybe, the Americans have more money than the
average European (although I have some doubts on this, especially with 
Germany). But the price difference is not high enough (100$ -200$ from
monochrome to color monitor, less if you use a TV) to cause such a difference
between sold color and monochrome systems.
  I guess the reason is that Americans use the ST often as a game machine
while Europeans do real work with it (text processing, programming and so on).
For this kind of work the monochrome monitor is an absolute need.
You get a system that has a better screen, higher speed and better user inter-
face than any 'industry standard' PC you can buy for double the money.
Especially students like the ST much for their work.
  Isn't the rumour true, that the Americans didn't discover the ST as a
real PC, isn't it true that we have more Sts here in Europe than you in 
America?
  I for myself never thought of buying a ST without color monitor not because
of the price (I connect him to my Color TV with a scart cable for playing
games) but because of the superb screen.

PS. Apologies for my bad english.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Elbel					UUCP: ...!unido!pcsbst!me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions might be my own, 
but how shall I know what I think until I read what I write?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

poole@forty2.UUCP (Simon Poole) (10/07/88)

In article <120@pande.UUCP> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Ricardo Autobahn) writes:
...
>
>Americans, in general, have more disposible income than the rest of
>the world.
>

Ugh, this is nearly as bad as Dan Quale claiming "America  is the envy
of the rest of the world", in particular with reference to Europe your
claim is much to broad to do justice to the diversity of political and
social systems (and incomes) that exist in Europe.

>I'm sure the European preference for colour is just as great, but
>the *relative* cost is higher. Same for other toys like CD players.

I don't think this is true, for  most people the  problem is that they
only want to have/can afford ONE monitor, not  the difference in price
(about 20% more for a 1040ST and 10% for a Mega  2). Since the ST does
not have such a `games machine` image here, people tend to buy the B&W
monitor, mainly because  it's  much easier on  your eyes (and there is
quite a lot of stuff here that only runs on a B&W system).

Matter of fact I've  always wondered why people in  the US put up with
such  things as  Mac screens, 50 line  displays on the  ST, the gastly
default Apollo workstation font,  low resolution colour monitors etc.,
perhaps there's a US-optician Mafia?  :-)

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UUCP:   ...mcvax!cernvax!forty2!poole			Simon Poole
BITNET: K538915@CZHRZU1A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

to_stdnet@stag.UUCP (10/10/88)

From: thelake!steve@stag.UUCP (Steve Yelvington)


In  <655@pcsbst.UUCP> jbe@pcsbst.UUCP (John_Brown Evans) writes...

> I'm not sure how much *disposable income* you have, but here the
> general consensus seems to be - you use a color monitor to *play*
> and a monochrome to *work*. Ever tried text-processing on your
> color monitor?

Yes. That's the primary use of my ST. The quality of my SC1224 
(the original 1985 JVC version) compares favorably with the monochrome
monitors on the Atex publishing system I use at work.

I bought the color because the first ST I examined was sitting next to
an Apricot PC running GEM on a monochrome monitor. The Atari made
the Apricot look pretty sick, and it cost about the same.

If I planned to do desktop publishing, the picture would change. :-)
And if I were buying my system from scratch, I'd choose monochrome
and put the extra money toward a hard drive.



  | thelake!steve@stag.UUCP / ...rosevax!pwcs!stag!thelake!steve 

wheels@mks.UUCP (Gerry Wheeler) (10/12/88)

In article <484@forty2.UUCP>, poole@forty2.UUCP (Simon Poole) writes:
> Since the ST does
> not have such a `games machine` image here, people tend to buy the B&W
> monitor, mainly because  it's  much easier on  your eyes (and there is
> quite a lot of stuff here that only runs on a B&W system).

Here's my two cents worth -- in both places (North America (including
Canada :-) and Europe) the monochrome monitor uses a 70 Hz refresh,
right? But the colour monitor uses 50 Hz in Europe, if I'm not mistaken,
and 60 Hz in North America.  Perhaps there is more noticeable flicker in
Europe, and so they don't like to use the colour monitor all day.  Over
here, the 60 Hz flicker is not so noticeable, and I don't mind using the
colour monitor for long periods.  The characters aren't as well defined
as on the monochrome, but it isn't any harder on my eyes. 
-- 
     Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: (519)884-2251
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
   35 King St. North                             BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario  N2J 2W9                  CompuServe: 73260,1043

rob@kaa.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere) (10/13/88)

In article <521@mks.UUCP> wheels@mks.UUCP (Gerry Wheeler) writes:
> [ 60 Hz flicker is less than 50 Hz same, ] and I don't mind using the
>colour monitor for long periods.  The characters aren't as well defined
>as on the monochrome, but it isn't any harder on my eyes. 

Apparently milage varies here; I have both monitors, and I find the
black and white significantly easier on the eyes, to the point that I
now sometimes wonder why I bought the color.

Rob Carriere

ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) (10/13/88)

In article <782@accelerator.eng.ohio-state.edu> rob@kaa.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere) writes:
>Apparently milage varies here; I have both monitors, and I find the
>black and white significantly easier on the eyes, to the point that I
>now sometimes wonder why I bought the color.

I love my flicker-free monochrome monitor.  I use 
	(1) APL.68000 on my ST for writing APL programs, I use 
	(2) TOM as an APL terminal emulator to reach remote APl sites,
	(3) Gulam as my favorite shell, and its terminal emulator
	(4) as a terminal to read and reply to news :-).

-- 
    L. J. Dickey, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo.
	ljdickey@WATDCS.UWaterloo.ca	ljdickey@water.BITNET
	ljdickey@water.UUCP		..!uunet!watmath!water!ljdickey
	ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu