howard@mtunj.ATT.COM (H. Moskovitz) (08/10/87)
I would like to thank all those who responded so speedily to my request for help concerning downloading Postscript. I got what I needed and am now busily sending my work to the LW. Thanks again. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard Moskovitz AT&T Bell Labs @ Liberty Corner, NJ ihnp4!io!howard
gillies@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu (06/14/88)
I don't agree that the AppleColor monitor is the safest bet. While
there is a "secret" warranty on AppleColor monitors with jitter
problems, the main warranty on these products is only 3 months.
For less money you can buy a Sony CDP1302 which is the same picture
tube, plus an anti-glare coating. It is a multiscan monitor with a
1-year warranty. A longer warranty makes this monitor an even better
deal. If you ever want to change displays, you can easily sell it to
someone with either a Mac OR a PC. Perhaps someday you'll be able to
buy an 800*600 display card to get 36% more resolution on your old monitor.
In summary, the monitor:
- Has nearly the same picture quality (but duller because of anti-glare)
- Costs less
- Has a longer warranty
- Is more resaleable
- May provide more resolution when future display cards are released.
Don Gillies {ihnp4!uiucdcs!gillies} U of Illinois
{gillies@cs.uiuc.edu}blknowle@uokmax.UUCP (Bradford L Knowles) (06/16/88)
In article <76000222@uiucdcsp> gillies@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >I don't agree that the AppleColor monitor is the safest bet. While >there is a "secret" warranty on AppleColor monitors with jitter >problems, the main warranty on these products is only 3 months. > >For less money you can buy a Sony CDP1302 which is the same picture >tube, plus an anti-glare coating. It is a multiscan monitor with a >1-year warranty. ... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Multiscan monitor? I think this implies that it is *NOT* the same monitor as the AppleColor monitor. Besides, from the people I've talked to, Apple goes through a lot of screens before they find one that suits them, and Sony is much less choosy with their CPD1302's. The rest of this posting I will not disagree with, primarily because it might be a good idea to have a multiscanning monitor to possibly get better resolution when new display cards come out. -Brad Knowles UUCP: ...!ihnp4!occrsh!uokmax!blknowle ARPA: blknowle@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu SNAIL: 1013 Mobile Circle Norman, OK 73071-2522 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Philosophy of Boris Yeltsin: "If one wants to be unemployed, one will criticize ones' boss. If one wants to be sent to Siberia, one will criticize the wife of ones' boss." -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Disclaimer: (The above opinions are my own. They have nothing to do with the Univeristy of Oklahoma nor intelligance of any sort. :-)
gillies@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu (06/17/88)
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 for the dark line 2/3 of the way down the screen. I think SONY has a patent on TRINITRON tubes. If you have an AppleColor monitor, you'll notice that the borders are very wide. That's because they're not using the 800*600 resolution. The trim even covers some useful area of the picture tube. 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. Are you saying that Sony video products have inferior quality? Are you familiar with Sony television products?
ho@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Alex Ho) (06/19/88)
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 >for the dark line 2/3 of the way down the screen. I think SONY has a >patent on TRINITRON tubes. > i've noticed this dark band on the monitor. can anyone explain to me the reason for its existance (or am i missising something really obvious.) thanks. alex ho university of california, berkeley ho@svax.cs.cornell.edu a confused eecs major spending the summer at cornell university Alex Ho ho@svax.cs.cornell.edu University of California, Berkeley Cornell University
straka@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Straka) (06/20/88)
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. | |Are you saying that Sony video products have inferior quality? Are |you familiar with Sony television products? 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 likely to be a bit better than others. Sony is evidently willing to sell Apple its best tubes, or it is willing to put extra effort (of course, in exchange for extra $$) into making those monitors better than the standard Trinitrons. This is all standard manufacturing procedure. Do you really think that (by and large) 150ns RAMS are off a different manufacturing line than the 120ns RAMS? No, the 120ns ones are the fast ones, and the 150ns ones just can't hack the tight access times; they are "binned" out as slower parts. (not that there aren't parts targeted for different speeds of course, but that's a different story) -- Rich Straka ihnp4!ihlpf!straka Avoid BrainDamage: MSDOS - just say no!
macak@lakesys.UUCP (Jim Macak) (06/21/88)
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!} >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<