amit@umn-cs.UUCP (03/02/87)
From Byte magazine, Feb 1987, the What's New section (p.38): " Big Monitor Lets You See What You'll Get ======================================== The LM-300 monitor from Princeton Graphic Systems has a 15" portrait-mounted screen that can display a full page of graphics and text, in WYSIWIG format, without scrolling. Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. Video bandwidth is 160 MHz. Scan rate is 74.63 KHz. The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. Other features include 42,000 characters display and support for four shades of gray. The monitor is attached to a tilt-and-swivel stand. It comes with a 9-pin shielded cable and connects directly to IBM PC's and most compatibles. Suggested List Price is $750. " I also saw P.G.'s ad in one of the PC magazines (March issue), which is in agreement with all of the above, and also talks about compatability between the LM-300 and their 300dpi scanner, and about related software (cut-and-paste directly in WYSIWYG format). --------------- I have some related questions: 1. The screen measures 15" diagonally, meaning roughly 9x12". Resolution- wise, we're talking 135dpi (1200/9 = 133 ; 1664/12 = 138). Now, that's an excellent resolution, to be sure, but not nearly as good as 300dpi. Did I miss anything, or is there really some sort of compression going on? 2. Hercules card, for all I know, supports resolutions up to 800x600, or so. Are there widely available and reasonably priced controllers for higher resolutions? 3. Never heard before about the WYSIWYG format -- what is it? 4. The hint about Cut-and-Paste software suggests a format that can be both displayed and printed. This is in contrast to the standard TeX approach of a .DVI file which must be filtered separately into each output device format. What I have in mind is a fancy-but-inexpensive TeX previewer. Did anyone in Netland, particularly a TeXpert, take a closer look at the beast? Can they address some of the questions? Neta Amit (amit@umn-cs.ARPA) University of Minnesota CSCI
faustus@ucbcad.UUCP (03/03/87)
In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: > Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. ... > The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per > inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. How do you "emulate" a resolution that is twice what you actually have? Wayne
jans@stalker.UUCP (03/03/87)
In article <1292@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> faustus@ucbcad.berkeley.edu (Wayne A. Christopher) writes: >In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: >> Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. ... >> The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per >> inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. > >How do you "emulate" a resolution that is twice what you actually have? They did mention four levels of grey. Grey scale anti-aliasing with four levels might achieve the effect of double resolution. We have (in the lab) *readable* three pixel high fonts, using 16 levels of grey and eliptical filtering. :::::: Artificial Intelligence Machines --- Smalltalk Project :::::: :::::: Jan Steinman Box 1000, MS 60-405 (w)503/685-2956 :::::: :::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans Wilsonville, OR 97070 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::
avi@hpcehfe.UUCP (03/03/87)
/ hpcehfe:comp.text / amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) / 3:34 pm Mar 1, 1987 / > Big Monitor Lets You See What You'll Get > ======================================== > > I have some related questions: > > 1. The screen measures 15" diagonally, meaning roughly 9x12". Resolution- > wise, we're talking 135dpi (1200/9 = 133 ; 1664/12 = 138). Now, that's an > excellent resolution, to be sure, but not nearly as good as 300dpi. Did I > miss anything, or is there really some sort of compression going on? The answer can be found in your own posting: > features include ... support for four shades of gray. They're claiming that the four shades of gray are effectively equivalent to a 2x2 black&white array taking up the same real estate. I.e., the effective resolution is 270x278, which is pretty close to 300x300. Note that to fit an 8.5"x11" 300x300 dpi image onto a 270x278 dpi screen requires 9.5"x11.9" of real estate -- approximately what they're providing (and of course one could always discount some margin space). However, the size of the displayed image (using the same bitmap) will be 11%x9% bigger. As an aside, the claim that one can easily trade off grayscale and resolution is rather simplistic, and has certainly never been justified in a controlled experiment. Even if the grayscale provides better positioning accuracy of the edges of characters (or lines, etc.), there is little more detail in the grayscale image than in a black&white one at the same resolution. It is the human visual system's inability to resolve the gray component that causes a tradeoff in intensity for perceived size. Needless to say, various conditions -- which have yet to be fully evaluated -- must be met in order for this tradeoff to occur, and noone has yet quantified the tradeoff even under very controlled reading conditions. Furthermore, the fatiguing impact of providing *blurry* edges for the visual system to resolve as spatially-displaced sharp ones has yet to be studied. For (much) more on this topic, see the references I posted a couple of weeks ago, or get in touch with me. > 3. Never heard before about the WYSIWYG format -- what is it? What You See Is What You Get -- and I'll let someone else open this can of worms. Avi Naiman Hewlett Packard & University of Toronto (415) 857-6310 avi%hpcehfe@hplabs.hp.com ...!hplabs!hpcea!hpcehfe!avi
frazier@cti.UUCP (03/04/87)
In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: > > From Byte magazine, Feb 1987, the What's New section (p.38): > > " Big Monitor Lets You See What You'll Get > ======================================== > The LM-300 monitor from Princeton Graphic Systems has a 15" portrait-mounted > screen that can display a full page of graphics and text, in WYSIWIG format, > without scrolling. Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. Video bandwidth is 160 > MHz. Scan rate is 74.63 KHz. The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per > inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. Other > features include 42,000 characters display and support for four shades of gray. > The monitor is attached to a tilt-and-swivel stand. It comes with a 9-pin > shielded cable and connects directly to IBM PC's and most compatibles. > Suggested List Price is $750. " You're absolutely CORRECT, IT IS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE! It is just about impossible to provide the resolution you're talking about on a pc WITHOUT a compatible graphics card. Maybe you can buy the monitor (ALONE, NO adapter card) for the $750.00, but I'd be doubtful you are able to even do that, considering the cost of s monitor of that resolution. Further more, IF you could buy one at that price, I'd be pretty worried that it wouldn't meet FCC class B emi levels (You've got to pass class B to sell into the "home" market! Class A is limited to "commercial" sites, as in your typical industrial park, etc.) Running such a monitor in your home is very likely to wipe out your tv whenever you use the thing, or your neighbor's if you are in an apartment. The IBM cards and their other "standard" cards like the hercules don't come anywhere NEAR to 1200 by 1664 resolution. You are going to need a graphics card that supports that resolution, and I can tell you,"they don't come cheap". Most don't support any kind of the typical ibm standards, so you still need to have your other monitor and graphics card around so you can boot up the system. As a THIRD problem, you have what CAN become the biggest problem of all, that of software. Without the proper drivers, the bigger screen cannot be used at all. Adding this all up means that you aren't going to see this sort of resolution in your hands for anywhere near $750.00 in a usable form for quite some time yet. Especially with 4 levels of grey scale (sounds like 2 bit planes to me). > 3. Never heard before about the WYSIWYG format -- what is it? What You See Is What You Get. It's one of the new "buzzwords" for the desktop publishing crowd. So you think I'm just blowing off steam 'cause I don't like P.G. and don't know a thing about this stuff? Well, now that you ask, I AM involved with a company that manufactures "medium" resolution ibm-at compatible graphics controllers for use with 19" monitors. "medium" resolution is 1280 dots (pixels) by 960 lines. We've got "high resolution" models at 1600 pixels by 1280 lines, and multiple bit plane models (to 16 levels of gray scale) in the works for release later this year. I know what it costs to manufacture these controller cards, and you just can't afford to put high resolution and any sort of compatibility mode (cga or herc) on the card and bundle the whole thing with some software drivers and a monitor and sell it to OEM's in high volumes for $750, much less get it to the end-user (you & me walking into a compuyter store or even ordering by mail) for near that kind of price. I'm fairly sure the price stated in the ad was from a product announcement send in by P.G., and was for only the monitor; not including the hardware or software to drive it. These things DO happen. If, on the other hand, P.G. REALLY can sell this little goodie to the end-user in a Class-B environment WITH the hardware and drivers, I'd certainly like to get a close look at one! If they provide any compatibility mode(s) so I could use it without the standard IBM monitor and card (I'm already out of slots) (and out of space on my desk) I would be quite interested.....Yes indeedie! --rick -- DISCLAIMER: The foregoing is the result of a brain frazzled by the effects of insufficient sleep and a noisy phone line, and in no way reflects the opinion of my employer, friends, or enemies. I'm not even sure I really wrote it. UUCP: {decwrl,pyramid}!sun!cti!frazier DDD: 408-734-8533
frazier@cti.UUCP (03/04/87)
> In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: > > From Byte magazine, Feb 1987, the What's New section (p.38): > > > > " Big Monitor Lets You See What You'll Get > > ======================================== > > The LM-300 monitor from Princeton Graphic Systems has a 15" portrait-mounted > > screen that can display a full page of graphics and text, in WYSIWIG format, > > without scrolling. Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. Video bandwidth is 160 > > MHz. Scan rate is 74.63 KHz. The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per > > inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. Other > > features include 42,000 characters display and support for four shades of gray. > > The monitor is attached to a tilt-and-swivel stand. It comes with a 9-pin > > shielded cable and connects directly to IBM PC's and most compatibles. > > Suggested List Price is $750. " I have been informed that P.G. INDEED does sell this unit without a graphics card, and that someone made reference to a supporting hardware card made by sigma (designs?). The price sounded about right for end user cost for the monitor alone, and rumor was that it passes class B so you could use it at home without worry. The controller card was discussed on the net either in this group or net.periphs (or a similar, now valid group) within the past few months, I personally don't remember seeing it, but was assured that it had at least been mentioned. According to my source (rumor) the controller card is not compatible with normal modes so you still need your standard graphics card and monitor to boot the system. alas, another hope dashed on the rocks....I'd still like to see a complete graphics system of this sort of resolution in the "under 900" price range..... Just think, someday (in the future) we'll think this was all "low" resolution stuff. --rick -- DISCLAIMER: The foregoing is the result of a brain frazzled by the effects of insufficient sleep and a noisy phone line, and in no way reflects the opinion of my employer, friends, or enemies. I'm not even sure I really wrote it. UUCP: {decwrl,pyramid}!sun!cti!frazier DDD: 408-734-8533
coffee@aero.UUCP (03/04/87)
In article <1292@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> faustus@ucbcad.berkeley.edu (Wayne A. Christopher) writes: >In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: >> The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per inch... > >How do you "emulate" a resolution that is twice what you actually have? I believe two bits/pixel (four shades of gray) will effectively be smoothed by the eye to give a reasonable approximation of twice the resolution in straight black/white.
tankus@hsi.UUCP (03/04/87)
> In article <1292@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> faustus@ucbcad.berkeley.edu (Wayne A. Christopher) writes: > >In article <1347@umn-cs.UUCP>, amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: > >> Pixel resolution is 1200 by 1664. ... > >> The monitor emulates a resolution of 300 dots per > >> inch (1:1 aspect ratio), making it compatible with many laser printers. > > > >How do you "emulate" a resolution that is twice what you actually have? > > They did mention four levels of grey. Grey scale anti-aliasing with four > levels might achieve the effect of double resolution. We have (in the lab) > *readable* three pixel high fonts, using 16 levels of grey and eliptical > filtering. > > :::::: Artificial Intelligence Machines --- Smalltalk Project :::::: > :::::: Jan Steinman Box 1000, MS 60-405 (w)503/685-2956 :::::: > :::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans Wilsonville, OR 97070 (h)503/657-7703 :::::: Sigma Designs is advertising something called LaserView in the 3/3/87 PC Week. It boasts the same resolution, etc. as that described above. Cheers! -- -- Ed. Net : {noao!ihnp4!yale!}!hsi!tankus Snail: Health Systems Int'l, 100 Broadway, New Haven, CT 06511 Bell : (203) 562-2101
amit@umn-cs.UUCP (03/05/87)
I know the acronym for WYSIWYG. I just never heard before about such a *format* , as stated in the original posting. Have you? I have received several private responses that indicate that the board: - is separate from the monitor - costs additional $750 - has no cga/ega/herc modes, thus doesn't replace them All indications are that the Monitor is indeed too good to be true. Can we hear more accurate info directly from P.G.? What about other high-resolution monitors (e.g. Wise)?
bradley@uiucdcsm.cs.uiuc.edu (03/06/87)
WYSIWYG - What you see is what you get.