21602MR@MSU.BITNET (Mark Rosenberg) (10/27/90)
I have a question about Apple's new 12" color monitor...I was wondering what the pixel density and size are on this new monitor ? I have heard that this new monitor has essentially the same real estate as a mac classic, the pixels are just larger (and color !) ? /Mark
carsup@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Fisher Library support) (10/28/90)
In article <69521602MR@MSU> 21602MR@MSU.BITNET (Mark Rosenberg) writes: >I have a question about Apple's new 12" color monitor...I was wondering what >the pixel density and size are on this new monitor ? I have heard that this >new monitor has essentially the same real estate as a mac classic, the pixels >are just larger (and color !) ? > Dear Mark, The "Classic" series's 9 in. monitor is 512 x 342 pixels at 72 dpi. The 12" color monitor supports 512 x 384 pixels at 64 (thereabouts) dpi. I guess you're right (almost) about your observation. **** My employers ignore me, I'm on my own when I speak out in public **** Norton Chia | My address is Micro Support | carsup@extro.ucc.su.oz.au *******************************************************************************
wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) (10/29/90)
In article <69521602MR@MSU> 21602MR@MSU.BITNET (Mark Rosenberg) writes: >I have a question about Apple's new 12" color monitor...I was wondering >whatthe pixel density and size are on this new monitor ? I have heard >that this new monitor has essentially the same real estate as a mac >classic, the pixels are just larger (and color !) ? Though this monitor looks much larger than the display on the compact Macs, it has only a slight edge in the amount of data it can display at any one time. The screen of the compact Macs shows 512x342 pixels (picture elements), the Macintosh 12" RGB display shows 512x384 pixels. That is only 42 pixels more vertically, which just helps a little bit, but not where it usually is needed the most in professional applications. The reason why there is so little difference in data display capacity between the two screens is that % the compact Macs have a 72 dpi (dots per inch) pixel density (i.e. true WYSIWYG [What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get], where the size of the image on the screen is virtually identical to its size on paper when printed), whereas % the Macintosh 12" RGB display has a 64 dpi density, i.e. things appear larger on the screen then on hard copy. This may be an advantage at the lower end of the K-12 market and for users with impaired vision, but characters and graphics also look more jagged to people with normal eye sight because it is easier to see the larger individual pixels when working at the same distance from the monitor. Also, this monitor has only a 60-hertz screen-refresh rate. This reduces production costs, since no special circuitry is required to change the frequency from that of the AC power supply. However, individuals differ physiologically in flicker perception over a surprisingly wide range. I happen to belong to the most sensitive group, and I found flicker on the Macintosh 12" RGB display noticable and disturbing. I certainly would not want to work with if for long periods of time. Screen flicker is correlated with screen-refresh rate. For serious office use I would therefore strongly discourage use of the new Macintosh 12" RGB display. This low-cost monitor was developed by Apple primarily to compete in the school and home markets. It has the same limited capacity to display data horizontally as the compact Macs (128k, 512k, 512ke, Plus, SE, SE/30, and Classic). This narrow screen width is often inadequate for business correspondence and reports when you require margins of less than one inch on both sides of the page. For example, if you need to work with 1/2 inch margins, you will constantly need to scroll horizontally to see the entire length of text lines. The narrow screen also tends to drastically decrease the productivity of people who need to work with spreadsheets that are more than a few columns wide and with full-page forms, e.g. in FileMaker. If low cost is imperative for office use, I would recommend the Macintosh 12" monochrome display, which shows 640 horizontal pixels by 480 vertical pixels, has a 76 dpi density, and 67-hertz refresh rate. The higher refresh rate means that it is virtually flicker-free. If you still notice flicker, it is probably due to interference with old-fashioned (core-coil ballast) fluorescent lighting. Replace that light source, either with incancescent task lighting or with compact or standard fluorescent lighting that uses electronic ballasts. Because of the high resolution and crispness of Mac graphics and because of the Mac's capability to accurately represent font attributes, such as italics, bold, underline, different sizes, etc. in any combination on the screen, color is much less necessary on the Mac than on PCs where it is often used to code or compensate for inadequacies in screen display capability. E.g. people use colors in WordPerfect to show various font attributes that cannot directly be represented on the screen. If color is required, I would strongly recommend the AppleColor 13" High-Resolution RGB display, which shows 640 horizontal pixels by 480 vertical pixels, has a 72 dpi density, and 67-hertz refresh rate. Few displays on the market manage to match or exceed the stability, crispness, and color rendition of the AppleColor 13" High-Resolution RGB display. If the computer is primarily used for heavy-duty word processing, I would recommend the Apple Macintosh Portrait Display. It has a 15" tube,which shows 640 horizontal pixels by 870 vertical pixels, has a 80 dpi density, and 75-hertz refresh rate. This display shows an entire page (8" by 10.8") at almost actual size. It is also a good choice for work with forms in portrait orientation and tall spreadsheets. For users who also have to frequently deal with documents and forms in landscape orientation or with wide spreadsheets, the Radius Pivot might be a better choice because it can easily be flipped on its axis. Many third-party vendors offer a variety of other portrait and two-page displays (not to forget the Two-Page Monochrome Monitor from Apple). However, all of these solutions require a separate video display card, and if you purchase an Mac IIsi, you may need the single expansion card slot for another purpose, such as an Ethernet card, for example. Despite its shortcomings, the Macintosh 12" RGB Display is a very good monitor for its price and well suited for many casual and less intensive uses in schools, homes, and businesses. However, it is probably not a good choice for a professional workstation that is used by a person for most of the day. Wolfgang N. Naegeli Internet: wnn@ornl.gov Bitnet: wnn@ornlstc Phone: 615-574-6143 Fax: 615-574-6141 QuickMail (QM-QM): Wolfgang Naegeli @ 615-574-4510 The above reflects my personal opinions, not those of my employers or sponsors.
rees@usage.csd.unsw.oz.au (Rees Griffiths) (10/29/90)
The 12" colour monitor has a pixel resolution of 512 by 384. The
SE Plus Classic etc have a resolution of 512 by 342. The new monitor has a
resolution of 64 dpi as opposed to 72 dpi but you loose the WYSIWYG (such
as it was)..
What I'd like to know is that resolution fixed or will changing to
monochrome output with the control panel increase the number of pixels
displayed. ie up to the full 12" at 72 or 76 dpi. I guess it won't,
but it wouldn't mind the low resolution of the colour monitor so much
if it did.
Rees
N.B. email bi_rees@vaxa.mqcc.mq.oz.au