[comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware] Sony vs Seiko

nbeck@weber.ucsd.edu (Nathaniel Beck) (04/15/91)

I am in the middle of buying a 486 33mh system. Some vendors I talk
too have Sony (1302 or 1304), some have Seiko (1440 or 1450). I know
that Sony makes the Sieko, and the Sieko seems a bit cheaper. Do I care
if I get the Sieko or the Sony.

On the same subject, I can save $100 if I get the interlaced 1440. i
gather the monitors are identical until I get to 1024x768 mode.
Having looked at windows in hires mode the characters are clearly
too small to read. Am I making a mistake getting the interlaced
monitor - should I except software within a year or two that will
want me to use hires noninterlaced graphics. (The machine is used
for statistics and latex, I don't do cad and I don't do desktop
publishing.)

As always, thanks in advance

Neal

-- 
Neal Beck 
Dept of Politcal Science, UCSD
beck@ucsd.edu
Dislaimer: The Regents pay me (a bit!) to distribute my opinions.

shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (04/16/91)

nbeck@weber.ucsd.edu (Nathaniel Beck) writes:

>I am in the middle of buying a 486 33mh system. Some vendors I talk
>too have Sony (1302 or 1304), some have Seiko (1440 or 1450). I know
>that Sony makes the Sieko, and the Sieko seems a bit cheaper. Do I care
>if I get the Sieko or the Sony.

	Sony does not make the Seiko - only the picture tube (perhaps some
other parts as well). Look closely at their respective warranties. Last
word I heard, Sony was still limiting the labor warranty to only 90 days.
I believe the Seiko goes a full year. (Having been bitten by the Sony's
limited coverage, I'm sensitive to the issue.)

-----------  
uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake				shwake@rsxtech