17" Monitors recommended
Rob Screene
I am looking at purchasing a 17" monitor in the UK. I require it to
generally run 1024 X 768 at 75Hz or greater and occasionally at 1280 X1024
at 66Hz or greater. It will use it work general Windows documents and
mails on-line manuals with regular bouts of heavy Access and VB
development.
Here are the good prices I have found after looking through PCW November
and December and February's PC Direct magazines. I hope they are of use to
someone in a similar position. Prices are inclusive of VAT at 17.5%
I would be very interested in your comments between these models and
suppliers. Also any others in this price range you know good things about.
If you mail me, please send to RobSc...@msn.com and also post here.
Thanks and regards,
Rob.
Manuf Model Size Pitch Resolution Hz
Warranty With VAT Delivery Supplier
Trust Viewer17 17" 0.28 1024 X 768 85
1280 X 1024 NI, 1600 X 1200 I 1
£386.58 Fox
Panasonic TXD-1734 PanaSync 5G 17" 0.27 1024 X 768 72
1280 X 1024 fst 1
£457.08 Rolodec
Nokia 447Vspkrs 17" 0.26 1024 X 768 80 MPR 90
multimedia, soft touch digital controls
£464.13 Simply
£468.83 DABS Direct
CTX 1785S 17" 0.26 1600 X 1200 85
3
£468.83 Computech
Panasonic TXD-1734 PanaSync 5G 17" 0.27 1024 X 768 72
1280 X 1024 fst 1
£468.83 Rolodec
£468.83 Simply
Hitachi 17MVX V2 17" 0.27 1024 X 768 75
1280X1024@60 .22 diagonal
£475.88 DABS Direct
£475.88 Simply
Hitachi 17MVXpro2 17" 0.25 1280 X 1024 75
1024X768@100 .21 diagonal uk made pcw highly commended
£492.33 DABS Direct
£504.08 Simply
£511.13 10 Javelin
Gavan Moran
PleaseSEEMyS...@NoUnsolicitedJunkMail.please.com (Rob Screene)
wrote:
>I am looking at purchasing a 17" monitor in the UK. I require it to
>generally run 1024 X 768 at 75Hz or greater and occasionally at 1280 X1024
>at 66Hz or greater. It will use it work general Windows documents and
>mails on-line manuals with regular bouts of heavy Access and VB
>development.
I have used the Panasync 5G and its excellent at 1024x768 and is good
value to boot. If you can afford the extra cash look at the Iiyama
vision master monitors. I have a pro model and its the best monitor I've
seen yet. I've used a standard model quite a lot too, and its also
v.good. The standard can be bought at a street price of around 530 quid,
the pro is about 650 but includes a 3 year on-site swapout. (prices inc.
vat)
Gavan
--
email: gmo...@nyx.net | "There can be only one"
| - the Highlander
Michael Chan
I have also gotten into the 17" monitor and I found a site that sold
refurbished fixed frequency HP Sony Trinitron monitors. The specs look good
and the warranty is very decent. The only download is the video card. From
what I gather, you can only use one or a select few types of video cards
(only Mirage cards so far). I was willing to go with this option if there
was support for the drivers but I haven't gotten a response yet. My other
option was the ViewSonic Optivision 17", rated by PC Mag as an Editor's Choice
and was the one of the cheapest options avaivable @ $629. The Sony HP refurb
was almost $800 for the 20" which came with an S3 or ET6000, 4MB video card.
-Mike C.
Rob Screene (PleaseSEEMyS...@NoUnsolicitedJunkMail.please.com) wrote:
: I am looking at purchasing a 17" monitor in the UK. I require it to
: generally run 1024 X 768 at 75Hz or greater and occasionally at 1280 X1024
: at 66Hz or greater. It will use it work general Windows documents and
: mails on-line manuals with regular bouts of heavy Access and VB
: development.
: Here are the good prices I have found after looking through PCW November
Joe Pompei
Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
Roger Safian
Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> writes:
Hi Joe...
>Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
I have the Princeton Utlra 17+, and I'm very happy with it.
--
Roger A. Safian
r-sa...@nwu.edu (email) finger ro...@grumpy.nsg.nwu.edu for public key
(847) 491-4058 (voice)
(847) 467-5690 (Fax) "You're never too old to have a great childhood!"
Jeff Hardy
ro...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Roger Safian) wrote:
I have a Princeton Ultra 17+ as well. I think its a good solid
monitor. Good value for the buck.
Jeff Hardy
jha...@istar.ca
.... oh no .... not another ice storm...
J Wright
Travis Carter wrote:
>
> Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> wrote in article
> <32D410...@audia.music.nwu.edu>...
> > Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
> >
>
> every once in a while. If I jiggle the monitor wire, then it clears up.
>
> I've also heard other people having this problem, and I guess it eventually
> causes the screen to permanently change to purple tint.
>
> Comments?
>
> --
> travis carter
> hedg...@xmission.com
> URL: http://www.xmission.com/~hedgehog/
>
> "Let the hedgehogs wear glasses!"
Funny colors like this are often due to a poor connection, this should
be corrected. I just got a 17" monitor for $650 new. It's an Infiniti,
Korean made I believe.
That's Canadian dollars.
Jim
Mark Marchie
On 9 Jan 1997 23:33:16 GMT, jha...@istar.ca (Jeff Hardy) wrote:
>ro...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Roger Safian) wrote:
>
>I have a Princeton Ultra 17+ as well. I think its a good solid
>monitor. Good value for the buck.
>
>Jeff Hardy
>jha...@istar.ca
>
>.... oh no .... not another ice storm...
>
>>Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> writes:
>
>>Hi Joe...
>
>>>Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>
>>I have the Princeton Utlra 17+, and I'm very happy with it.
>>--
>>Roger A. Safian
>>r-sa...@nwu.edu (email) finger ro...@grumpy.nsg.nwu.edu for public key
>>(847) 491-4058 (voice)
>>(847) 467-5690 (Fax) "You're never too old to have a great childhood!"
>
>
Mitsubishi DiamondPro 17TX. Fabulous!! 0.25mm DP, 1280x1024. Very
sharp & clear with digital controls.
Mark Marchie
ma...@REMOVE.marchie.agn.net
Highland, MI USA
486-100, 36MB Ram, Win95
Running Free Agent 1.1
Non Spammers, simply remove the REMOVE from my address when replying
Travis Carter
Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> wrote in article
<32D410...@audia.music.nwu.edu>...
> Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>
I have a MAG DX17F. It works great, but I get a purple tint to the screen
Ron Kligman
Have the same Mag 17 and I thought I was the only one with the
occasional problem... When the picute is righ which is most of the time
its great. Occasionly it changes shade and if I jiggle the cable at the
monitor connection it corrects itself.
That made me think that the inside the monitor connection was loose,
so I took it to a monitor company to check it out. They couldn't find
the problem and it worked gret while they had it.... So back to square
one.
na...@kaiwan.com
I have a MAG 17T (trinitron). It has good quality and controls. The
display went a bit wacko after 5 months, but I sent it for warranty
repairs two months ago and it works fine. Turnaround time was less
than a week (including shipping).
My only complaint is two faint grey lines which can be seen only on
white screens.
no...@nuc.net
>>>>Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>>
>>>I have the Princeton Utlra 17+, and I'm very happy with it.
Princeton is made by MAG for those that don't already know. Expect
around the same quality with the Ultra 17+ as you would from a MAG
monitor. The ones I've seen look to be a pretty good value for the
money.
>Mitsubishi DiamondPro 17TX. Fabulous!! 0.25mm DP, 1280x1024. Very
>sharp & clear with digital controls.
Better yet, get a 17" Mitsubishi 87TXM. It is the replacement model
of the 17TX. I've got the 91TXM, the 87TXM's BIG brother, and I think
it is "Fabulous!!" as well. Here is my review of the 91TXM in
comparison to the Panasonic S21. I would imagine that the 17" model
would be about the same only smaller.
______________________________________
I first ordered a Panasonic S21. It is basically the same monitor as
the Viewsonic P810 (Panasonic makes many of Viewsonic's monitors).
Similarly, the P815 is basically the same as the Panasonic P21. All
of these monitors use the same tube; have the same OSD; weigh,
measure, and spec almost exactly the same; and *basically* they have
the same case (although it looks a little different cosmetically).
Anyway, I sent the S21 back for a Mitsubishi 91TXM. I'm glad I did.
I think the Mitsubishi is a better monitor in every way except for it
being heavier and for it having the two support wire shadows being
visible. The Mitsubishi 91TXM uses the new .28mm DiamondTron tube.
Picture Quality:
The Panasonic wasn't quite as sharp at the edges, but the Mitsubishi
is about as sharp at the edges as it is in the center, IMO. Someone
with both a .25mm Viewsonic P815 and the *claimed* .22mm Hitachi says
he thinks the Viewsonic is sharper. Since knowledgeable people seem
to think that the Hitachi's dot pitch is really only .27 or .28mm
measured in the "classical" method, I think the .25mm Panasonic tubes
are likely as sharp, if not sharper, than the *claimed* .22mm Hitachi
tubes. The 91TXM Mitsubishi uses a new .28mm Trinitron type tube
(called DiamondTron by Mitsubishi) that is an improvement over the
.30mm models of the previous Mitsubishi DiamondTron and current Sony
Trinitron 20\21" tubes. IMO, the 91TXM's .28mm DiamondTron tube is
sharper than the S21's .25mm shadow mask tube. I think the 91TXM's
.28mm DiamondTron tube is among the sharpest of any 21" monitor's
tube, and possibly, it may be the sharpest. Of course, keep in mind
that I'm basing that on very limited experience with different 21"
monitors, however, I still think that *could* be the case. The two
reviews of the 91TXM linked at the bottom of this post mention the
impressive sharpness of the 91TXM.
With the Panasonic I had, there was a problem with blotchy slightly
darker areas. Based on what I've been reading others write about
their experiences with other 21" Panasonic\Viewsonic monitors, I don't
think it is all that uncommon with the Panasonic tubes. Some parts of
the screen, especially towards the center, were darker looking. It
was a subtle difference but a noticeable one with use. I found it
distracting. Also, I had to turn up the brightness and contrast all
the way up (the video level was set highest so that wasn't an issue)
to get it bright enough to be about as bright as I'd ever want it (the
Mitsubishi can go beyond that).
The Mitsubishi was much less blotchy (with darker areas) than the
Panasonic. However, the Mitsubishi can be noticeably brighter around
the edges. For example, looking at an empty "black" DOS screen with
the brightness turned up past 15% (10% is all I use since it is a very
bright monitor and I like empty DOS screens to look *black*), the
center looks blacker than much of the rest of the screen where it
looks "grayer\brighter" (as is the effect with an empty DOS screen
when the brightness is turned up). When displaying color the brighter
areas around the edges of the screen may also be noticeable with the
brightness turned up some, but I find that flaw much less bothersome
than having noticeably dark areas on the screen as with the Panasonic
since I often can't even notice that effect on the Mitsubishi even
with the brightness turned up. With the excellent color controls of
the Mitsubishi, I find that I can make colors as vivid and bright as I
like while keeping areas with no color ("black" areas) dark (without
the graying effect noticeable when turning up the brightness of a
monitor). A feature I like is that the Mitsubishi has an analog
contrast adjustment (in addition to it's digital one) so that I can
make quick adjustments to how bright looking the screen is. I think
I'd prefer that control to be a brightness adjustment, but it works
well enough as it is I guess.
IMO, the Mitsubishi has better looking color than the Panasonic. This
isn't too difficult to understand since Trinitron type tubes are known
for excellent color.
The geometry of the Mitsubishi, although not perfect, is better than
what I had with the Panasonic. The Panasonic had a nasty horizontal
bow in the bottom left hand corner of the screen which happens to be
where the Win95 Start button is =(. The Mitsubishi has a *slight*
amount of horizontal bow on both the top and bottom. Unfortunately,
I've yet to see a monitor with a horizontal pincushion adjustment
(anyone know of one?) so these flaws aren't correctable. I'm pretty
picky, and although I'd prefer to have perfect geometry, the small
amount of horizontal pincushion with the Mitsubishi is very
acceptable, IMO. The vertical geometry of both the Mitsubishi and
Panasonic was adjustable to my liking.
I noticed a wavering effect when looking at DOS screens with the
Panasonic which didn't occur with the Mitsubishi. It could be my
Verite video card, but my previous 17" Panasonic 1791E didn't have
that problem either. The Moire control didn't help.
Controls:
The controls of the Mitsubishi are *MUCH* better than those of the
Panasonic, IMO.
First of all, I prefer having four buttons to navigate the On Screen
Display with the Mitsubishi (giving the ability to move up, down,
left, and right) rather than only two with the Panasonic (which only
allows for left and right movement). Also, the Mitsubishi has
separate buttons for (+) and (-) adjustments. OTOH, the Panasonic
requires the use of button (1) and (2) for navigating the OSD, using
another button (select) to select a function, and then using button
(1) and (2) for the (+) and (-) adjustments.
When entering the OSD, the Panasonic defaults to the contrast function
instead of the last function used. The Mitsubishi defaults to the
last function so that someone can easily go back and change the same
function over and over without having to navigate through the OSD
again. My Panasonic 1791E (similar to the Viewsonic 17G) also has the
same type OSD as the newer Panasonic and Panasonic "tubed" Viewsonic
models, and I find it annoying that it doesn't default to the last
function used. For example, if I wanted to change between a Voodoo
card plugged into the D-Sub connector of the monitor and my 2D card
plugged into the BNC connectors of the monitor, I couldn't just press
a button to enter the OSD and immediately make the change (assuming
the input switching function was the last I used) with the Panasonic's
OSD, but rather, I'd have to navigate the OSD until I get to that
function, select it, and then make the change. With the Mitsubishi, I
could press one button and then another to change it (assuming the
input switching function was the last I used), however, another great
feature of the Mitsubishi is that it has a separate button for
changing input from D-Sub to BNC making it an even simpler one button
task (that feature would work excellently with a Voodoo board
eliminating the need for a pass-through connection and making it easy
to switch).
Lastly, the Mitsubishi just has more adjustments than the Viewsonic.
Both the Viewsonic and Mitsubishi had these adjustments:
Horizontal and Vertical centering and size
Vertical Pincushion
Trapezoidal
Parallelogram
Rotation
Tilt
Moire
Color
Video Level
The Mitsubishi also has these adjustments:
Pincushion Balance - that is like pincushion only it bows both sides
in the same direction instead of opposite directions.
Center, Corner, and Bottom Pincushion - that together with regular
pincushion provide four different pincushion adjustments.
Top Balance - that bends both the left and right top corners in the
same direction.
Sine - that is difficult to describe. It can make the screen look
like a woman's figure... either heavy on top or heavy on the bottom.
H-Static - that is to move red to the right and blue to the left or
blue to the right and red to the left. I'm not sure what they mean by
that.
Purity - that adjusts color purity.
Clamp Pulse Position - Hmmm. I really don't know.
The color adjustments of the Mitsubishi are also better because all
three modes are user definable whereas the Panasonic only has one user
definable mode. It is much better to be able to set all three user
definable color modes so that I can change to my preferred color
adjustments for different applications (or video cards such as with
switching between a Voodoo and my 2D card) without having to
constantly re-adjust the one user setting over and over for different
things.
Other:
The Panasonic often made a clicking noise when changing resolution.
That isn't usual for a monitor, but the Mitsubishi doesn't make any
noises when changing resolutions.
Both monitors changed video modes quickly. I'm thinking the
Mitsubishi is faster in this respect, but I honestly can't remember
for sure.
Something I don't like about the Mitsubishi is that it displays the
OSD for 5 seconds (defaulted to the power saving on\off function) when
it doesn't receive a signal before powering down. That means that I
see the OSD every time I reboot the machine for a second or two when
there is no signal. I wish they had an option for turning that off.
Also, there is a brief moment when Win95 is loading that there was no
signal to my monitor and the OSD displays for a second or two there as
well so I end up seeing it twice during a reboot.
Interestingly, 60hz is MUCH less annoying on the Mitsubishi than the
Panasonic. I've noticed that same effect on 17" Mitsubishi "tubed"
monitors as well. I have no idea why, but I often mistake 60hz for
85hz even at high resolutions such as 1024x768 and 1152x864. It is a
little more noticeable at 1280x1024. If there is something to that,
it really is a big advantage for the Mitsubishi in my book. I would
imagine that 75hz (etc.) is likewise less "flickery" looking on the
Mitsubishi vs. the Panasonic. BTW, both of the monitors can display
their current refresh rate through their OSD.
The Mitsubishi's tube is flatter than the Panasonic's. The Mitsubishi
tube is only curved in the horizontal and not the vertical (like a
soda can standing up but with *MUCH* less curvature). The Panasonic
tube is curved in the horizontal and vertical similar to many TV sets,
especially older ones (but to *MUCH* less a degree). Both are
considered flat tubes and are reasonably flat.
The viewing area of the Panasonic is slightly bigger than the
Mitsubishi with the Mitsubishi being around 19.7" viewable (AFAIK,
Sony's Trinitron tubes of this size are only 19.2" viewable, BTW) and
the Panasonic being around 20" viewable. However, I like that the
Mitsubishi's viewing area does not come too close to the bezel of the
monitor. I can clearly see the *perfectly* square (not rounded in the
corners as with some monitors) limits to the viewing area, and because
of that, I can fairly easily compare the geometry of the displayed
image's sides with that of the ruler straight sides of the end of the
viewing area. I can't really remember how the Panasonic was in this
respect, but I don't remember it being quite the same way. It is
possible to get a FULL 19.7" viewable area with the Mitsubishi that is
not hindered in any way by the bezel of the monitor.
The 91TXM is capable of software configurable adjustments with a
windows based program, but it requires using an optional serial cable.
A form came with the monitor to get the kit for free. I haven't got
it yet, but having this feature can't hurt.
Both of them had custom Win95 monitor .inf profiles that were
relatively easy to find on both Mitsubishi's and Panasonic's web
sites.
The Mitsubishi 91TXM is a *solidly* built monitor that has excellent
controls, an excellent picture that is among the best I've seen on any
monitor, and an excellent price (I paid $1529US plus $35 shipping
through NECX but now they've raised the price to $1579 along with the
price of other stuff). It seems to me that the .22mm Hitachi models,
the top Viewsonic and Panasonic models that use the .25mm tube, and
the Trinitron type monitors are the best choices out their for 21"
monitors. IMO, the Mitsubishi may likely be the best choice among
them.
Information on Mitsubishi monitors can be found at:
http://www.mitsubishi-display.com/
Check out these links for reviews of Mitsubishi's 91TXM:
http://techweb.cmp.com/crn/testcenter/mitsu.htm
_ __ __
/ | / / ____ _ __ ____ _ / /__
/ |/ / / __ \ | / // __ `/ / //_/
/ /| / / /_/ / |/ // /_/ / / ,<
/_/ |_/ \____/|___/ \__,_/ /_/|_|
Mike Diggins
>I have a MAG 17T (trinitron). It has good quality and controls. The
>display went a bit wacko after 5 months, but I sent it for warranty
>repairs two months ago and it works fine. Turnaround time was less
>than a week (including shipping).
>My only complaint is two faint grey lines which can be seen only on
>white screens.
If the tube a Sony trinitron then those two faint lines are suppose to be
there. In fact, they're on all trinitron tubes, the newer ones anyway. I have
the same thing on my Sony 15sx.
I believe they are suppose to improve the picture quality although I've never
been interested enought to learn how.
Mike
Marc Unangst
Ron Kligman <ronb...@themall.net> writes:
> That made me think that the inside the monitor connection was loose,
> so I took it to a monitor company to check it out. They couldn't find
> the problem and it worked gret while they had it.... So back to square
> one.
Why don't you send it back to Mag and have them repair it? Should be
covered as a warranty repair, although you might have to pay shipping
to send it back.
-Marc
neil tull
The two lines are thin pieces of metal. There are two on 17" monitors and
one on 15" monitors. To achieve that .25 fine dot pitch, the covering for
the cathode ray tube is so thin and flimsy, it starts to vibrate. This
distorts the picture, so there are two thicker strands of metal running
across that "grille mesh" to stabilize the picture.
Neil
Mike Diggins <dig...@mcmaster.ca> wrote in article
<diggins.3...@mcmaster.ca>...
Quentin Bargate
In article <32d283c6...@news.vbo.dec.com>,
PleaseSEEMyS...@NoUnsolicitedJunkMail.please.com says...
> I am looking at purchasing a 17" monitor in the UK.
I recently bought a CTX 1765D, 0.28 dot pitch, which runs 1024 x 768 at
75Hz, but 1280 x 1024 at only 60Hz - but it was inexpensive (my old 14in
monitor blew up and had to be replaced) and gives what I think is a
very good picture, with sensible easy to use controls.
The next model up, the CTX 1785, got excellent reviews in a comparative
test of 20 17in monitors in a leading PC mag recently, better than many
more expensive products. Its refresh rates etc meet your needs.
--
Quentin Bargate
q...@barleigh.prestel.co.uk
Steve Stai
> I recently bought a CTX 1765D, 0.28 dot pitch, which runs 1024 x 768 at
> 75Hz, but 1280 x 1024 at only 60Hz - but it was inexpensive (my old 14in
> monitor blew up and had to be replaced) and gives what I think is a
> very good picture, with sensible easy to use controls.
>
> The next model up, the CTX 1785, got excellent reviews in a comparative
> test of 20 17in monitors in a leading PC mag recently, better than many
> more expensive products. Its refresh rates etc meet your needs.
I love the Panasonic Panasync S17 I have, great price and PC Mag's Editor's
Choice.
Robert & Karen Rodriguez
We love our MAG 17" no problems now but at the beginning we got one with a
bad IR too much blue- 2nd one we couldn't adjust the pincushion out. The
3rd is a charm!. We took the monitor directly to MAG and they replaced all
of them with no problems or no charges! Karen
neil tull <*ne...@pinky-and-the-brain.com*> wrote in article
<01bc0048$c5697780$1810020a@hal>...
Joe Pompei
no...@nuc.net wrote:
>
> >>>>Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
> >>
> >>>I have the Princeton Utlra 17+, and I'm very happy with it.
>
> Princeton is made by MAG for those that don't already know. Expect
> around the same quality with the Ultra 17+ as you would from a MAG
> monitor. The ones I've seen look to be a pretty good value for the
> money.
The reason I ask is because I'm considering buying a colored one from
Computer Systems Divine. I can't stand the beige of computer hardware..
I was thinking deep red... Anyone bought monitors from them before? Or
know of any other (black?) colored monitors?
Robert Trafton
settings or a "shaking" side to side (very slight but noticable) on this
monitor? My refresh rate is set at 85 Hz in 640 x 480 and I experience
this phenom. When I lower the refresh rate to 60 Hz, all is okay, of
course I then notice some flicker. Any clue?
Robert
Robbie Diehl
> The reason I ask is because I'm considering buying a colored one from
> Computer Systems Divine. I can't stand the beige of computer hardware..
> I was thinking deep red... Anyone bought monitors from them before? Or
> know of any other (black?) colored monitors?
You know, you can get special paint if you really wanted to have a
different color monitor. Just cover the screen with something while you
apply it to the main area of the beige section of the monitor, then go
around the details with something a little smaller. I've heard of people
doing this before. Just make sure you get a paint that doesn't harm
plastic or glass (and is permanent). I would ask someone who is a little
bit more familiar with this process, however. But, you could get a
monitor in any color you would like.
at...@yournet.com
I've thought about this as an alternative to the "beige hell" that the
computer industry has put all of us in. How hard is it to remove the
casing on a monitor and paint it then put it back on? Are there any parts
affixed to the inside of the casing to worry about? I'm going to paint my cpu
soon which is relatively easy compared to the monitor. A fire red and a nice
cobalt blue for the cpu and the monitor respectively would be nice. Some
company used to make colored monitors but I forget who.
--
Reality is a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to
live there.
Aaron P. Siri
Travis Carter wrote:
>
> Hey. That reminds me. Way back when... when I had an Amiga 2000, I
> painted it and the monitor with FlexStone. I must admit, it looked really
> cool. I got all sorts of "Wow! What kind of computer is that?!"
>
> Computer hardware manufactures really need to make other colors than beige
> and black. I want cool marble or granite textured colors.
>
You can always buy an SGI 20" (or 16") monitor. They are Sonys with a
cool "rock" color and the Silicon Graphic logo on the front. The ones
that go out with the O2 work fine with PCs. Our machines come in pretty
funky colors too.
-Aaron
> --
> travis carter
> hedg...@xmission.com
> URL: http://www.xmission.com/~hedgehog/
>
> "Let the hedgehogs wear glasses!"
--
Aaron Siri mailto:si...@engr.sgi.com
Web Products Division phone: (415) 933-3967
Silicon Graphics, Inc. fax: (415) 932-3967
******************* http://cosmo.sgi.com *******************
Travis Carter
Robbie Diehl <lep...@parodius.com> wrote in article
<32DB10...@parodius.com>...
> > The reason I ask is because I'm considering buying a colored
one from
> > Computer Systems Divine. I can't stand the beige of computer
hardware..
> > I was thinking deep red... Anyone bought monitors from them before? Or
> > know of any other (black?) colored monitors?
>
> You know, you can get special paint if you really wanted to have a
> different color monitor. Just cover the screen with something while you
> apply it to the main area of the beige section of the monitor, then go
> around the details with something a little smaller. I've heard of people
> doing this before. Just make sure you get a paint that doesn't harm
> plastic or glass (and is permanent). I would ask someone who is a little
> bit more familiar with this process, however. But, you could get a
> monitor in any color you would like.
Hey. That reminds me. Way back when... when I had an Amiga 2000, I
painted it and the monitor with FlexStone. I must admit, it looked really
cool. I got all sorts of "Wow! What kind of computer is that?!"
Computer hardware manufactures really need to make other colors than beige
and black. I want cool marble or granite textured colors.
Dennis Cheng
Aaron P. Siri (si...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
: You can always buy an SGI 20" (or 16") monitor. They are Sonys with a
: cool "rock" color and the Silicon Graphic logo on the front. The ones
: that go out with the O2 work fine with PCs. Our machines come in pretty
: funky colors too.
Forget about the moniter, I want that cool looking O2 case! It comes in
your choice of blue, metallic green(my fave), platinum, and a few others.
I doubt that they made them AT compatible but I'd love to have one.
Dennis
Dennis.Cheng http://www.wam.umd.edu/~decumcp
_____________________________________________
d e c u m c p @ w a m . u m d . e d u
Joe Pompei
Robbie Diehl wrote:
>
> > The reason I ask is because I'm considering buying a colored one from
> > Computer Systems Divine. I can't stand the beige of computer hardware..
> > I was thinking deep red... Anyone bought monitors from them before? Or
> > know of any other (black?) colored monitors?
>
> You know, you can get special paint if you really wanted to have a
> different color monitor. Just cover the screen with something while you
> apply it to the main area of the beige section of the monitor, then go
> around the details with something a little smaller. I've heard of people
> doing this before. Just make sure you get a paint that doesn't harm
> plastic or glass (and is permanent). I would ask someone who is a little
> bit more familiar with this process, however. But, you could get a
> monitor in any color you would like.
Yea, well, I'd be worried about clogging up the vents that are all
around the monitor - unless I was sure they'd be big enough to not
clog. I'd much rather have a monitor that's *really* another color -
permanent and scratch-proof.
Nicholas Hoh
In article <01bbff19$3d0c4460$3a28...@xmission.xmission.com>,
"Travis Carter" <hedg...@xmission.com> wrote:
>
>
>Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> wrote in article
><32D410...@audia.music.nwu.edu>...
>>
>
>every once in a while. If I jiggle the monitor wire, then it clears up.
>
>I've also heard other people having this problem, and I guess it eventually
>causes the screen to permanently change to purple tint.
>
>Comments?
>
>
I've got same monitor and mines over a year old and I haven't had that problem
or heard of that problem before. I love my Mag!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Hoh
4B Kinesiology, Eergonomics Option
University of Waterloo
James D. Arnold
On Tue, 14 Jan 97 16:46:03 GMT, at...@yournet.com wrote:
>I've thought about this as an alternative to the "beige hell" that the
>computer industry has put all of us in. How hard is it to remove the
>casing on a monitor and paint it then put it back on? Are there any parts
>affixed to the inside of the casing to worry about? I'm going to paint my cpu
>soon which is relatively easy compared to the monitor. A fire red and a nice
>cobalt blue for the cpu and the monitor respectively would be nice. Some
>company used to make colored monitors but I forget who.
I hope you mean the tower and not the actual CPU. ;)
Skidmark
But mere mortals can't afford SGI's, and painting a monitor yourself
is like painting a car yourself, it just won't turn out right and
you'll be stuck with the results. Take a look at the Acer Aspire 15"
and 17" monitors at Best Buy for $400 and $749 respectively. They come
in charcoal gray and emerald green, have built-in mikes and speakers,
great picture quality, and have won several design awards. (The tower
cases are cool, too.)
George Zamroz
In article <5bgd7t$d...@news2.preferred.com>, at...@yournet.com says...
>I've thought about this as an alternative to the "beige hell" that the
>computer industry has put all of us in. How hard is it to remove the
>casing on a monitor and paint it then put it back on? Are there any parts
>affixed to the inside of the casing to worry about? I'm going to paint my cpu
>soon which is relatively easy compared to the monitor. A fire red and a nice
>cobalt blue for the cpu and the monitor respectively would be nice. Some
>company used to make colored monitors but I forget who.
It had to happen. Gone are the days of computers being tools. They have become
household appliances, and now people want ones that match the decor. They want
pink fridges and fluro green televisions. :-)
George
--
George Zamroz, BHP Information Technology, Australia.
Mail: PO Box 261 Warrawong NSW 2502
Phone: +61 42 75 5426 Fax: +61 42 75 5215
Internet: zamroz.g...@bhp.com.au | My opinions are my
| own, I think!
at...@yournet.com
In article <5bn04q$2...@gossamer.itmel.bhp.com.au>, zamroz.g...@bhp.com.au (George Zamroz) wrote:
>In article <5bgd7t$d...@news2.preferred.com>, at...@yournet.com says...
>
>>I've thought about this as an alternative to the "beige hell" that the
>>computer industry has put all of us in. How hard is it to remove the
>>casing on a monitor and paint it then put it back on? Are there any parts
>>affixed to the inside of the casing to worry about? I'm going to paint my cpu
>
>>soon which is relatively easy compared to the monitor. A fire red and a nice
>>cobalt blue for the cpu and the monitor respectively would be nice. Some
>>company used to make colored monitors but I forget who.
>
>It had to happen. Gone are the days of computers being tools. They have become
>household appliances, and now people want ones that match the decor. They want
>pink fridges and fluro green televisions. :-)
>
>George
Actually I want it to stand out from the decor instead of matching it. ;-)
Jerry Houlihan
In article <01bc0241$9bd83960$3a28...@xmission.xmission.com>, "Travis Carter" <hedg...@xmission.com> wrote:
>Hey. That reminds me. Way back when... when I had an Amiga 2000, I
>painted it and the monitor with FlexStone. I must admit, it looked really
>cool. I got all sorts of "Wow! What kind of computer is that?!"
Hey, I thought I invented that idea. My CPU case is painted with black
granite Flexstone and it looks very cool. I didn't do my monitor only becuase
I knew I wouldn't be happy with the areas around the glass and around the
little buttons. I knew it would start to chip and look bad.
Jerry
at...@yournet.com
FlexStone would look really cool. I have 3 or 4 things in my home painted
with it and they look great.
David Schmitz
On 10 Jan 1997 17:06:40 GMT, "Travis Carter" <hedg...@xmission.com> wrote:
>
>
>Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> wrote in article
><32D410...@audia.music.nwu.edu>...
>> Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>>
>
>I have a MAG DX17F. It works great, but I get a purple tint to the screen
>every once in a while. If I jiggle the monitor wire, then it clears up.
>
>I've also heard other people having this problem, and I guess it eventually
>causes the screen to permanently change to purple tint.
>
>Comments?
I have the same monitor and same problem . I just turn the monitor off and back
on on to cure it and its random.
I hope it does not CHANGE permanently .... I dont think its worth sending in for
service because it might come back worse than the latter..
Now that I know it is not only my monitor and many others i think this should be
brought to MAGS attention.
I have a 3 year warranty that is still not up yet......
>--
>travis carter
>hedg...@xmission.com
>URL: http://www.xmission.com/~hedgehog/
>
>"Let the hedgehogs wear glasses!"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
David John Schmitz
cyg...@planet.net
djs...@megahertz.njit.edu
http://www.planet.net/pcygnusx/
http://megahertz.njit.edu/~djs3447/
This posting uses 100% recycled bytes.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
plat...@primenet.com
at...@yournet.com wrote:
>FlexStone would look really cool. I have 3 or 4 things in my home painted
>with it and they look great.
Is that the spray-on stuff that makes stuff look like different rock
surfaces? The one I used came with two spray cans: one was the actual
paint and the other some kind of clear fixative.
If it is, I'd like to warn you about spraying it on some kinds of
plastics; it may eat them up. Probably some kind of chemical
interaction. Never had a problem with wood or metal, though, and it
does look pretty darned cool.
John The Platypus
plat...@primenet.com
Stephen R. Feger
Ok so maybe you're looking for MAG or Princeton, but for $620 at
NECXDriect, you can get a Viewsonic 17GS which is an excellent price.
I got mine from them about 7 months ago for $640 and it was one of the
best purchases I ever made. I got the monitor in 3 days and have not
had a single problem with it yet, it get up to a 1280 x 1024
resolution and it's refresh rates are AWESOME, none of the 60 Hz VESA
minimum crap at 1024 x 768.
Nothing but 'net!.
Steve Feger
feg...@inx.net
>Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> writes:
>Hi Joe...
>>Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>I have the Princeton Utlra 17+, and I'm very happy with it.
>--
>Roger A. Safian
>r-sa...@nwu.edu (email) finger ro...@grumpy.nsg.nwu.edu for public key
>(847) 491-4058 (voice)
>(847) 467-5690 (Fax) "You're never too old to have a great childhood!"
soed...@rad.net.id
On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:23:23 GMT, cyg...@planet.net (David Schmitz)
wrote:
>On 10 Jan 1997 17:06:40 GMT, "Travis Carter" <hedg...@xmission.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Joe Pompei <pom...@audia.music.nwu.edu> wrote in article
>><32D410...@audia.music.nwu.edu>...
>>> Anyone have experience with 'Princeton' or 'MAG'?
>>>
>>
>>I have a MAG DX17F. It works great, but I get a purple tint to the screen
>>every once in a while. If I jiggle the monitor wire, then it clears up.
My friend bought MAG 14", and it was horrible. The outer part was not
focus at all. It was a total mess. He changed to Viewsonic.
Anyway, for 17" , the best I've ever seen goes to Samsung. I think
they are the closest thing to what we called ideal CRT.
--
Dody Suria Wijaya
0495030341
Travis Carter
plat...@primenet.com wrote in article
<32e25fa7...@news.primenet.com>...
I painted the old A2000's monitor and case with Flexstone with no problems
at all. It did look cool! Perhaps I'll get to doing it on my Pentium
here shortly. The only thing bad about it, is that they keyboard looks way
out of place. I thought about doing the keyboard, but then... naw! It
simply wouldn't work!
Larry Palmer
Richard wrote:
>
> I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
> NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
> Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
> narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
> Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
> the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>
> Richard
Well, although it's subjective, I definitely agree that if you've got a
good trinitron tube, it looks better than almost any other monitor. On
the other hand, getting a good one can be tough. Lots of them have
convergence problems in the corners, especially when you size them for
full screen and high resolution. Depending on how picky you are, you
may have to send back about three bad ones to get one good one, or else
just live with blueish chars on the right edge of the screen and redish
ones on the left.
DAN
hi im thinking of geting a daytek 17" monitor and want to no if anybody has
one and how is it whats the actually viewing area.i now there are better
monitors but the price im geting for the daytek is really good.and the
other monitors cost a few hundred more which i cant afford
Joe Smulowicz
"Richard" <l...@brokersys.com> wrote:
|I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
|NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
|Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
|narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
|Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
|the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
I've never seen a Princeton get any more than fair reviews. Mag seems to
rank a bit better, but not outstanding. Of course these are both lower
priced units. The Sony I believe is superior (and may cost a bit more?), but
I'm only speaking from what I've read....no first hand experience.
Richard
I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
Richard
Bill
Where would a person buy a paint called flexstone? I could paint my keyboard,
because the casing can be seperated from the keys. Wouldn't do the monitor
though. Still under warrenty. NEC Multisync XE21.
Bill
Richard
Well, actually I am really looking forward in getting Sony 200SX. It's not
really a superior monitor based on price because of five monitors I
mentioned below do not differ more than $100 in price. I have went to the
local computer store and saw NEC VX-17+ and Sony 200SX. I still like Sony
200SX better because Sony's front design made the screen looked even
bigger.... I am also considering MAG just because it has a little larger
viewable area than rest of them.... Anyone would like to shine some lights
on this subject??
Richard
Joe Smulowicz <jo...@hpwaroh.an.hp.com> 次寫入到主題
<slrn5e7o0...@hpwaroh.an.hp.com>...
Dave Balcom
On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:05:54 GMT, soed...@rad.net.id wrote:
}Anyway, for 17" , the best I've ever seen goes to Samsung. I think
}they are the closest thing to what we called ideal CRT.
About 3 months ago, I bought a Hitachi SuperScan Elite 611 (17) from
Computer City ($778). I am very impressed with its performance, and
was surprised at its .22 dot pitch. I know even the smallest fonts
are readable now, especially compared to my old NEC IIA it replaced.
Later,
Dave
d...@wavenet.com
Richard..
REgarding the monitors..
First of all, Princeton is made by Mag.. same company. I have a Mag 17"
700T and it appears to be well setup and manufactured.
I have no such blue and reddish hues on either edge.. pincushioning is
not present.. good adjustments.. runs well at 85 Mhz refresh at 800-600
and on up.. the Trinitron is a good screen. Clear..
I have had to deal with Mag's service department on one occasion and
they were absolute gems.. If anyone needs tech support that will listen
and try to help, contact Russ Westman at MAg thru e-mail.. if you have
to talk to Customer service, ask for Darlene.. these two people made the
one problem I had go away.. fast.
I would say that Mag is an excell. mid priced Monitor.. easy to use,
good adjustments.. clear screen. And at .25 dot pitch, it is easy to
see ... hope this helps.. Rich "doc" Colley
Dave Balcom
On 20 Jan 1997 15:30:25 GMT, "Travis Carter" <hedg...@xmission.com>
wrote:
}The only thing bad about it, is that they keyboard looks way
}out of place. I thought about doing the keyboard, but then...
How about replacing your keyboard with a Key Tronic Lifetime series
(black). They are about $39 almost anywhere...
Later,
Dave
David Brooks,139,7233
Larry Palmer <pal...@casc.com> writes:
>Richard wrote:
>>
>> I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
>> NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
>> Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
>> narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
>> Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
>> the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>>
>
>Well, although it's subjective, I definitely agree that if you've got a
>good trinitron tube, it looks better than almost any other monitor. On
>the other hand, getting a good one can be tough.
I agree the tube is, in theory , the best, but I have a Mag DX700T, and I'm
most unhappy with it. The first one had a dead pixel, which became obvious
when I started a word processor. The second worked for a few days, and
then it became unable to sync in the lower res modes (so bootup screens
were hard to read).
The third one, out of the box, has poor alignment, with bad pincushion in
some modes and wavy edges in others. While these problems are, in
principle, fixable with the OSD (a) something this expensive shouldn't have
to be fixed (b) the display's illuminated area isn't centered in the bezel,
and that can't be adjusted.
So far my vendor has exchanged these things without complaint, but I'm
getting fed up with squeezing it in the car!
--
David Brooks, QA Manager, Desktop Engineering dbr...@opengroup.org
The Open Group <URL:http://www.opengroup.org/~dbrooks/>
Commit planned giving and daily acts of compassion.
Russ Poffenberger
Richard wrote:
>
> I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
> NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
> Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
> narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
> Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
> the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>
> Richard
At a local store, I compared Sony (.25) and several other 17" monitors,
the Sony blew them all away. It was interesting to see how different the
picture was.
--
Russ Poffenberger Engineering Specialist
Schlumberger Technologies ATE DOMAIN: pof...@San-Jose.ate.slb.com
1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110 Voice: (408)437-5254 FAX: (408)437-5246
S. Whitmore
Russ Poffenberger <pof...@San-Jose.ate.slb.com> wrote:
>Richard wrote:
>>
>> I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
>> NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
>> Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
>> narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
>> Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
>> the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>
>the Sony blew them all away. It was interesting to see how different the
>picture was.
I owned a Sony (200SX if I remember right) for about three weeks.
(Ended up returning it with the crappy Sony PC, but that's another
story entirely.) It is certainly one of the nicer monitors I've used,
but I wouldn't buy another one. I found the two horizontal lines
(wires or whatever they are) too distracting while doing things which
made most of the screen very light (e.g., full-screen page layout,
etc.). I also found the sequential access to functions in the
on-screen adjustments annoying.
For comparison, at work I have a MAG Innovision (not sure of the
model). The picture quality is good, there are no distracting
elements, and the (physical) buttons in the control panel allow me to
immediately adust whatever I want without scrolling through other
adjustments.
So if you're going to buy a Sony (and at this point, I'm so infuriated
about the Sony PC fiasco that I couldn't recommend it), try one out in
a store and make sure you at least address those two things. That is,
make the display all white (open up Notepad or whatever and make it
full screen) and see if the lines bother you, and also try making a
few adjustments to the screen.
Oh yes, and another thing: I prefer a "degauss" button over having to
turn off the monitor for two minutes. The MAG has a button, the Sony
had to be turned off. In my eyes, that's a dumb feature design.
Hope this is enlightening without being too biased against Sony. :-)
(BTW, some of the newsgroups this appeared in didn't look very
appropriate, so I set followups to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart Whitmore (http://www.cwu.edu/~whitmore)
whit#mo...@tahoma.cwu.edu (Remove the # symbol to make a valid address)
NOTE: When sending me e-mail, please PGP encrypt it using my key,
available by fingering my "whitmore at cluster.cwu.edu" account.
If you don't know how, feel free to ask.
ABBYR
Russ Poffenberger wrote:
>
> Richard wrote:
> >
> > I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
> > NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
> > Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
> > narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
> > Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience with
> > the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
> >
>
> At a local store, I compared Sony (.25) and several other 17" monitors,
> the Sony blew them all away. It was interesting to see how different the
> picture was.
>
> Russ Poffenberger Engineering Specialist
> Schlumberger Technologies ATE DOMAIN: pof...@San-Jose.ate.slb.com
> 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276
> San Jose, Ca. 95110 Voice: (408)437-5254 FAX: (408)437-5246
trinitron monitor I have ever seen has horrible geometry problems. It is
impossible to get straight lines, especially vertical ones, on a Sony.
It obviously does not bother a lot of people, because the monitors sell
well. A few years ago I tried a 15" SF model and after returning three
of them, studying them carefully in the store, and reading numerous
similar posts on this board, I realized the problem was a characteristic
of Sony. It drove me crazy so I gave up and got an NEC XE15 whose
geometry was perfect and picture great. I have just purchased a new
Pentium and decided to try Sony again, since I do love the clarity of
the image (and swear by their tv sets). I am writing this looking at a
brand new Sony 200SX- my second one. The first I brought home had a bad
brownish looking area of the screen. This one is much better in that
regard, although I still notice a very slight brownish cast in the upper
middle to right portion of the screen. But lo and behold, the geometry
problem persists. While the 200SX is better than my earlier try at the
15" and has a few more geometry controls such as pin balance and
keystone balance than did the earlier model which can lessen the
problem, it is still impossible to get straight vertical lines. Plus, it
gets annoying to constantly have to fiddle with those controls to get
even close to straight. We have some Gateway and Dell trinitrons in my
office and they suffer from the same problem. I therefore presume it is
an inherent issue in the trinitron technology. Of course there are also
the famous two trinitron horizontal visible wires to deal with but those
do not bother me. You will have to decide if screwy geometry is offset
by the picture clarity. As for me, I will give it a few more days to see
if I can live with it. If not, its back to the store for the NEC XV17+.
David Ross
KL Wong
All this talk about big monitors, could I please ask a related
question:
I'd love to buy a big monitor, but my optometrist (whatever) tells me
that the bigger the monitor, the farther back I'll have to sit, or
else it's a sure fire way to wreck the eyes.
True, false, or both?
Some have said that whether a monitor will be damaging to the eyes all
depends on the refresh rate. If this is true, what refresh rate
should I be looking for when getting a bit monitor? Do most of the
monitors nowadays satisfy that criteria?
For that matter, would it make a difference to my eyes if I were to
get an even larger monitor?
Thanks!
KL
---------------------------
K...@OOHYEAH.com.hk
KL....@CliffordChance.com
(Web site soon to be officially inflicted on the world at http://www.glink.net.hk/~klwong)
**JUST DOO EEEEEET**
Roy Taylor
Any good optician or PC magazine or in the UK
the Government Health & safety regulations stipulate
a minimum refresh rate of 60MHz and a recommended
rate of 75MHz.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
KL Wong <K...@OOHYEAH.com.hk> wrote in article
<32eacbeb...@news.glink.net.hk>...
Gilbert Baron
"Richard" <l...@brokersys.com> wrote:
>Well, actually I am really looking forward in getting Sony 200SX. It's not
>really a superior monitor based on price because of five monitors I
>mentioned below do not differ more than $100 in price. I have went to the
>local computer store and saw NEC VX-17+ and Sony 200SX. I still like Sony
>200SX better because Sony's front design made the screen looked even
>bigger.... I am also considering MAG just because it has a little larger
>viewable area than rest of them.... Anyone would like to shine some lights
>on this subject??
>
What is the difference between the Sony 200SX and the 200SF? Our local
best buy has the SF. I have a 100SX now and only for a week but may
bring it back for the 200SF. The only thing bad I can say about the
15inch is there is more pincushion () )( distortion than I would
like. Every monitor I see seems to have it.
>Richard
>
>Joe Smulowicz <jo...@hpwaroh.an.hp.com> 次寫入到主題
><slrn5e7o0...@hpwaroh.an.hp.com>...
>> "Richard" <l...@brokersys.com> wrote:
>> |I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
>> |NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
>> |Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
>> |narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
>> |Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience
>with
>> |the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>>
>> I've never seen a Princeton get any more than fair reviews. Mag
>seems to
>> rank a bit better, but not outstanding. Of course these are both
>lower
>> priced units. The Sony I believe is superior (and may cost a bit more?),
> but
>> I'm only speaking from what I've read....no first hand experience.
>
--
Gil Baron W0MN gba...@sparc.isl.net Web http://www.isl.net/~gbaron
"Bailar es vivir" pgp2.6 key http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
"Cuatro caminos hay en mi vida. Cual de los cuatro sera el mejor"
[Posted with Agent .99g. For info, email agent...@forteinc.com.]
Mack Harris
My experience would not agree with your optometrist. I recently got a
17 inch monitor at work. At the end of the day my eyes are now
noticably less fatigued. I may be ruining my peepers, but they
certainly feel better. The refresh rates are the same as my old
monitor and I set about the same distance from it.
A refresh rate of at least 70Hz (many say 75Hz) is required to
eliminate visible flicker. Also, if your workarea has florescent
lighting, consider getting an incandescant lamp.
Bob Jones
I do not agree with your OD. wrecking your eyes is a bit of a
stretch. The only thing you will get by staring a larger monitor at
the same distance as a smaller one is:
1. Possibly more radiation (Very debatable subject)
2. You will make larger saccades (Rapid eye movments )
while reading text at the same rez and font size as on a 15"
monitor. Will possibly tire eyes faster.
3. You may see more blur around fonts on a 17" if the Dot pitch is
the same as a 15"
Things that are the same at a fixed distance:
1. Convergence of eyes
2. Diopters of focus need to view monitor
The things that do make a difference on any monitor
1. Refresh rate
2. Sharpness of fonts
3. Color selection of background and fonts
4. Lighting conditions of room
5. Your phoric posture and lag of accomodation (will explain)
Non of these things have been proven to damage the eyes.
Eyestrain/fatigue does not equal damage. Excess flickering will cause
more neural activity and blood flow/vascular changes that can
precipitate head aches or epilepic seizure in some individuals.
Things to do to promote visual comfort
1. Use a high refresh rate >70, the higher the better.
2. Don't choose a black background with white letters, this really
increase ones lag of accomodation.
3. Use a 3/1 ratio for monitor/background brightness. Too dark or
bright of a room can reduce comfort. There are experiments that
have proven this. Thats why you are not suppose to watch TV in
the dark, aside from being creepy.
4. Buy a good monitor
5. Have your OD check you phoric posture and lag of accomodation at
the distance your eyes are from your monitor (Usually 20-28 inches).
Phorias are the tendancy of your eyes to either drift outward or
inward (crossed) with respect to the object you are looking at. Lag
of accomodation is the amount (in diopters) that your focus has
drifted behind the text you are reading.
If you have a large lag or phoria or both your eyes will be working
much harder than they need to be and no monitor can improve this. A
pair of dedicated computer glasses using prism/lens and can really
improve visual comfort. In michigan many State employees are allowed
a free pair of computer glasses per year. They know that fatigued
employees eat up company time.
So go buy that Sony or NEC monitor and enjoy it. And try some of my
suggestions.
Oh, and I am not just pontificating here, I have a strong background
in physics, optics and human physiology.
Bob.............
"Roy Taylor" <ro...@vcm2.win-uk.net> wrote:
>Any good optician or PC magazine or in the UK
>the Government Health & safety regulations stipulate
>a minimum refresh rate of 60MHz and a recommended
>rate of 75MHz.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>KL Wong <K...@OOHYEAH.com.hk> wrote in article
><32eacbeb...@news.glink.net.hk>...
Z. Major
In article <5c5k87$a...@paperboy.osf.org>,
David Brooks,139,7233 <dbr...@x.org> wrote:
>>>
>I agree the tube is, in theory , the best, but I have a Mag DX700T, and I'm
>most unhappy with it. The first one had a dead pixel, which became obvious
>
>getting fed up with squeezing it in the car!
>--
>David Brooks, QA Manager, Desktop Engineering dbr...@opengroup.org
Hi !
So after the 3rd one why do you keep going thru the same old get in the
box get out of the box routine??
Just try a Viewsonic 17" and be amazed.
V775 cheap but good (Canadian $825)
PT775 not so cheap but excellent ($1175)
btw good luck!
Z
Hugh Webb
Mack Harris wrote:
: My experience would not agree with your optometrist. I recently got a
: 17 inch monitor at work. At the end of the day my eyes are now
: noticably less fatigued. I may be ruining my peepers, but they
: certainly feel better. The refresh rates are the same as my old
: monitor and I set about the same distance from it.
:
: A refresh rate of at least 70Hz (many say 75Hz) is required to
: eliminate visible flicker. Also, if your workarea has florescent
: lighting, consider getting an incandescant lamp.
This is good to hear. One of the facts of life I half to deal with is
bifocals. Right now with my 14" monitor, I find I'm always lifting my
head up just to read the screen - after an hour or two, this can be more
than a little annoying. Perhaps a 17" will allow me to relax a bit more
while I pen my words of wisdom and read others'.
HW
---------------------------
Hugh Webb
hw...@rain.org
http://www.rain.org/~hwebb
---------------------------
Thomas M. Root
Hugh Webb wrote:
>
> This is good to hear. One of the facts of life I half to deal with is
> bifocals. Right now with my 14" monitor, I find I'm always lifting my
> head up just to read the screen - after an hour or two, this can be more
> than a little annoying. Perhaps a 17" will allow me to relax a bit more
> while I pen my words of wisdom and read others'.
>
> HW
>
> ---------------------------
> Hugh Webb
> hw...@rain.org
> http://www.rain.org/~hwebb
> ---------------------------
I had a second pair of bifocals made just for using my computer. The
lower section is my standard reading perscription so I can read manuals
and typical "reading" and the upper section has a half strength reading
perscription which lets me see the monitor comfortably at a distance of
about 24-30 inches. It's a pain to have to switch glasses when I sit
down an the computer, but not as much as the pain I used to get in my
neck.
TMR
--
Thomas M. Root
tmr...@spessart.com
McMinnville, OR
Bob Jones
Hugh, ordinary bifocals are not well suited for computer use, they are
the cause of many sore necks from tilting your head back to see the
monitor. To help this situation neck one needs a dedicated pair of
computer bifocals. That is a pair in which the area of the lens above
the segment line is focused at your computer to eye distance and the
bifocal portion is set for your eye to keyboard/paper distance. This
way you can use the entire top portion of your glasses to view the
monitor (20-30")(No head tilting needed) and the bifocal for things
that are a bit closer than the monitor (12-18") The only drawback is
such a pair of glasses are only good for computer use, you will not be
able to see clearly in the distance.
If you are using a computer part time then a progressive multifocal
lens is a good jack of trades option. If you choose this type do not
buy a no-name brand as the optics are quite poor. The better designed
progressive lenses go under the names of Varilux, Zeiss, Silor. This
option does not sacrifice distance vision but offers less freedom of
ocular movement while viewing the monitor vs a dedicated CPU Rx.
Hope this helps
Bob.......
Gilbert Baron
mha...@pcok.com (Mack Harris) wrote:
>My experience would not agree with your optometrist. I recently got a
>17 inch monitor at work. At the end of the day my eyes are now
>noticably less fatigued. I may be ruining my peepers, but they
>certainly feel better. The refresh rates are the same as my old
>monitor and I set about the same distance from it.
>
That is NONSENSE and GARBAGE. Get a new optometrist or go to an
Ophthalmologist. The guy doe not know what he is talking about. It is
the same myth about TV viewing in a dark room and reading in dim light
damaging the eyes. It won't period. You may feel fatigued but damage,
no way. The only reason to set further back is to see the whole screen
at once and also the lines are further apart since same number of
lines on the larger screen. Do try to get at least .26 or smaller
pitch. I love my Sony Trinitron 17incher with .25 and 85 Hz refresh at
1024x768, best investment so far.
c_wa...@netdepot.com
I couldnt agree more! I own a Sony Trinitron 17 and a Panasonic 17 and
they are the two best monitor I have ever worked with. I have been
working with them in the dark for the last year and I am suffering no
ill effects or at least thats what my last eye exam revieled. 17's are
the only way to go.
P. Batton
I have a 17" Princeton Ultra 17+ and love it! It's a great monitor. I
have Diamonds Stealth 3D video card with 2 MB of EDO on it and I get a
great picture 1024X768 with optimal automatic refresh rates! It's
fantastic. It has easy on-screen adjustments and I just love it. I
tried a viewsonic, which I returned, my sister who is a professional
photographer with art on the net, uses a Sony with a Number 9 video
card, with VRAM and doesn't have near the resolution that I have with my
Princeton! I'm very happy with it - I too read mediorce reports on it,
but they just don't add up if you ask me!
KL Wong
gba...@sparc.isl.net (Gilbert Baron) wrote:
>That is NONSENSE and GARBAGE. Get a new optometrist or go to an
>Ophthalmologist. The guy doe not know what he is talking about. It is
>the same myth about TV viewing in a dark room and reading in dim light
>damaging the eyes. It won't period. You may feel fatigued but damage,
>no way. The only reason to set further back is to see the whole screen
>at once and also the lines are further apart since same number of
>lines on the larger screen. Do try to get at least .26 or smaller
>pitch. I love my Sony Trinitron 17incher with .25 and 85 Hz refresh at
>1024x768, best investment so far.
>
That's very good to hear. I might just go get my 17" tomorrow!
But before that let me ask the question another way:
If I wanted to, how would I go about wrecking my eyes in front of a
computer monitor? Is there nothing I could do to make my eyesight
deteriorate?
What about glare? The same optometrist who obviously did not get his
facts very right also said that I should put a glare screen in front
of the monitor or turn down the brightness.
Well?
Zinzan
>If I wanted to, how would I go about wrecking my eyes in front of a
>computer monitor? Is there nothing I could do to make my eyesight
>deteriorate?
Read, for 72 hours straight without sleep, the entire newgroup as it
exists now, on a 17-inch monitor running 1600x1200 at 45hz interlaced,
with the font being MS Serif 8pt.
That should do it.
~Scott
Aaron Rittmaster
I can't imagine that it would actually damage your vision long-term, though
glare certainly contributes a great deal to eyestrain and fatigue (it's the
same reason polarized sunglasses are better than the ones that just shade
your eyes). As far as dimming your monitor, that seems a bit specious.
Televisions are considerably brighter than computer monitors. Glare and
monitor brightness are two seperate issues entirely. Glare comes from
external light sources and brightness comes from internal light.
Aaron
From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long: Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
Get Pearls of Wisdom! at http://www.net-link.net/~sda19
KL Wong <K...@OOHYEAH.com.hk> wrote in article
<32efb379...@news.glink.net.hk>...
> gba...@sparc.isl.net (Gilbert Baron) wrote:
>
> >That is NONSENSE and GARBAGE. Get a new optometrist or go to an
> >Ophthalmologist. The guy doe not know what he is talking about. It is
> >the same myth about TV viewing in a dark room and reading in dim light
> >damaging the eyes. It won't period. You may feel fatigued but damage,
> >no way. The only reason to set further back is to see the whole screen
> >at once and also the lines are further apart since same number of
> >lines on the larger screen. Do try to get at least .26 or smaller
> >pitch. I love my Sony Trinitron 17incher with .25 and 85 Hz refresh at
> >1024x768, best investment so far.
> >
>
> That's very good to hear. I might just go get my 17" tomorrow!
>
> But before that let me ask the question another way:
>
> If I wanted to, how would I go about wrecking my eyes in front of a
> computer monitor? Is there nothing I could do to make my eyesight
> deteriorate?
>
Ed Redondo
In article <32EB08...@spessart.com>, tmr...@spessart.com wrote:
>Hugh Webb wrote:
>>
>> This is good to hear. One of the facts of life I half to deal with is
>> bifocals. Right now with my 14" monitor, I find I'm always lifting my
>> head up just to read the screen - after an hour or two, this can be more
>> than a little annoying. Perhaps a 17" will allow me to relax a bit more
>> while I pen my words of wisdom and read others'.
>>
>I had a second pair of bifocals made just for using my computer. The
>lower section is my standard reading perscription so I can read manuals
>and typical "reading" and the upper section has a half strength reading
>perscription which lets me see the monitor comfortably at a distance of
>about 24-30 inches. It's a pain to have to switch glasses when I sit
>down an the computer, but not as much as the pain I used to get in my
>neck.
>
Hint, that is what trifocals are for. These work for me. The middle
section for computer work, upper long distance, lower for reading. I did
find that the "executive" style of trifocals were better for me than the
normal style. The "executive" style have the 'focal' lines from edge to
edge vs. the half-moon sections.
=== Ed Redondo ===========================================
Religious practice is an individual's right, *not* a right
of the majority to be imposed on other individuals.
Parenthood is hard. And long. And thankless. And comes
without an off switch, a pause button, a rewind or a volume
control.
Bill Soon
I have had the best results with blended lenses (no lines)...
now I can sit as near or far from the tube as I want, and
get the $%^&*! screen in sharp focus.
I want to get a 17" but cannot afford it right now.
The blended bifocals (trifocals??) that I just got
two months ago are terrific.
-- Bill
evrw...@powergrid.electriciti.com (Ed Redondo) wrote:
Harry Oehlers
On 25 Jan 1997 23:03:54 GMT, hw...@rain.org (Hugh Webb) wrote:
:Mack Harris wrote:
:: My experience would not agree with your optometrist. I recently got a
:: 17 inch monitor at work. At the end of the day my eyes are now
:: noticably less fatigued. I may be ruining my peepers, but they
:: certainly feel better. The refresh rates are the same as my old
:: monitor and I set about the same distance from it.
::
:: A refresh rate of at least 70Hz (many say 75Hz) is required to
:: eliminate visible flicker. Also, if your workarea has florescent
:: lighting, consider getting an incandescant lamp.
:
:This is good to hear. One of the facts of life I half to deal with is
:bifocals. Right now with my 14" monitor, I find I'm always lifting my
:head up just to read the screen - after an hour or two, this can be more
:than a little annoying. Perhaps a 17" will allow me to relax a bit more
:while I pen my words of wisdom and read others'.
:
:HW
Hugh, what you need are multi-focal specs, those without a clear
distinguishing line between the different focal length portions of
your lens. I had the same difficulty as you many years ago but solved
the problem by changing my specs.
The other solution is to sit on a higher chair. :-)
Harry Oehlers
oeh...@singnet.com.sg
jwray
Harry Oehlers <oeh...@singnet.com.sg> wrote in article
<32f056d8...@news.singnet.com.sg>...
Unless you have really bad eyesight as I do. I have the no-line multi focal
lenses and still found that I tired easily from tilting my head back to get
in just the right focal area. I finally gave up and got a pair of single
vision glasses focused right at the screen plane...I use them just for
computer work and nothing else...it's amazing the difference that has
made...you tend to ignore or compensate for vision deficiencies and don't
really notice how bad things are until you see how good they can be...
doctari
And above all dont forget to get UV COATING on your lens - tried to
solve what I thought was a bad Rx for lenses and it turned out to be the
lack of UV coating - was amazing
bob
I went on a monitor shopping spree about a month ago. After narrowing the
brands down to Sony and NEC, I bought the following:
For home I bought the NEC XV17+, the picture is not quite as bright as the
Sony, but for home lighting I really am pleased with it.
For the shop I bought 3 Sony 200 SX monitors, and 2 Sony 300SX for CAD
workstations. They are fine monitors, but I had to replace on of the 300's
because it popped and got a real soft and blurry picture, and one of the
200's occasionally starts up with a bright center area, which disappears if
you power it down and then on again. The Sony's work great under harsh
lighting conditions.
All the 17's are used with P200 systems, ASUS mobos, and 4mb Millenium,
with 4mb upgrades backordered. The 20's are used with PPro 200's, 128 mb
ram, NT4.0, and Dynamic Pictures Oxygen 102 3D accelarators, 8MB. I wish I
had one of these at home.
Regards
Bob
Richard <l...@brokersys.com> wrote in article
<01bc06ea$9e1ac640$ada2dece@richard>...
> I am hunting for a good 17" monitor, too! From the Computr Shopper, the
> NEC VX-17+ is recommended. However, I am aiming to MAG, Princeton, and
> Sony since Sony supposed to make the best monitor tube. So far I have
> narrowed down to MAG DX700T (Trinitron), Sony 200SX (Trinitron), and
> Princeton EO74T or EO76T (Diamondtron). If anyone have any experience
with
> the above monitors, please give me your rating on them. Thanks.
>
> Richard
>
Bob Jones
doctari <some...@world.com> wrote:
>
>And above all dont forget to get UV COATING on your lens - tried to
>solve what I thought was a bad Rx for lenses and it turned out to be the
>lack of UV coating - was amazing
I think you mean AR (Anti-reflection coating), UV (Ultraviolet
coatings) block out invisible UV light which has nothing to do with
visual comfort or clarity. Now if you are a welder then UV filters do
take the sting out of keratitis.
Bob.......
Neil Polo
On 31 Jan 1997 18:20:29 GMT jwray wrote:
>Unless you have really bad eyesight as I do. I have the no-line multi focal
>lenses and still found that I tired easily from tilting my head back to get
>in just the right focal area. I finally gave up and got a pair of single
>vision glasses focused right at the screen plane...I use them just for
>computer work and nothing else...it's amazing the difference that has
>made...you tend to ignore or compensate for vision deficiencies and don't
>really notice how bad things are until you see how good they can be...
Agreed! But then, don't turn around to look at TV <vbg>! Mine make me
dizzy!!
The aging process sucks, eh?
Regards,
Neil
Return Address: np...@voicenet.com
Larry Kahn
In article <01bc1183$97298580$90e992cf@r>, random...@worldnet.att.net
says...
>
>I went on a monitor shopping spree about a month ago. After narrowing the
>brands down to Sony and NEC, I bought the following:
>For home I bought the NEC XV17+, the picture is not quite as bright as the
>Sony, but for home lighting I really am pleased with it.
>For the shop I bought 3 Sony 200 SX monitors, and 2 Sony 300SX for CAD
>workstations. They are fine monitors, but I had to replace on of the 300's
>because it popped and got a real soft and blurry picture, and one of the
>200's occasionally starts up with a bright center area, which disappears if
>you power it down and then on again. The Sony's work great under harsh
>lighting conditions.
>All the 17's are used with P200 systems, ASUS mobos, and 4mb Millenium,
>with 4mb upgrades backordered. The 20's are used with PPro 200's, 128 mb
>ram, NT4.0, and Dynamic Pictures Oxygen 102 3D accelarators, 8MB. I wish I
>had one of these at home.
>Regards
>Bob
>
you can even see them in the adds...
I prefer nec's actually the xp17 over the xv17 ... I just bought a refurb
xp15 for home for my sone and it is a great monitor...
I have an older 5fg (non e) model that is great...
Scott Kriefall
On Wed, 05 Feb 1997 17:45:30 -0500, address...@bogus.com (Larry Kahn)
wrote:
>but don't all sony tubes have those damn thin lines down the screen..
>you can even see them in the adds...
Yes, all Sony Trinitron tubes have 1 or 2 thin horizontal lines. So?
They're *very* thin, and are almost always unnoticable unless one is
deliberately looking for them. They're a minor tradeoff for such a nice
(clear, colorful, etc) CRT.
>I prefer nec's actually the xp17 over the xv17 ... I just bought a refurb
>xp15 for home for my sone and it is a great monitor...
I looked at some of the 15" and 17" NEC monitors a year or two ago, and
was not impressed at all. Too expensive for the quality, viewable screen
area too small (only 15.7" for a 17" monitor), didn't like the picture
quality in comparison with trinitron tubes, etc.
To each his/her own, I guess.
Aaron Rittmaster
I just bought a Panasync S17, and I absolutely love it! It's got a bright,
large viewable screen area, good on-screen controls - bottom line is that
it looks terrific! I picked it up on sale last weekend at Best Buy for
$650. The best $650 I've spent on my computer yet.
:-)Aaron
Larry Kahn <address...@bogus.com> wrote in article
<257cd$112d1e.6d@p6dnf>...
> In article <01bc1183$97298580$90e992cf@r>, random...@worldnet.att.net
> says...
> >
> >I went on a monitor shopping spree about a month ago. After narrowing
the
> >brands down to Sony and NEC, I bought the following:
> >For home I bought the NEC XV17+, the picture is not quite as bright as
the
> >Sony, but for home lighting I really am pleased with it.
> >For the shop I bought 3 Sony 200 SX monitors, and 2 Sony 300SX for CAD
> >workstations. They are fine monitors, but I had to replace on of the
300's
> >because it popped and got a real soft and blurry picture, and one of the
> >200's occasionally starts up with a bright center area, which disappears
if
> >you power it down and then on again. The Sony's work great under harsh
> >lighting conditions.
> >All the 17's are used with P200 systems, ASUS mobos, and 4mb Millenium,
> >with 4mb upgrades backordered. The 20's are used with PPro 200's, 128
mb
> >ram, NT4.0, and Dynamic Pictures Oxygen 102 3D accelarators, 8MB. I
wish I
> >had one of these at home.
> >Regards
> >Bob
> >
> but don't all sony tubes have those damn thin lines down the screen..
> you can even see them in the adds...
>
> I prefer nec's actually the xp17 over the xv17 ... I just bought a refurb
> xp15 for home for my sone and it is a great monitor...
>
Bob Downing
bobo...@concentric.net (Bob Jones) said:
>Hugh, ordinary bifocals are not well suited for computer use, they are
>the cause of many sore necks from tilting your head back to see the
>monitor. To help this situation neck one needs a dedicated pair of
>computer bifocals. That is a pair in which the area of the lens above
>the segment line is focused at your computer to eye distance and the
>bifocal portion is set for your eye to keyboard/paper distance. This
>way you can use the entire top portion of your glasses to view the
>monitor (20-30")(No head tilting needed) and the bifocal for things
>that are a bit closer than the monitor (12-18") The only drawback is
>such a pair of glasses are only good for computer use, you will not be
>able to see clearly in the distance.
>
There are firms who specialise in producing bifocals for computer use
- I got mine from one who did a lot of work for organisations who have
to provide employees with specs under the Health & Safety provisions.
They may not have been top-quality lenses, but served me well for
quite a while. They were designed with, as you suggest, the
close-focus area raised much higher than with conventional bifocals.
This was carefully assessed by the optician who ordered them, and it
did allow me to use them in an office or similar situation, in that
there was an area of "normal-distance" lens left at the top which
enabled me to look up (in fact holding my head slightly tilted down,
but not unduly) and recognise colleagues (!), walk round the building
etc without having to change glasses.
I readily confess they were not suited to other situations. However,
as a compromise for a specific context they were pretty good. Provided
I used either reading or distance specs when not needing the bifocal
facility they did not tire my eyes or have other adverse effects. The
optician I saw was - luckily - a specialist in this field, and quite
adamant in rejecting variable-focus lenses for this type of use.
Wayne
Couldn`t you just get a taller chair or a shorter monitor??
mar...@alias.mcn.net
They also make trifocals in the computer glasses which is what I use. The
cost of the glasses is well worth it by not having the neck pain, and I too
can still see at a distance through the top portion of my glasses.
Richard Sheumaker
computer use: the mid range (center) focus is just right for monitor and
close focus is right for keyboard.
I'm Dody Pete Sampras Wijaya !!!
>On Wed, 05 Feb 1997 17:45:30 -0500, address...@bogus.com (Larry Kahn)
>wrote:
>
>>but don't all sony tubes have those damn thin lines down the screen..
>>you can even see them in the adds...
>
>Yes, all Sony Trinitron tubes have 1 or 2 thin horizontal lines. So?
>They're *very* thin, and are almost always unnoticable unless one is
>deliberately looking for them. They're a minor tradeoff for such a nice
>(clear, colorful, etc) CRT.
>
>>I prefer nec's actually the xp17 over the xv17 ... I just bought a refurb
>>xp15 for home for my sone and it is a great monitor...
>
>I looked at some of the 15" and 17" NEC monitors a year or two ago, and
>was not impressed at all. Too expensive for the quality, viewable screen
>area too small (only 15.7" for a 17" monitor), didn't like the picture
>quality in comparison with trinitron tubes, etc.
>
>To each his/her own, I guess.
I've seen 'em all. Don't like all of them, but just one. Samsung
produce very good quality monitor. I cannot describe it, you've got to
see it with your own eyes.
--
Dody Suria Wijaya
0495030341
Peter Jun
On Mon, 10 Feb 1997 15:26:55 GMT, soed...@rad.net.id (I'm Dody "Pete
Sampras" Wijaya !!!) wrote:
>I've seen 'em all. Don't like all of them, but just one. Samsung
>produce very good quality monitor. I cannot describe it, you've got to
>see it with your own eyes.
Agreed.. The Samsung SyncMaster 17GLSi is hard to beat.
Regards,
Peter
--
Peter Jun <pete...@utoronto.ca>
University of Toronto - Life Sciences
tester
I have got the ViewSonic 17PS which I am running at 1600x1200. I am quite
happy with it and it is very clear and haven't had any problem with it. In
one of the reputable magazines review it rated better than SONY quality
wise and it was also cheaper than Sony too.
I'm Dody "Pete Sampras" Wijaya !!! <soed...@rad.net.id> wrote in article
<32fe0f4f...@news.rad.net.id>...
> On Thu, 06 Feb 1997 04:01:08 GMT, skri...@prairie.lakes.com (Scott
> Kriefall) wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 05 Feb 1997 17:45:30 -0500, address...@bogus.com (Larry
Kahn)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>but don't all sony tubes have those damn thin lines down the screen..
> >>you can even see them in the adds...
> >
> >Yes, all Sony Trinitron tubes have 1 or 2 thin horizontal lines. So?
> >They're *very* thin, and are almost always unnoticable unless one is
> >deliberately looking for them. They're a minor tradeoff for such a nice
> >(clear, colorful, etc) CRT.
> >
> >>I prefer nec's actually the xp17 over the xv17 ... I just bought a
refurb
> >>xp15 for home for my sone and it is a great monitor...
> >
> >I looked at some of the 15" and 17" NEC monitors a year or two ago, and
> >was not impressed at all. Too expensive for the quality, viewable
screen
> >area too small (only 15.7" for a 17" monitor), didn't like the picture
> >quality in comparison with trinitron tubes, etc.
> >
> >To each his/her own, I guess.
>
> I've seen 'em all. Don't like all of them, but just one. Samsung
> produce very good quality monitor. I cannot describe it, you've got to
> see it with your own eyes.
Mitchell D. Miller
just got one of these for my wife - REALLY NICE!
Aaron Rittmaster (ajr...@cris.com) wrote:
: I just bought a Panasync S17, and I absolutely love it! It's got a bright,
king...@healthy.uwaterloo.ca
In article <5dvcrh$5...@news2.cais.com>, m...@qis.net says...
Hi all,
Ive seen posts about this great monitor and that great monitor, and I
have gone through 3 Samsung 17Glsi now (supposed to be a great monitor)
and they all look fuzzy on my machine (compared to my girlfriends cheaper
Viewsonice Optiquest 775 - on her machine)... so the question is : Is it
possible my video card is the problem? I run at 1024*768 74Hz, 16 bit
color.
What determines the clarity of the image? Monitor- yes, video card???,
refresh rate???, cable (BNC v.s std)???
Cheers,
Steve
Adarsh Daswani
On 13 Feb 1997 15:43:45 GMT, m...@qis.net (Mitchell D. Miller) wrote:
>just got one of these for my wife - REALLY NICE!
>
>Aaron Rittmaster (ajr...@cris.com) wrote:
>: I just bought a Panasync S17, and I absolutely love it! It's got a bright,
>: large viewable screen area, good on-screen controls - bottom line is that
>: it looks terrific! I picked it up on sale last weekend at Best Buy for
>: $650. The best $650 I've spent on my computer yet.
I just picked one up yesterday (for $550, to boot...look around). And
I agree with this consensus. It's night and day from my 14".
-A.
dmappin
I also picked up a Panasonic 17 about 8 months ago and it is
indeed a wonderful unit. .27 dot pitch, 16" view area, and great price.
Speakers too! (I know, yea....)
Nice flast view area with crisp display. HIGHLY recommened.
Don Mappin
Hien Pham
If you were to spend from $700-$800 dollars for a 17" monitor, which one
would you buy ?
Iiyama ? Samsung ? Viewsonic ? NEC ? Panasonic ? Eizo? Nanao ? Nokia ?
Hitachi ?
Thanks for your recommendation.
Aaron Rittmaster
I've posted this rec before, but I like my monitor so much I'll say it
again. I love my Panasonic PanaSync S17, and it only ran $650 at Best Buy.
-Aaron
Hien Pham <h...@concentric.net> wrote in article
<5e1i2l$8...@chronicle.concentric.net>...
Adarsh Daswani
On 15 Feb 1997 04:12:36 GMT, "Aaron Rittmaster" <ajr...@cris.com>
wrote:
Yep, and if you look around, you should be able to find it for no more
than $575. Definitely a steal at that price.
-A.
Tom Bunch
found for $500 . Search on it and read up this is what i am getting.
stre...@dockinbay.com
I bought a 17inch AST Vision7L from Tredex for $437.00. It is a
refurbished monitor. It's been great and I have no problems with it. I
bought it in October 96. If your interested call them at
1-800-899-6800. Bob~~~
B Storch
I bought a Panasonic S17 at Office Depot for $599 last week - great
monitor!
Hien Pham
So far, I've got rec's for Panasonic Panasync S17 and Princeton E070 and
(through private mail) Mitshubishi 87TXM. Does anybody know the refresh
rate and resolution of these monitors ?
I am using two Vision Master Pro 17". They are all right. I need to buy
two more though. Willing to spend up to $850.
Thanks
stre...@dockinbay.com wrote in message <5e4r0b$5...@nnrp1.digex.net>:
James Park
Hien Pham wrote:
>
> If you were to spend from $700-$800 dollars for a 17" monitor, which one
> would you buy ?
>
> Iiyama ? Samsung ? Viewsonic ? NEC ? Panasonic ? Eizo? Nanao ? Nokia ?
> Hitachi ?
>
What about MAG 17 Trinitron???(Is it any good?)
> Thanks for your recommendation.
#10 Ox
On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 20:28:29 GMT "h...@concentric.net (Hien Pham)" posted to
"comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc" on the subject "Re: 17" Monitors
recommended" :
-->So far, I've got rec's for Panasonic Panasync S17 and Princeton E070 and
-->(through private mail) Mitshubishi 87TXM. Does anybody know the refresh
-->rate and resolution of these monitors ?
-->
If you go with the Panasonic, get the Panasynch Pro P-17. It has refresh
rates up to 69 @1600x1200: better specs and only slightlly more $. At
lower resolutions the refresh rate is higher than the other Panasonics
except the PF-17, which is at least $900. I read up on this stuff on the
www. Just go to Panasonic's site and all the info on each model is there.
I have never seen a Panasonic monitor in person, they're not on the
shelves in Atlanta, that I can find. So I am torn between mailordering the
Sony CPD 200 SF and the Panasonic P-17. The Sony I mention is nice, very
bright good color Trinitron tube (like .26mm phospher sep.); the sony does
not allow adjustment for vertical pincushioning tho it needs it. This
drove me crazy when I tested out the CPD200sx (less features, less $$$,
same tube), but it had other probs and I had to return it. The Panasonic
has a true flat screen instead of cylinder section, and uses a dot type
mask instead of vertical slit mask. It has a fine dot pitch, like .25 or
better. TS
"You're trying to rile me so's you can see the vein
stick out on my neck; you like to see that, right?"
Barney Phife
-red de...@ix.netcomm.cim cichlisoma labiatum, baby!
Dave
I recently purchased a Princeton Graphics EO17 17" monitor. It has .26
resolution and it looks great from edge to edge. The price was $599 and
after looking at about 25 different monitors in this price range this
was the best deal I found. If you want to spend more I found a Sony 17"
with .25 res but the extra 100 bucks was too much for me.
Timo Koivumaki
>I've seen 'em all. Don't like all of them, but just one. Samsung
Stop thinkin' and get NOKIA 17".