Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Tara who wrote (14641)	12/6/2004 7:58:25 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 14778

LCD's have all of those advantages and less size and weight. CRTs are more flexible in terms of resolution, can handle rapidly moving images better, and I've heard that they (at least the better CRTs) have greater color fidelity and of course lower cost. I'd like a monitor with the advantages of both, at the cost of an LCD or better but thats not an option right now. Tim

To: Jon Tara who wrote (14641)	12/7/2004 11:15:20 AM
From: Cage Rattler	Respond to of 14778

Thank you for the thoughtful input. DVI linking is something I failed to consider -- please realize I am somewhat ignorant on the subject. During my investigation, I uncovered the following link to a tutorial-type article on the subject that was helpful. I will include that just in case I'm not the only one that needing to be "de-confuse". :^) pacificcable.com We do not cable runs that exceed 100-feel at this facility; however the linear amp you describe is an interesting consideration depending upon the etiology of the problem. Certainly cable length, resistance, and capacitance always combine to reduce signal input at the receiver. Do you know if the loss of signal quality you mention is primarily due to a drop in signal strength, a shielding leak, or a combination of both? Aren’t LCD's susceptible to degradation as a function of time/use? Again, thank you for the very thought-provoking input.