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: GrnArrow who wrote (395)	3/28/1998 1:53:00 PM
From: Zeuspaul	Respond to of 14778

Monitors...text intensive...invar shadow mask from PC Magazine editors choice zdnet.com >>Finally, the Cornerstone Color 50/101sf ($1,570 street) is among the best monitors we've seen for text-intensive applications. Images on the 21-inch Invar shadow mask CRT were extremely clear and precise, making it easy to read even the smallest text.<< I know this does not answer your question......at least it supports your premise.

To: GrnArrow who wrote (395)	4/1/1998 9:04:00 AM
From: Spots	Respond to of 14778

As I type this I'm looking at a 21" NEC (Invar Mask). Next to it, and about 12" further away from me is a 17" Sony (aperture grill). Both are set at 1280 x 1024, though the Sony is set for big fonts, which almost exactly compensates for the difference in screen linear dimension (25% from smaller to larger). To my eyes, the text on the Sony is very slightly but noticeably crisper, even though it's a foot farther away (I sit way back anyhow, so the NEC is about 3 feet away, the Sony about 4 feet). However, both produce excellent, crisp text which I can read easily at these distances. There is a barely discernable loss of crispness near the corners of the Nec that I don't observe with the Sony, but it in no way affects readability, and I have to look at it and ask myself if there's a difference to notice it at all. IMO, the quality of the monitor itself is MUCH more important than the particular construction technology. BTW, I think PC Mag's test results have deteriorated in the past couple of years. Case in point, they had near orgasms over a UMAX scanner, which, when I bought one, turned out to be junk with junk software. I got a grin from the return line at Micro-Center, though: Out of 8 or 9 people in line, 4 of us were returning UMAX scanners. <GGG> Spots