Maker Pro
Maker Pro

OT: Large LCD monitors for PC

R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
VWWall said:
The receptors in the human retina are about 0.0025 mm in diameter, or
about 2.5 microns. Using the parameters of the rest of the eye, this
results in a visual acuity of about one minute of arc. This is about
0.075 mm. at a 10 inch viewing distance.
Who in the world views stuff at 10 inches? That's one span from the end
of your nose! That's just about where the lenses of an optivisor or a
stereopticon are.

Well, OK, I guess the OV or SO are more like five, but really!

Right now, I can reach out and just exactly touch the screen of my
monitor with the tip of my finger.

With 1.25 diopter cheaters. (what's the smiley for EEK! ?)

Thanks!
Rich
 
R

Rich Grise

Jan 1, 1970
0
VWWall said:
At 86 years, I have AMD, (age related macro degeneration), in one eye,
but can still use a 19" 1680 x 1950 monitor.
Macular?

Thanks,
Rich
 
A

AllInTheChi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Zooming on a diagram might be sluggish. Why not just put in another PCIe
card?


Were that an option, don't you think he would have?

I guess I gave him too much credit?
 
S

Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
They are not all 16:10, idiot.

Cite for a 2560 x 1600 (of any diagonal size) that is _not_ ?

<crickets>

Have you considered _why_ it's 16:10?
So, though I slipped (and not with the math, but with the length figure
used IN the math, IDIOT!), you ASSumed. I feel your error is
a far worse transgression. Then you called it 9th grade math. Maybe
where you live. 5th grade over here.

You live in Shanghai or Singapore?

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011004.pdf

Sad.
Doesn't matter since there was no
math error. The formula is fine. The wrong data was used by me.
The wrong data AND the attitude was used by you, however.


Neither the 30" I mentioned, nor the 23" I have here is 16:10. Do'h!

Neither is 2560 x 1600.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
Who in the world views stuff at 10 inches? That's one span from the end
of your nose! That's just about where the lenses of an optivisor or a
stereopticon are.

Well, OK, I guess the OV or SO are more like five, but really!

Right now, I can reach out and just exactly touch the screen of my
monitor with the tip of my finger.

With 1.25 diopter cheaters. (what's the smiley for EEK! ?)

I like to read the monitor like I do with a book, ok, maybe 14" or so.
Plus the big CRT can't be set any farther back or there'll be a hole in
the wall behind it.

A LCD can be placed farther back and then you have to buy an even larger
screen. Doesn't seem to make much sense. Like what native Americans used
to say, "White man make big fire, sit far away".
 
For mechanical design I can see the value but the main reason for me is
that I need this for layout reviews. Which I have to do at an increasing
number these days, to advise on EMI improvements. Often you have to see
the big picture but at the same time look at details, such as trace
lengths to 0603 bypass caps. Right now on a 21-incher it's panning and
zooming like crazy.

This is also why a dual monitor setup doesn't do much good here.

Dual monitors is *Great* for cross-probing, particularly in those situations.
Unfortunately, OrCad doesn't probe Crapture to Layout.
 
Maybe I didn't read, "I can't get a third monitor working" the same way. If
it's a problem of needing admin rights to add drivers to a work PC then the
same would apply to a USB device. Not knowing what the obstacle was, I
asked "why", which is not the same as making an assumption.

It's a laptop in a dock. A second adapter in the dock doesn't work either.
I've tried several.
 
Say Keith,



Have you tried using DisplayLink's own drivers rather than the ones that come
on the CD from Kensington?

No, but it's worth a try.
--> http://www.displaylink.com/support/downloads.php

...they update them rather more often than Kensington updates theirs...

I went to Kensington's service site and opened a problem report. They
basically said, try it on another system. If it works there, tough shit. If
it doesn't work there, tough shit. I took it to work to try it (all I have is
two ThinkPads (working) here) but haven't had time to try it. I'll try the
drivers above.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Dual monitors is *Great* for cross-probing, particularly in those situations.
Unfortunately, OrCad doesn't probe Crapture to Layout.


Won't be too useful for me. The various clients use a plethora of CAD
systems and I have viewers for some. For the others it's all Gerber and
there ain't no cross-probing there. Not even a good transparent view :-(

So I normally use a small computer for the scheamtic and then the big
screen for the Gerbers.
 
Won't be too useful for me. The various clients use a plethora of CAD
systems and I have viewers for some. For the others it's all Gerber and
there ain't no cross-probing there. Not even a good transparent view :-(

So I normally use a small computer for the scheamtic and then the big
screen for the Gerbers.

Yes the same computer, separate displays. There is no excuse, these days, for
suffering with a single monitor. I want a couple more.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Yes the same computer, separate displays. There is no excuse, these days, for
suffering with a single monitor. I want a couple more.


I actually prefer them being two separate computers here at my desk.
They are on the same LAN drive and if one crashes I can reboot and
continue on the other.
 
A

AllInTheChi

Jan 1, 1970
0
Maybe I didn't read, "I can't get a third monitor working" the same way. If
it's a problem of needing admin rights to add drivers to a work PC then the
same would apply to a USB device. Not knowing what the obstacle was, I
asked "why", which is not the same as making an assumption.


He has two displays, so he obviously has at least one dual monitor
graphics card.

IF his mobo has another PCIe slot, AND IF the mobo is SLI ready, he can
add another card, and get them to work well together. IF he has no SLI
facility, he MIGHT be able to add another card, but would cut performance
of the entire system.

This AWARD winning device allows folks to have a HUGE number of
displays on a box.

I doubt seriously that he was referring to not having access to the
machine to make installations of softwares and hardwares.
 
I

ItchyGato

Jan 1, 1970
0
Cite for a 2560 x 1600 (of any diagonal size) that is _not_ ?

I never at any time mentioned any such array.

The array I refer to, I DID mention. You simply cannot read.
<crickets>

grow the **** up, retard. You're the one that fucked up here.
Have you considered _why_ it's 16:10?

Dumbfucktard!

2048 x 1152 is 16:9, so SHUT THE **** UP.

The 30" inch *I* referred to is as well, and there are several others
that are that true AR in the 30" class!

Come back when YOU are not a complete and utter clueless bastard.

Go kick your old man for making you that way too. (all three
descriptors)

My 1920 Acer is 16:9 too! It's native resolution is 1920x1080, and it
is a wider display than a 24" 16:9

I should know, I have examples of all of those, and several CRTs as
well.

I even have a Ball monochrome (green phosphor) Hercules @ 720 x 480,
which is a 3:2. That was the top of the line hi-res display back when it
came out.

Ball made them and display makers used them in their displays. The one
I have is in a cardboard carrier and came straight from Ball, and has no
chassis.

I hook up it via 9 pin d-sub connector and three wires IIRC, and add a
12V positive feed to the back of it, and then I can fire it with my old
ISA PC where my Hercules monochrome graphics card/I/O combo card goes. No
drivers. DOS, and Windows 3.11 sees it fine, and I think even 3.0 did.
I should make a home security monitor and print server from that and my
286. Maybe I should use a 486.
Both quite fast enough for the job.

Run OS/2 or DesqViewX on it, and get true multi-process, multi-threaded
operation on a single core, single branch (oh wait.. not on the 486!),
tick tock engine! All I'd need to monitor video channels for motion, and
other sensors like thermal.

DesqViewX was a really cool little OS. It runs *some* win32
instructions, and all of the win 3 set natively.

Bill was so scared of Quarterdeck that he reneged on his promise of
full win32 operability, so the product literally died mid-stride.

OS/2 continued on in the banking systems around the world all the way
to and past the introduction of Windows 2000, and that only started out
being implemented in branch office counters.

They operate old gear great though! Real hardware hooks!
 
I

ItchyGato

Jan 1, 1970
0
You live in Shanghai or Singapore?

It is straight math, idiot. If it took you until your ninth grade to
learn that, you need to sue your school district.
 
I

ItchyGato

Jan 1, 1970
0
As fine as 0.25mm? Not on big screens,

Oh, you mean like the TOPIC?
but plenty of laptops are well in
excess of that... all the way down to around 0.15mm.

I'm sorry, but 4:3 @ 19" is the smallest candidate for discussion, and
it barely gets to play.

Of course small form factor screens will have smaller pitches at the
same array size. Basic math again.


They cannot claim 1080p display function if all the thing can show you
is one "light bulb" for every two (720).
LCDs on phones get even
tighter,

And even less being of any consequence.

OLED cam be even smaller.

Watching a movie on my PSP, and watching it on an only slightly bigger
HTC or the like is a huge, notable difference, but part of that is Sony's
file format restrictions.
such as the iPhone 4's display at an astonishing .078mm!

I call the entire family of devices iPUDs Apple is jacking the brains
of millions, and they don't even know it.

No thanks. I'll wait until after "we're done letting you bastards rip
us off" era starts.
Of course this reflects the idea that your eye only has so much resolution
anyway, and hence with a bigger display the idea is that you'll be physically
further away from it and super-high dot pitches don't buy you much.

Sure they do Notice those little fuzzies around lettering on some
commercials, etc.?

Remember the old CRT term "video bandwidth"? I HAVE a viewsonic flat
optically coated 19" at 185MHz, which was the fastest available. At
least at the time. Don't know now, and there is likely some medical
grade job that is faster.

Small things ARE noticeable and DO matter.
.. (Steve
Jobs would have you believe that, held at 10-12 inches from your eyes, the
iPhone 4's display is roughly the same resolution as what your eyeballs can
differentiate, but it's a somewhat contentious issue with others claiming he's
off by a factor of up to 2 or 3...)

Exactly, and then there are the video image processing shortcuts that
get injected, just like Obama pork into a fresh bill about to hit a lame
duck congressional floor.
I have some Samsung 2343's that are 2048x1152 over 23" ... which gets you
0.25mm as well.

My CRTs were pretty tight, IIRC, for phosphor. I think it was 0.19 or
such. I can't even remember CRT specs any more, but I have hoarded
several near mint examples, including a 37" 4:3 glass monster that will
also do 720p HD modes via RGB tho. AT 450W and over 150Lbs, I don't want
it anywhere but out in the garage or sold!

Damn thing would not "see" my light rifle. Those bastards and their
screen timings!

Oh well, motion sensing is far better I hear.
 
I

ItchyGato

Jan 1, 1970
0
The Kensington version doesn't work. What guarantee is there that one this
will?


It got top ratings, or you could probe the forum there ITIO, (If There
Is One). I think EVGA might also still actually answer the phone with a
real human within a few steps as well. They would likely already know
many scenarios, and failure modes. There was a time when getting such
info from a company was like pulling teeth.
 
E

ehsjr

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
40 years ago people crawled across huge sheets of vellum in their socks,
armed with Rubylith, and now we have to have quadcore processors, two
monitors, terabytes of HD space ... :)

Oh so _that's_ it! I thought we'd evolved longer arms, and
better eyesight. :)

Ed
 
I actually prefer them being two separate computers here at my desk.
They are on the same LAN drive and if one crashes I can reboot and
continue on the other.

That's what KVM switches are for. ;-) ...except they don't make decent
(cheap) ones for USB.
 
Top