Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!well!farren
From: farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Stupid Wishes
Message-ID: <12170@well.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jun 89 13:38:12 GMT
References: <16615@gryphon.COM> <17328@swrinde.nde.swri.edu>
Reply-To: farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Distribution: na
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 24

In article <17328@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes:
>Now maybe I'm wrong here, been a while, but it used a monochrome
>monitor and sure looked hires. Displayed 80* ~50 text. Greyscale
>looked fine also. It was the only thing about the ST that I envied.

You're right in that the mono display is hires, 640 X 400.  You're wrong
in that there is no grey scale, only dithered shading.

>Now about that Sony monitor... I'm hearing conflicting reports about
>what the Sony does without a deinterlacer board.

I've had a KV1311CR for almost four years.  Flicker is not non-existant,
but IS well within my tolerance levels.  MUCH better than a 1080.

>I'm just saying that with as many complaints about the 640*400 display
>as there have always been, I believe that Commodore should have looked
>into fixing it much sooner.

"Fix" it?  It ain't broken!  There are a lot of good reasons for the
interlaced display, including higher performance and strict NTSC
compatibility.  It's a FEATURE.  Seriously!

-- 
Mike Farren 					 uucp: well!farren