Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!fauern!lan!rommel
From: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: 1024x768 monitors:  14" vs. 16+"
Message-ID: <4237@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de>
Date: 2 Sep 90 08:46:53 GMT
References: <19265@ttidca.TTI.COM> <51380001@hpindda.cup.hp.com>
Sender: news@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de
Reply-To: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel)
Organization: Inst. fuer Informatik, TU Muenchen, W. Germany
Lines: 22

Most 14" displays simply cannot show 1024 pixels satisfying. The minimum
pixel size on current displays is 0.25mm. Now calculate this by 1024 and
compare this to the width of the picture on your display. You will find
that the picture on the 14" is not wide enough to hold 250mm (10"). That
means several dots in 1024x768 mode overlap with the same holes in the
RGB mask of the display and the picture looses much of its quality.
Only a few color display (perhaps SONY ones with Trinitron tubes) can
show 1024x768 on a 14" tube really good. This does not apply to
gray-scale display which do not have a RGB mask and therefore to not
have this dot size limit (you should never see something about "0.28mm
per dot" on data sheets for gray-scale displays).
On a 14" gray-scale display you *can* show 1024x768 in good quality if
the display can synchronize to this mode (not all can do this for
non-interlaced 1024x768 and some are even fixed-freq. only).

Kai Uwe Rommel

--
/* Kai Uwe Rommel
 * Munich
 * rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de
 */