Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!unmvax!uokmax!d.cs.okstate.edu!ong
From: ong@d.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Loop Omnisync non-interlaced monitors (anyone have one?)
Message-ID: <1991Apr17.164509.19165@d.cs.okstate.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 16:45:09 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.063825.19501@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Lines: 116

From article <1991Apr16.063825.19501@leland.Stanford.EDU>, by fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang):
> NEC 14" monitor never can do a decent 1024x728.  The 3D model you were talking
> above has such a pitiful narrow horizontal sync frequency range it's not good
> for 1024x728 at all.  3D should be treated as a 800x600 non-interlaced and
> non-flicker monitor.
> 
> Yes, you can use the interlaced mode of it, but personally I never like to 
> run it in that mode.

What do you mean?  Isn't 3D a 1024x768 interlaced monitor?  Hence you have
to run it at interlaced during 1024x768 regardless of what you WISH to do?

>>The ad states that they have a "wide frequency range - 15-48
>>KHz" and "Wide bandwidth 40 MHz". What do these mean? Is the 
>>monitor "fast" enough for good, sharp, flicker-free operation 
>>at 1024x768x256 non-interlaced? 
>>
> The ad is bragging!  That's it.  15 ~ 48Khz and they dare to call it wide?
> Shame on them!  With 48Khz, you hardly can do a 58Hz refresh rate 1024x728
> non-interlaced display, and most people can sense flickering even at 60Hz!

What do you mean most people?  My monitor runs at 1024x768 noninterlaced
at 48KHz and all my friends could not find any "flicker" whatsoever.
The pixels are as solidly ANCHORED to the screen as in the standard 640x480x16. 

> Remember our floresent light is "refreshed" at 60Hz and most of us can sense
> the flickering and so we use them in clusters?  Don't believe this ad.
> 
> I recently had a chance to try out a brand new TVM SuperSync 5A with spec
> just like what you saw, I was disgusted!  SuperSync 5A has a .28 mm dot pitch
> but that alone could never make up it's fundamental shortcoming -> narrow
> horizontal sync frequency range with 48Khz as upper limit.  It' almost flat
> screen didn't help much either.  

My Swan VGA15 is a TVM SuperSync 5A and it is spectacular!!!  I have worked
for months 10 hours a day on Sun Sparc 1+ (17" flatscreen and 19") and 
Dec 3100's (19" screens) and SuperSync 5A is just as good as their
displays.  And what do you mean by "It' almost flat screen 
didn't help much either."  Do you mean that its flatness is not as good
as those of the Zenith 1492 (640x480 for $600) and similar monitors or
you personally do not know how to appreciate flatscreen?  I find the 
flatscreen on the VGA15 (SuperSync 5A) tremendously helpful and make a
great difference.  Now that I am "pampered" by its flatscreen, I find
the standard "curve" screen somewhat unacceptable.

> Likewise, OptiQuest 2000 has a spec similar to yours and priced not much 
> more, but unfortunately I have to tell you if you want to use 800x600 with
> this bunch, fine.  1024x768?  .......Hmmmm.

Please keep to the subject.  We are talking about 1024x768 noninterlaced.
If you have something to sell that is less than that, most of us are
not interested!
> 
> If you really want 1024x728, shop carefully and spend around $850~920, get
> a 16" monitor with horizontal sync frequency upper limit as high as or higer
> than 60Khz, then you will be in good shape.  If your software driver is 
> written competently so that a proper driving frequency of your vedio board
> is employed, you maybe able to get 70Hz refresh rate for your 1024x728,
> non-interlaced of course.

Talk is cheap.  Talk that is invalid is even cheaper.  I shopped around
for two months "quite intensively" and another two prior to that with
16" to 17" in mind and $900 to spare.  When it come time to spend,
NOBODY (I called nearly all the shops that supposedly sells them)
has stock of the 17" Samsung 4 1024x768 noninterlaced or the
Goldstar 16".  What other 16" monitors are you talking about?
The ones you have to connect your own separate R, G, and B connectors?
I don't think there are too many people who would like to mess with that.
Or are you talking about those "good" ones attached to Sun workstations?
Can we buy them at about $900 (for 16" that is)?  I have not seen any ads
and the shop people I talked to does not know much about them. 

And what about cards?  The most popular Super VGA cards I come across
seems to the those based on the ET4000 chipset with 1024x768 noninterlaced
at 48KHz.  Yes, we have that Sigma "thing" that runs at 70 or 72KHz, but
I saw a recent comparison test for more than 10 Super VGA and Sigma ranked
near last!  (And it is relatively expansive too) 

> 70Hz is nice, as most workstations, like SUN, HP, DEC use for their monitors
> screen update (refresh) rate.  At this frequency, you can watch the monitor
> for a long time (several hours) without suffer eye strain.  Images are very
> steady at this or higher refresh rate.

Oh, come on.  I had worked on a Sun Sparc 1+ for a few months for
about 8 to 10 hours a day and many times I came home after work and 
went straight to bed (as opposed to my usual additional 3 to 4 hours
of TV).  That's how tire my eyes were watching those "nice" workstations
at "70Hz".  In fact, I find watching my Swan VGA15 is less tiring than
the Sun workstation.  My guess is that screen size has something to do
with it. 

> Except IBM, it's latest RS6000 is another shame of the BIG BLUE.  Using a 
> blazingly fast TI34010 board but screwed up the very fine Trinitron tube
> with a 54Hz refresh rate (estimated) it's pain to watch the display indeed.
> Even when I do system adminstration, I remote login our RS6000s from 
> a Sun Sparc 1+ just to avoid to see that stupid IBM implementation.
> 
> Remember, non-interlaceness alone will do you not a trace of good if it's
> updated (or refreshed) at low frequency which to me, is any frequency below
> 65Hz. But on the other hand, if a interlaced display is updated at high
> enough refresh rate, let's say 90Hz, it's FAR FAR FAR better than a non-
> interlaced one updated at say 50Hz.  I know so, because my X server allows
> me to configure at all kinds of refresh rate/resolution combos.
> 
> Remember also, price is LESS IMPORTANT THAN your invaluable eyssight!

In general, I agree.  Pay a little bit more for a SuperSync 5A (Swan VGA15,
they are both the very same monitor) as opposed to those cheap
$350 1024x768 interlaced.  Or get a 17" Samsung noninterlaced 1024x768
for $900 if you can find a shop with stock.  But the last author
would have to tell us where to find a "70KHz noninterlaced 1024x768 16" for
$900" and a 1meg VGA card that supports the same frequency at close
to $200 before we can do anything.  His suggestion of shopping around
has not worked for me and you might not want to waste the same amount
of time as I did. 
$