Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!brahms!phil
From: phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Loop Omnisync non-interlaced monitors (anyone have one?)
Message-ID: <1991Apr21.040510.8032@amd.com>
Date: 21 Apr 91 04:05:10 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.063825.19501@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Apr17.164509.19165@d.cs.okstate.edu> <1991Apr19.185311.6972@leland.Stanford.EDU> <28109@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Lines: 11

jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes:
>This discussion has been throwing around the phrase "scan rate" a wee bit
>too much.  I think we need to start clarifying "horizontal" and "vertical"
>since I, for one, am becoming confused.

For any particular combination of interlaced/noninterlaced and
resolution, the horizontal scan rate completely controls the vertical
scan rate. Anyone who passed 6th grade math can easily work it out.

--
	It doesn't have to be perfect to be useful.