Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!nstn.ns.ca!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!quiche!tinyguy
From: tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Try the Seiko 1450 multisync
Message-ID: <1991May15.182813.5585@cs.mcgill.ca>
Date: 15 May 91 18:28:13 GMT
References: <May.14.18.05.22.1991.1235@u2.rutgers.edu> <1991May15.035843.16448@ucselx.sdsu.edu> <May.15.08.48.59.1991.2672@steely.rutgers.edu>
Sender: news@cs.mcgill.ca (Netnews Administrator)
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Lines: 21

In article <May.15.08.48.59.1991.2672@steely.rutgers.edu> andrewsr@steely.rutgers.edu (Rich Andrews) writes:
>
>The 1440 is interlaced, the 1450 is non-interlaced.  Is there a
>difference between "non-interlaced" and "de-interlaced?"

I think this difference only matters on the IBM clone, namely Super VGA
1024x768 mode. The interlaced monitors will diaply flicker on this mode,
and non-interlaced won't. Since de-interlacer from Commodore only uses
standard VGA freq., this difference _shouldn't_ affect the display at all.
May be there are some other differences betweem 1440 and 1450...

-TG



+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Yeo-Hoon Bae      tinyguy@homer.cs.mcgill.ca              |       /// |
| Dept. Computer Science, McGill University, Canada         |      ///  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|  \\\///   |
| Amiga2000 & 386SX                                         |   \XX/    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+