Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!yale!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!d75!cello!sabre!robin
From: robin@sabre.uucp (Robin D. Wilson/1000000)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: (Non) Square Pixels?
Summary: obnoxious
Message-ID: <3142@cello.UUCP>
Date: 16 Feb 90 16:32:39 GMT
References: <4687@lmrc.uucp> <3119@cello.UUCP> <4736@lmrc.uucp> <3053@d75.UUCP> <7217@netcom.UUCP>
Sender: news@cello.UUCP
Reply-To: robin@reed.UUCP (Robin D. Wilson/1000000)
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX
Lines: 88

In article <7217@netcom.UUCP> hue@netcom.UUCP (Jonathan Hue) writes:
>>>In article <3119@cello.UUCP>, robin@sabre.uucp (Robin D. Wilson/1000000) writes:
>>>> Most monitors (and TV's do not have "square" pixels.  Most have round or oval
>>>> shaped pixels.  In fact, the only monitors that I know to have square pixels 
>
>CRTs don't have pixels, frame buffers do.  If I have a three tube camera
>displaying its picture on a television, there aren't any pixels.  Pixel stands
>for picture element.  In this case the picture has neither been quantized
>nor sampled, so how can there be picture elements?
>
>The useful parameters about a monitor are bandwidth, pitch, horizontal scan
>rate, and vertical retrace rate.  The number of pixels in either dimension
>is not meaningful as it depends on the device driving it, although recently
>monitor vendors have been adding an x by y resolution spec in their literature,
>mainly to help non-technical customers figure out whether or not a monitor will
>work with their frame buffer.
>[Techno garbage Deleted]

WOW!  You must really know your stuff.  You must really be a brain.  Oh wow,
show us some more intelligence.

You know; for a guy who snarled flames at me for not being able to figure out
what someone (who was less technically oriented) meant, you sure seem to have
a hard time figuring out what this discussion is about.   Please forgive us 
stoopid little people who can't possibly understand any of this technical
monitor stuff.

It SEEMS OBVIOUS (Oh, I really enjoyed that) that everybody else is talking
about the individual DOTS that are used to make up a screen image.  On some
monitors these dots are round or oval, and on some these dots are square.
Get the picture?  (At least on this branch of the discussion; which orginally
started out as a discussion of aspect ratio; which admittedly, I didn't 
catch.)

>>Also, on my NEC 3D there is an adjustment to increase the distance between the
>>pixels from right to left (thus making the screen wider, and changing the 
>>aspect ratio from that perspective) and another adjustment that changes the 
>>ratio from top to bottom.  It sure helps me to get a 1:1 aspect ratio on my 
>>stuff.  (I'm not sure how NEC does this, but I think it may have something to 
>>do with changing the shape of the tension masks.)

>This is plainly ridiculous.  The phosphor on the screen is carefully aligned
>with the electron guns through the mask, usually by applying the phosphor to
>the tube with a photoresist, and exposing the tube through the mask from a
>light source located where the guns normally are.  If the geometry of the mask
>was somehow changed, this alignment would be lost and it would be impossible to
>display a color picture.
>
Boy for guy who complains that I can't see the obvious, you can' t even read
the obvious!  I clearly said, "I'm not sure...may have something..."  You know
that I OBVIOUSLY don't have the technical expertise that you do on the 
subject, so why do you treat me like I SHOULD know as much about this as the
inventor.  My original posting was intended to help someone understand
a fairly simple concept (note: not the details). 

>All that the knobs on the NEC do is decrease the current through the
>deflection coils, which reduces strength of the magnetic field applied across
>the yoke of the tube.  This slows the beam deflection rate across the face of
>tube and causes a smaller area of the CRT to be exposed.  A Commodore 1084S
>can do this.

Maybe it can, but I don't have a Commodore 1084S, so how am I supposed to
know that it can do this.  I never said that the NEC 3D was better because 
it can do it and nobody else can, did I?

You know, I don't really mind being corrected in public.  I mind being told
in such a pinheaded way.  You must really have some deep-seeded emotional
problems if you feel like you have to go around policing the net for mis-
informed or improperly stated information.  Personally, I would like to 
discuss with you the technical details of monitor design, but I find it 
difficult to get over the obnoxious, know-it-all, I'm-better-than-you, and
you're-a-stupid-dweeb attitude that you seem
to ooze from every crevice of your postings.


>Followups to alt.stupidity.

Followups to alt.obnoxious.asshole.Jonathan


+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|The views expressed herein, are the sole responsibility of the typist at hand|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|USNail:                               UUCP:                                  |
|2323 Wells Branch Pkwy., #G107        cs.utexas.edu!romp!ibmchs!auschs\      |
|Austin, TX  78728                     !sabre.austin.ibm.com!robin            |
|Home: (512)251-6889                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<-MUST BE INCLUDED|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+