Ok, when it's as sharp as text in your word processor or CAD then I'll have to figure out why it ain't on my computation machine.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
wrote in
designer/troubleshooter for
EndoSonics
So you say. Even win 98 needed more RAM, if you did all the security updates.
-- Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is enough left over to pay them.
I'm looking at a 25.5" LCD with 1920x1200 resolution that was all of $250.
LCD monitors are the next best thing to free these days; it's incredible to me that some businesses keep their employyes on dinky little, e.g., 17" displays at 1280x1024 resolution or similar. Well, at least for any employee who'll be doing CAD work, big spreadsheets, etc...
---Joel
You can get monitor mounts such that you lose little if any actual desk space.
E.g., feel free to get me one of these for Xmas:
:-)
---Joel
wrote in
designer/troubleshooter for
EndoSonics
I used it for business, it always worked and the business made money. What can I say?
No 10 horses would have gotten me to use Win 98. NT4 Server played in a different league.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Try this:
My wife has one, and her laptop (a Dell M1330 running Windows XP) drives its own screen (only 1280x800), a 24" Dell 1920x1200 LCD through an HDMI port, and a second identical 24" Dell through one of those Kensington adapters.
As far as I'm aware, that particular adapter is one of a relatively few that will drive all the way up to 1920x1200.
---Joel
Oh yeah, that sure looks like the executive edition :-)
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Here's a zoomed-in letter "a" on that data sheet:
FoxIt reader on the left, Acrobat on the right. To me, while there isn't a huge difference, I'd have to say FoxIt is a little fuzzier. It all seems to be tied up in just exactly how each program performs anti-aliasing, and Acrobat if nothing else has a lot more options for controlling that. I wouldn't be surprised if the difference were more pronounced on a lower-resolution screen as Joerg is using.
Keith: If you're out in Oregon one of these days, I've got a radial arm saw with your name on it here -->
---Joel
I tend to prefer native ports rather than Wine, but since I already have Wine installed anyway, I suppose I should give PDF Xchange a try.. . thanks for your comments.
wrote in
designer/troubleshooter for
EndoSonics
with
If you didn't need to run any applications...
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
-- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
They're very nicely made.
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
-- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Exactly. Having gigabytes of RAM is no guarantee you have enough, when running poorly written software.
-- Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is enough left over to pay them.
Thanks, Joel. Mine is definitely more fuzzy but only with Foxit. So, maybe it doesn't like this particular resolution or I have some setting messed up.
[...]-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
wrote in
designer/troubleshooter for
EndoSonics
with
Oh yeah. I used to run a laptop with 256MB and Win2k. Stuff such as MS-Word ran just fine but OpenOffice brought it to a grinding halt.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
wrote in
designer/troubleshooter for
EndoSonics
with
Server software was intended for just that: Servers. As far as using win98, that is a matter of opinion. I never had any problem with it, or win ME. Unlike all the whiners who swore that it was released from the bowels of hell. Although, I ran 256 MB of RAM with 98, and 512 MB with ME. In fact, I still have the original install of ME on a 80 GB hard drive that has survived five motherboards. I use it with some software that won't work under XP.
-- Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is enough left over to pay them.
But you'd need a matching stock portfolio to justify this many screens. Looks like a heart attack machine to me :-)
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
Not at all... you can get plenty of ~24" LCDs with resolutions of 1920x1080 or (less common, more expensive) 1920x1200 for $200-$300 these days. Compare that to the $1300 I spent for a 21" CRT back in the late '90s -- adjusting for inflation, the price per monitor has dropped by roughly an order of magnitude!
Two or three big LCDs today is far less of an expense, per employee, than a single CRT was just 15 years ago.
---Joel
It's the whole computer stuff. I paid well north of $5k for my first
386. This dual-core here was under $600 and SPICE sims probably run two orders of magnitude faster. Recently I did a quick run to see whether a scheme that a client wants me to design is at all feasible. A few opamps, level shifts, unorthodox rectification but simple stuff. So, hit the sim button ... nothing. Drat. Turns out it was done, in under a second!For the inflation-adjusted price of a hand scanner in 1990 I got, around
2006 or so, a blazingly fast laser printer, networked, with fax, scanner, sheet feeder and all sorts of other stuff.
So far I am very happy with this Trinitron here although it sure is an energy hog. When it dies (if it ever does) I hope there'll be nice
30-inchers or bigger by then. It doesn't have to be 50" :-)I'd rather have only one monitor and not all those cables.
-- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
There are some very nice 30" LCDs out there. Not cheap -- all are still north of $1k, AFAIK -- but 2560x1600 resolution is awesome.
Occasionally Costco has some 30" LCDs on display... I think this one from HP has been there:
Fair enough...
---Joel
There are nice 30-inchers now, and not more expensive than a 21" Trinitron was back in the day (but still far more than a dirt-cheap
24" currently). Apple's Cinema 2560 x 1600 is one pricey example, but Dell and others have cheaper versions with the same resolution.I have an older dual 20.1", a dual 30" and a single 21" LCD in this office (on one desk, but three computers) and a single 24" 1920x1200 in a each of a couple other locations. Three would seem to be more sensible than two in that you'd be looking at the center of a monitor much of the time rather than always to one side or the other. But even two 30" monitors means a _lot_ of head motion. I only fire up the big machine when high octane computing is required. I looked at using two NEC 1600 x 1200 monitors at 90' rotation along with a single 30" 2560 x 1600, but decided on the two 30".
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
-- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.