Slashdot Mirror

According to this (PDF, scroll down to the P1100 section), the pitch was 0.24mm, which probably isn't enough. Don't really feel like doing the math, but it's doubtful at first glance that that is enough. Yes, it may have had the ability to modulate the beam at 1920x1440 @ 75Hz, but that does not mean that it was actually drawing that many pixels properly masked with no overlap. Like I said, the mask and beam spot size have to be small enough for the pixels to fit, and I've never encountered a 21" CRT that could actually do it for 1920x1440.

For example, adding small pieces of wire or cable to a display could make a big difference.

More worrisome, the x-rays being emitted out the front are carefully regulated for health reasons.
Information here and here. The dosage is extremely low, which is because glass is basically opaque to low-energy x-rays. If your friend spends a couple of hours inside sitting in front of (or behind) a CRT, while you spend the same time outside in the sun, you'll incur the higher risk of cancer, due to the sun's U.V.

After an exhaustive, 3-year study, a 16-member panel said there is 'no conclusive and consistent evidence' that ordinary exposure to EMF's causes cancer, neurobehavioral problems, or reproductive and developmental disorders."

And many sites allege a justified concern:

Some believe the electro-magnetic fields emitted by CRT monitors constitute a health danger to the functioning of living cells. Exposure to these fields is far lower at distances of 85cm or farther.

If there are many peer-reviewed studies of the health dangers of CRT usage, they are not easy to find.

would you care to elaborate on what type of "improper" wiring will cause a CRT to emit X-rays

Just because YOU never heard of it, doesn't mean that it's not true.

Have a look at this.

When the electrons strike the phosphor, shadow mask and other screen components, x-rays are produced. The amount and energy of the x-rays depends on the accelerating voltage. The relatively low voltages in CRT's (compared to commercial x-ray machines) means that relatively low quantities of low energy x-rays are produced and modern monitors are so well shielded, that there is no concern of being irradiated over time.

This only applies when things are operating to spec, if some inept repairman steps up the accelerating voltage you will be exposed to X-Rays.

LK

Not having been anywhere the odious "source" of the grandparent poster's claim (thankfully,) I can only provide a cite to the contrary

CRT's (Cathode Ray Tubes) direct a beam of electrons at a thin layer of phosphor which coats the screen on your monitor. When the electrons strike the phosphor, shadow mask and other screen components, x-rays are produced. The amount and energy of the x-rays depends on the accelerating voltage. The relatively low voltages in CRT's (compared to commercial x-ray machines) means that relatively low quantities of low energy x-rays are produced and modern monitors are so well shielded, that there is no concern of being irradiated over time. Though it is possible for a damaged monitor to emit x-ray radiation, it is unlikely that harmful amounts will be released, and most x-rays would be directed towards the back or sides of the monitor. Any damage to the front of the CRT severe enough to increase x-ray emission would cause the CRT to implode.

Ya know, if you're smart enough to ignore this sort of stuff (or vain enough to try to correct them,) /. can be hilarious for the amazing level of confidence maintained by some while posting the most outrageous, usually unsupported, and sometimes unsupportable nonsense ever uttered.

I would stick with a CRT, purely because you get more bang-per-buck (how many of us can afford a 21" LCD?). However, there is one important caveat: if you want a good picture, you must get a Trinitron CRT, rather than the normal shadow-mask tube (see here for a good overview of Trinitrons). I recently had to toss my beloved 6-year old Iiyama Trinitron, which always gave an incredibly crisp picture. The replacement, a Samsung 19" shadow-mask CRT, is rather a let down, with fuzzy fonts of the sort you describe. I'm now regretting the fact that I didn't shell out the extra $$ and get a Trinitron again.

Right story, wrong consortium product. VESA is not a bus, it's a standard for a Super VGA BIOS. The EISA bus was defined by IBM's rivals.

Auld Monitors: Monitor World

PCI Vendor and Device lists

( maybe you can get Knoppix to tell you, with "lspci", what a device is, for the previous one...

Many know of Adrian's Rojak Pot BIOS guide, sometimes useful for weird BIOS 'features' like the older "Format HD" that doesn't tell you this is for old RLL drives... even though no ESDI/RLL drives were sold in the year the mobo was made... (ouch)

I bookmarked, but haven't bothered with yet, HardwareSecrets.com, maybe it's got the stuff youse want...

-sigh- I USED to have a link to a (Russian?) site that listed all sorts of old drives' jumpers ( not the clothing ), dunno what happened to that one...

If you find more such gems, add 'em, eh?

Cheers,

-me

That's not entirely correct, either. He's talking about "bank interleaving" -- multiple banks on the same module all communicate through a single bus, so there's no benefit to having two banks read at the same time, as only one can return the data.


Normal RAID works this way too. There's only one SCSI/IDE bus, so they can't read at the same time, because only one can return the data.

Here's how you get a benefit:

(Memory here has a latency of 2 clock cycles)

1: Controller issues Read A to Chip A - Chip A begins fetching data.

2: Controller issues Read B to Chip B - Chip B begins fetching data

3: Chip A presents data

4: Chip B presents data

This is interleaved reading. Serial reading would be

1: Controller issues Read A to Chip A

2: Controller waits, knowing Chip A is busy

3: Chip A presents data

4: Controller issues Read B to Chip A

5: Controller waits

6: Chip A presents data

The above interleaved read saved 2 clock cycles - the read latency - because it issued two reads to two chips.

The above example could be substituted for RAID by replacing "Chip" with "Drive", and of course, increasing the latency by about 10,000. There's only one SCSI bus - only one set of data lines - so each SCSI clock, only one drive can return data on the bus. RAID helps because the latency for returning data is (much) larger than the SCSI clock, so scattered accesses get latency benefits. It also doesn't help a ton because you don't read single bytes from drives that often, and so the latency benefit is offset by the fact that the bus is constantly busy.

See here, , or here for more info.

Basically, if the bus cycle time is much much less than the access latency (i.e. if the number of wait states is much much greater than 1), you'll win out with interleaving if your access pattern is pretty staggered. In any case, you will rarely lose out.

CRT's (Cathode Ray Tubes) direct a beam of electrons at a thin layer of phosphor which coats the screen on your monitor. When the electrons strike the phosphor, shadow mask and other screen components, x-rays are produced. The amount and energy of the x-rays depends on the accelerating voltage. The relatively low voltages in CRT's (compared to commercial x-ray machines) means that relatively low quantities of low energy x-rays are produced and modern monitors are so well shielded, that there is no concern of being irradiated over time. Though it is possible for a damaged monitor to emit x-ray radiation, it is unlikely that harmful amounts will be released, and most x-rays would be directed towards the back or sides of the monitor. Any damage to the front of the CRT severe enough to increase x-ray emission would cause the CRT to implode.

The End.

Of your nuts maybe

Well ok, perhaps not your nuts but who ever you point your monitor at will be sorry. Kinda funny way to get back at co-workers :)

Jack Frost was a good'un no doubt, all a matter of taste really.

Failure, failure, he's a mighty failure....

I have a G200 that I use with a NeXT (Hitachi) 21" monitor. I bought a fixed frequency card from Software Integrators but the X support for Sync On Green is not there. I tried the Matrox and it works great with X, but I dont use (or have) any console modes at all. Interestingly enough the SI card wokrs great in my NT box. There's a site here with good information on fixed freq monitors out there. Since I have two machines that will talk to the NeXT monitor I hooked up a KVM switch (Belkin OmniCube) so I can browse between the two of them. I still keep an old multisync hooked up A/B though for console mode on the Linux box. I dont know how many KVM's will work right with sync on green, but mine does not have a problem.

Good Luck...

-Rich