I wanted desperately to love the LCD monitors. They are not as hot, they don't take up as much desk space, less danger of radiation and they have very sharp pictures. I do a lot of audio and video editing and computer graphics, and I do get into a game of Soldier of Fortune or Halo with my kids now and again - so I bought a 19" Dell that promised it was very fast on the refresh so it would be great for games.
I tried it for a couple of days, but I had to return it because it made me carsick all the time because of the "ghosting/motion blurr" stuff. Before returning it, I went on a quest to every store with these on display and every one that belonged to someone I knew and found that all I needed to do was a few simple tests like moving the mouse cursor across the screen to see that they ALL had streaky blurrs following every dark thing that moved. The higher the picture quality was the blacker the blacks seemed to be and the blacker the blacks got the more exaggerated the blurring was. The higher the picture quality settings in the games were, the worse the blurring looked as well.
I also noticed that on a screen any bigger than 15" the screen always appeared to be lit unevenly, depending on the angle it was set at, where I was seated and whether I was slouching or sitting up straight. Some were much better than otheres, but they all did it to some degree. I always had to move my head around to see how something full screen looked.
I bought a 21" Philips CRT monitor for less money and am much happier with it. I have been looking at computer monitors up to 20 hours a day since 1989, and I solved the flicker/eye strain problems of CRTs years ago by just getting a monitor that supports 100+ refresh rates.
Another HUGE problem with LCD monitors is that they only have one resolution available where the resolution is sharp and clear. I never saw any warnings about this very serious problem anywhere "before the purchase" although I found quite a few people who became aware of it after they bought their LCD panels. If you set them to any resolution except their "native resolution" the picture is extremely grainy and fuzzy, and the colors are way off.
I don't like having to use only one resolution and only the one they decide I should have. My son's laptop computer has a native resolution of 1600 on a 15" monitor which is really too small for a normal person. If he sets it to anything else the picture quality is really bad.
I think the flat panel monitors are all right for doing static work and ok for that up to 17." I have one with an auxilliary computer at work and although I am always having to adjust the angle depending on if I am standing or sitting to see the picture well, It suits my needs well because it fits on a counter top where a regular monitor would not. I really think it is good that people have choices and can use whatever best fits their needs.
I expect to be using only flat panel monitors eventually when the technology improves. I say let them try anything they want. There is no danger that a bad technology will take over because nobody will buy them if they are that awful. The manufacturers will make what people are willing to buy, so let them experiment. Maybe they will eventually come up with something we can all use. But I am not expecting to see anything suitable for high resolution with quick motion for another 3 years.
I wanted desperately to love the LCD monitors. They are not as hot, they don't take up as much desk space, less danger of radiation and they have very sharp pictures. I do a lot of audio and video editing and computer graphics, and I do get into a game of Soldier of Fortune or Halo with my kids now and again - so I bought a 19" Dell that promised it was very fast on the refresh so it would be great for games.
I tried it for a couple of days, but I had to return it because it made me carsick all the time because of the "ghosting/motion blurr" stuff. Before returning it, I went on a quest to every store with these on display and every one that belonged to someone I knew and found that all I needed to do was a few simple tests like moving the mouse cursor across the screen to see that they ALL had streaky blurrs following every dark thing that moved. The higher the picture quality was the blacker the blacks seemed to be and the blacker the blacks got the more exaggerated the blurring was. The higher the picture quality settings in the games were, the worse the blurring looked as well.
I also noticed that on a screen any bigger than 15" the screen always appeared to be lit unevenly, depending on the angle it was set at, where I was seated and whether I was slouching or sitting up straight. Some were much better than otheres, but they all did it to some degree. I always had to move my head around to see how something full screen looked.
I bought a 21" Philips CRT monitor for less money and am much happier with it. I have been looking at computer monitors up to 20 hours a day since 1989, and I solved the flicker/eye strain problems of CRTs years ago by just getting a monitor that supports 100+ refresh rates.
Another HUGE problem with LCD monitors is that they only have one resolution available where the resolution is sharp and clear. I never saw any warnings about this very serious problem anywhere "before the purchase" although I found quite a few people who became aware of it after they bought their LCD panels. If you set them to any resolution except their "native resolution" the picture is extremely grainy and fuzzy, and the colors are way off.
I don't like having to use only one resolution and only the one they decide I should have. My son's laptop computer has a native resolution of 1600 on a 15" monitor which is really too small for a normal person. If he sets it to anything else the picture quality is really bad.
I think the flat panel monitors are all right for doing static work and ok for that up to 17." I use one at work like this and although I am always having to adjust the angle depending on if I am standing or sitting to see the picture well, It suits my needs well because it fits on a counter top where a regular monitor would not. I really think it is good that people have choices and can use whatever best fits their needs.
I expect to be using only flat panel monitors eventually when the technology improves. I say let them try anything they want. There is no danger that a bad technology will take over because nobody will buy them if they are that awful. The manufacturers will make what people are willing to buy, so let them experiment. Maybe they will eventually come up with something we can all use.
When I switched from PageMaker to Quark years ago, Quark was by far superior. I called Quark's support number with a list of about 20 things I didn't like about the program. With the next upgrade they had fixed every one of them. They obviously put some effort into listening to their customer and trying to improve their program, very much unlike Adobe who only listens to its customers in order to find out how to thwart their every whim.
The fact that InDesign is made by Adobe disqualifies it as a valid program to even try in my opinion. I was told by an Adobe support rep after being bounced from person to person to person, and being told a different lie by each one "If you don't like our service, don't buy our products - it's that simple." I have alway followed that excellent advice ever since and have not missed Adobe one bit.
Quark does everything I need it to do and I am sure the next upgrade will make it even better as they always do.
Bush is far more liberal/socialist than anyone in US politics was when I first learned the terms liberal and conservative and left and right wing back in the late 60s.
And saying Clinton is even a moderate liberal would be a silly statement, never mind calling him a moderate conservative.
The fact is that there is no essential difference between Kerry or Bush, or Clinton, or King Bush the 1st, or Reagan or Carter or Nixon or FDR or Stalin or Hitler. They are all avowed socialist one-worlders - all on the far left. The only difference between them is how, and how fast to reach their one-world socialist goal.
You need to wake up from your public-school/media brainwashing and stop living so far on the radical edge of the left of the political spectrum, that you no longer even recognize the existance of the true center. In fact, you completely exclude everything all the way from the extreme right to the middle of the left, so that the middle of the left becomes your extreme right.
On a true political spectrum, Total Government is on the left and Total Freedom is on the right. At the center would be a perfect balance between the two so that you could do what you wanted with your life and property as long as you didn't pose a threat to the life or property of anyone else. Enough freedom to thrive, and enough law to protect your achievements. This leaves no room for Anarchy (the far right) or Socialism (the far left), either of which even in small amounts will destroy the balance.
I have talked to all these people before on the phone. (Were you doing support for HP?) I always thought these were ignorant people putting something over on their bosses to keep their jobs. Now I find out their ignorance is actually created, fostered and rewarded BY their bosses.
Thank you for this wonderful work. Besides being informative, it is pure poetry to read. I hope you do a lot of writing and a lot of people get to read it.
Slashdot Mirror
I tried it for a couple of days, but I had to return it because it made me carsick all the time because of the "ghosting/motion blurr" stuff. Before returning it, I went on a quest to every store with these on display and every one that belonged to someone I knew and found that all I needed to do was a few simple tests like moving the mouse cursor across the screen to see that they ALL had streaky blurrs following every dark thing that moved. The higher the picture quality was the blacker the blacks seemed to be and the blacker the blacks got the more exaggerated the blurring was. The higher the picture quality settings in the games were, the worse the blurring looked as well.
I also noticed that on a screen any bigger than 15" the screen always appeared to be lit unevenly, depending on the angle it was set at, where I was seated and whether I was slouching or sitting up straight. Some were much better than otheres, but they all did it to some degree. I always had to move my head around to see how something full screen looked.
I bought a 21" Philips CRT monitor for less money and am much happier with it. I have been looking at computer monitors up to 20 hours a day since 1989, and I solved the flicker/eye strain problems of CRTs years ago by just getting a monitor that supports 100+ refresh rates.
Another HUGE problem with LCD monitors is that they only have one resolution available where the resolution is sharp and clear. I never saw any warnings about this very serious problem anywhere "before the purchase" although I found quite a few people who became aware of it after they bought their LCD panels. If you set them to any resolution except their "native resolution" the picture is extremely grainy and fuzzy, and the colors are way off.
I don't like having to use only one resolution and only the one they decide I should have. My son's laptop computer has a native resolution of 1600 on a 15" monitor which is really too small for a normal person. If he sets it to anything else the picture quality is really bad.
I think the flat panel monitors are all right for doing static work and ok for that up to 17." I have one with an auxilliary computer at work and although I am always having to adjust the angle depending on if I am standing or sitting to see the picture well, It suits my needs well because it fits on a counter top where a regular monitor would not. I really think it is good that people have choices and can use whatever best fits their needs.
I expect to be using only flat panel monitors eventually when the technology improves. I say let them try anything they want. There is no danger that a bad technology will take over because nobody will buy them if they are that awful. The manufacturers will make what people are willing to buy, so let them experiment. Maybe they will eventually come up with something we can all use. But I am not expecting to see anything suitable for high resolution with quick motion for another 3 years.
I wanted desperately to love the LCD monitors. They are not as hot, they don't take up as much desk space, less danger of radiation and they have very sharp pictures. I do a lot of audio and video editing and computer graphics, and I do get into a game of Soldier of Fortune or Halo with my kids now and again - so I bought a 19" Dell that promised it was very fast on the refresh so it would be great for games. I tried it for a couple of days, but I had to return it because it made me carsick all the time because of the "ghosting/motion blurr" stuff. Before returning it, I went on a quest to every store with these on display and every one that belonged to someone I knew and found that all I needed to do was a few simple tests like moving the mouse cursor across the screen to see that they ALL had streaky blurrs following every dark thing that moved. The higher the picture quality was the blacker the blacks seemed to be and the blacker the blacks got the more exaggerated the blurring was. The higher the picture quality settings in the games were, the worse the blurring looked as well. I also noticed that on a screen any bigger than 15" the screen always appeared to be lit unevenly, depending on the angle it was set at, where I was seated and whether I was slouching or sitting up straight. Some were much better than otheres, but they all did it to some degree. I always had to move my head around to see how something full screen looked. I bought a 21" Philips CRT monitor for less money and am much happier with it. I have been looking at computer monitors up to 20 hours a day since 1989, and I solved the flicker/eye strain problems of CRTs years ago by just getting a monitor that supports 100+ refresh rates. Another HUGE problem with LCD monitors is that they only have one resolution available where the resolution is sharp and clear. I never saw any warnings about this very serious problem anywhere "before the purchase" although I found quite a few people who became aware of it after they bought their LCD panels. If you set them to any resolution except their "native resolution" the picture is extremely grainy and fuzzy, and the colors are way off. I don't like having to use only one resolution and only the one they decide I should have. My son's laptop computer has a native resolution of 1600 on a 15" monitor which is really too small for a normal person. If he sets it to anything else the picture quality is really bad. I think the flat panel monitors are all right for doing static work and ok for that up to 17." I use one at work like this and although I am always having to adjust the angle depending on if I am standing or sitting to see the picture well, It suits my needs well because it fits on a counter top where a regular monitor would not. I really think it is good that people have choices and can use whatever best fits their needs. I expect to be using only flat panel monitors eventually when the technology improves. I say let them try anything they want. There is no danger that a bad technology will take over because nobody will buy them if they are that awful. The manufacturers will make what people are willing to buy, so let them experiment. Maybe they will eventually come up with something we can all use.
When I switched from PageMaker to Quark years ago, Quark was by far superior. I called Quark's support number with a list of about 20 things I didn't like about the program. With the next upgrade they had fixed every one of them. They obviously put some effort into listening to their customer and trying to improve their program, very much unlike Adobe who only listens to its customers in order to find out how to thwart their every whim.
The fact that InDesign is made by Adobe disqualifies it as a valid program to even try in my opinion. I was told by an Adobe support rep after being bounced from person to person to person, and being told a different lie by each one "If you don't like our service, don't buy our products - it's that simple." I have alway followed that excellent advice ever since and have not missed Adobe one bit.
Quark does everything I need it to do and I am sure the next upgrade will make it even better as they always do.
Do you really believe all this stuff?
Bush is far more liberal/socialist than anyone in US politics was when I first learned the terms liberal and conservative and left and right wing back in the late 60s.
And saying Clinton is even a moderate liberal would be a silly statement, never mind calling him a moderate conservative.
The fact is that there is no essential difference between Kerry or Bush, or Clinton, or King Bush the 1st, or Reagan or Carter or Nixon or FDR or Stalin or Hitler. They are all avowed socialist one-worlders - all on the far left. The only difference between them is how, and how fast to reach their one-world socialist goal.
You need to wake up from your public-school/media brainwashing and stop living so far on the radical edge of the left of the political spectrum, that you no longer even recognize the existance of the true center. In fact, you completely exclude everything all the way from the extreme right to the middle of the left, so that the middle of the left becomes your extreme right.
On a true political spectrum, Total Government is on the left and Total Freedom is on the right. At the center would be a perfect balance between the two so that you could do what you wanted with your life and property as long as you didn't pose a threat to the life or property of anyone else. Enough freedom to thrive, and enough law to protect your achievements. This leaves no room for Anarchy (the far right) or Socialism (the far left), either of which even in small amounts will destroy the balance.
Wake up. Just wake up.
Wow.
I have talked to all these people before on the phone. (Were you doing support for HP?) I always thought these were ignorant people putting something over on their bosses to keep their jobs. Now I find out their ignorance is actually created, fostered and rewarded BY their bosses.
Thank you for this wonderful work. Besides being informative, it is pure poetry to read. I hope you do a lot of writing and a lot of people get to read it.
- megalonzerg