> LCD panels have a 'native' resolution where every pixel is physically > represented by an element within the panel. Lower resolutions are > 'scaled' down either by the graphics drivers or by hardware (panel or > graphic driver chip). Lower resolutions will never be as 'clear' and > the native. However, for things such as games where objects are > moving, this is normally not such an issue. And most operating systems > today allow you to scale icons and text so that you can 'enlarge' > things on higher resolution screens to help with the vision thing. > > CRTs are better as they are very scalable up to their max resolution. > But I personally will never go back to them as the better panels today > are just so awesomely brilliant and sharp (now that you no longer have > to allign a moving electron gun, along with scattering/bleeding issues, > etc that are inherent to CRTs). Agreed. She was away for a week some time ago and I got to use her PC. I fell in love with that LCD screen, especially when I found how brilliantly clear and sharp it was once I upped it to 1024x768. When she came back, she also noticed how much better it was. As the LCD was there before I started working here, it had obviously been installed like that by the people who installed everything and nobody even noticed or tried to put it right!
Even with small text before you strat messing with text and icon sizes it's far clearer and sharper to read than this horrible 15" CRT monstrosity on my desk! LCD prices are starting to fall now, it was rare last year to find a LCD under £200 here, now you can suddenly get 14" LCD screens from about £130 even in high street stores, and 15 inch from about £150 just that I've noticed without really looking recently. Suddenly I know what I want from Santa (he said no to a Q60, but that's life). Dilwyn Jones _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
