>>I was saying the same thing right here months ago.
> I know, and I was one of those who didn't really believe you, I should
> have known better than to trust the opinion of "Tom's" even if it was
> backed up by a few other places
> As punishment I will install and run*** Johnson's V8 Racing for a time
> period of no less than 48 hours in total
--
Gerry Aitken?
...and a friend shall lose a friend's hammer. - Book of Cyril, chapter
6, verse 16
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses by a fish called Colin.
> I rest my case.
--
Gerry Aitken?
...and a friend shall lose a friend's hammer. - Book of Cyril, chapter
6, verse 16
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses by a fish called Colin.
You act as if the CRT is the pox of humanity. The steady flicker of
flourecent lamps or the UV rays that occur naturally, smog smoke and on and
on each cause more eye strain than any correctly configured high refresh
CRT.
So you like your LCD. Who really cares, I don't cause next year when I do
go with an LCD which will cost me half as much for twice the perf as your
POS I'll just sit back and laugh at you. When I can get a LCD of similar
size and performance to my 22" CRT then Ill likely go that route. Till then
take your useless propaganda and shove it squarely up your arse.
BTW I use many types of displays daily both LCD and CRT and I dont disagree
with your general assesment of LCDs, right up till you turn into a raving
fool.
At no time was I "childish" in my previous response soooo...
PLONK ..l..
Yes he seems to be "wind-milling", doesn't he.
So I was wrong to assume you prefer LCDs? You actually prefer CRTs? Why is
that exactly?
> So I was wrong to assume you prefer LCDs? You actually prefer CRTs? Why is
> that exactly?
--
Gerry Aitken?
...and a friend shall lose a friend's hammer. - Book of Cyril, chapter
6, verse 16
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses by a fish called Colin.
So you have no preference for either - you just care about size?
No such thing as a "correctly configured" CRT, matey.
You think just because you've adjusted the refresh rate to just beyond the
visible that it isn't refreshing ?
Sorry, but you have absolutely no understanding of the workings of the
visual cortex - I suggest you go and read some books.
Well I know I certainly do.
And millions of other LCD users feel the same way about theirs.
I don't cause next year when I do
Well, you're just gunna have to put up with another year of eyestrain on the
road to an opthalmic prescription and shi'ite viewing/tough document-reading
for another year then, aren't you .... eh ?
When I can get a LCD of similar
A 1,500lb 22" CRT sack of shi'ite has the same viewable area as a 20" LCD.
Till then
The only fools around are the ones who think CRT's are acceptable viewing.
The tone of the response may not have been childish - but lying to "justify"
that bullshi'ite is the sort of thing you should have given up at seven y-o.
<BWAAAH>
<Looks for sleeping pills to overdose on ... as cry for help>
> > What a crock of shi'ite.
> > ALL CRT's cause eyestrain, you wallaby.
> > No honestly, you sack of shi'ite ... before you post another bullshi'ite
> > post, go out and BUY an LCD - then you'll realise that you're a childish
> > *** who can't resist telling whoppers.
> > Oh, my. And the hits just keep a comin' :)
> Yes he seems to be "wind-milling", doesn't he.
Freak.
> So I was wrong to assume you prefer LCDs? You actually prefer CRTs? Why
is
> that exactly?
Nah.
--
Gerry Aitken?
...and a friend shall lose a friend's hammer. - Book of Cyril, chapter
6, verse 16
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses by a fish called Colin.
> >Refresh rate is immaterial for LCD's. It's the pixel response rate that
> >matters (technically). The problem is, every manufacturer uses their own
> >testing methods, so a monitor that has a 16ms response rate may not be as
> >good as one with a 25ms response rate.
> >Really, the only thing you can do is research, research, research. Make
> >sure you look at it with *** in mind.
> >-Larry
> Yea, I've read that those 16ms rated ones don't do true colour and
> that is how they achieve the 16ms rating. My Samsung 171S is
> avaialable for quite cheap now and is fine for ***. It's sub 30ms.
...Klinn
I worked in a computer shop and you need to invest some 3 to 4 times more
for a LCD to have the qualities you just mentioned, especialy color quality.
I'd say you probably never seen a good CRT. My eyes don't hurt even after
--
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
ICQ: 138579247
which I now say
This guy is obviously the top poster quantity wise, but as far as quality
goes..............................
Kerrrrrrrrrrrrrr PLONK!