Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

Super Large, Super Hi-Res LCD Screens? 197

Posted by Cliff from the can-you-say-super-expensive? dept.
Saberwind asks: "Fed up with flicker problems when viewing 1600x1200 and 1920x1440 resolutions on even some high-end CRTs, and wanting a perfect image that I can hang on my wall, I'm ready to switch to LCD. I almost plunked down nearly $3000 for a 18.1-inch Viewsonic VP181. The ideal LCD would have a digital input, be at least 20" diagonal, be wall-mountable, have an orthagonal shape, and of course square pixels (regardless of the aspect ratio). Does anyone know where such holy grails might be procured?"

"I did some digging and found that while the VP181 is advertised as having a maximum resolution of 1600x1200, its native resolution is a piddly 1280x1024 (every image I've seen so far is intended to be displayed on a device with square pixels, and 1280x1024 crams a 5:4 resolution into a 4:3 space resulting in squished pixels) and the higher res is just emulated. Then there's the 17.3-inch SGI 1600SW, which does 1600x1024, but I understand it locks you into a specific video card and the product is no longer supported. Every once in a while we hear about new flat panel technologies being developed (IBM developed the QX20, a 20.8-inch, 2048x1536 LCD (this was last year. Where is it now?). Then there's the 22" Apple Cinema Display, which can do 1600x1024, but it's made by Apple, and I'm not quite so sure about that one."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Super Large, Super Hi-Res LCD Screens? More

Super Large, Super Hi-Res LCD Screens?

Comments Filter:

  • Re:Actually, ADC isn't proprietary... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    And you don't have the USB connectors on the back of the machine - they're much easier to reach on the display.

  • SGI Flat Panel (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    SGI has released the multilink adapter (at least $300 extra) - allowing any VGA or DVI card to use the monitor... you just need to make sure the card supports 1600 X 1048 resolution. Bingo! No longer locked into any specific video card.

    Its an excellent monitor, especially price competitive to other monitors, and the resolution (110 dpi) is tighter than anything coming out over the next 2 years.

    I haven't heard about SGI discontinuing support for the product... you might want to contact them directly. I have a feeling though that in the next year, they will either introduce a new flat panel that will work with the standard DVI interface... or they will end up dropping the product line all together.

    eBay always seems to have a few available for bids as well... but the price tends to get up towards $2000 - still quite less than retail.

  • Hardware Hackerz to the Rescue (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Doode, I just like hacked a I-Opener and stuff. Got the display going great in Windows98 for a while and even switched the keyboard for a Windows keyboard. Added a fan for the processor and a :Cue:Cat, it was dope!

    Buy one of those Apple monitors and send it to me and I will hack it to work on your computer for $20.

    I even got a 15w soldering iron, solder, liquid flux, a Dremel, solder wick, solder sucker and other lab stuff for this I-Opener thing, so I am really set to hardware hack just like a factory. But I ended up frying the USB and some other stuff, so I got free practice for you. If you want it send another $200 and will send it back with your monitor.

    I don't want my info posted on /. bekuz I don't want the man shutting me down so you will have to look me up and work out the detailz. I promise to have it done in less than a couple of weeks or something.

    Don't send cash, use PayPal an I will give you a discount later. Don't forget to add for shipping too, bekuz I have a low margin that is too low for the UPS truck to drive under. Lotsa big companies don't ecksplain that to people and rip them off really bad, but we are real honest since we are doing lots of business so people will trust us real good. So your money is safe. We even got a guarantee for it.

    Sinserely,
    ODK Team
    WhitHatHardwareHackerz, Inc.

    P.s., the old guy next door is in a movie [dorsai.org] and he lets us sleep over and drink all the time.
  • The Viewsonic panel actually does have the correct aspect ratio for its native resolution (which is 1280 x 1024). Phisical screen size is 359mm (H) x 287mm (V), 1024/1280 is 0.8, and 287/359 is ~0.799. This is of course the wrong aspect ratio for any other common resolution, but what kind of fool runs an LCD in anything other then its native resolution?
  • Alot of people here seem to be praising the 22" Apple LCD display, though I have to say that I'm not all that impressed with it. We have one here at work, and it's exhibited some issues. The center of the screen is darker than the edges, so you get this wierd shadowed effect. There are a couple geometry problems as well, with certain areas of the screen not lining up as well as you would expect. It's made it unsuitable for some of the vision studies that are done here, so now it's just pretty much used as an over-glorified workstation monitor (Still a rather nice one). I guess my suggestion would be that when you factor in how much this display costs, you really should be getting perfection, and so far our experience with it here has been unimpressive.

    Mark Nelson

  • If you can't stand the thin black lines on a Trinitron display, I don't know how you can stand an LCD display.

    I detest the trinitron display's lines, but I use my 14.1" notebook every day and don't notice any blocking. Glasses are recent and keep everything in focus so I know I can see the grid effect. (in fact I do if I sit 6" in front of the screen) I prefer my 14.1" LCD to my 17" Philips 107s @ 1280x1024 (no flicker, just not as clear as the LCD)

  • It's 1920 x 1080, actually.. At least when watching 1080i HDTV programming, which is what those screens are designed for.

  • Woah! For that money, Apple will give you their cinema display, plus their top-of-the-line G4 to run it with:

    • Dual 500MHz PowerPC G4 - 2x1MB L2 cache
    • 256MB
    • 40GB Ultra ATA drive
    • Apple Cinema Display (22" flat panel)
    • DVD-RAM drive with DVD-Video
    • RADEON card - 32MB DDR-RAM
    • 56K internal modem

    $7,598.00

    I can't find a picture of that NEC, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't look as good as the Cinema Display.

  • It should also be noted that the 1600SW *is* a digital input device, not analog. The only drawback is that the XFree86 support is very weak, it mostly works under 3.3.6 (but no DPMS support) and there is no 4.0 support.
  • So has anyone been able to get an ACD working with an x86 machine? After several emails to ATI asking if their Radeon could do 1600 x 1024 I gave up. Their tech support people are clueless and never gave me a straight answer. I am dying to get this monitor, but must have verification that it will work with SOME card under Linux and Winblows (gotta play Quake (I know you can play in Linux, but I am still on libc5 (don't ask))).
  • I'm using right now (the joys of being a student at a rich university) Silicon Graphics workstation with a 1600SW monitor - 1600x1024 LCD screen. Very nice picture, easy on the eye and has a very small desk footprint.
    These can work with as PC using a special graphics card from Oxygen, I believe.
    Not sure if they can be fixed up to hang from a wall, but for a desktop they get my vote.
  • I know it is bad form to follow up your own posts but I posted this without thinking. Sorry - should have read the story properly first!
  • For those that do not understand, Tau Beta Sigma and Kappa Kappa Psi are not social organizations. They are service organizations for college and university band programs. These organizations are the driving force behind many college band programs across the nation.

    Just because this person did not like the actions of one chapter does not mean that all chapters are the same. It also does not give this person the reason or the right to post the most important documents of the orgainization.

    In case the person that owns the site does not know, what he/she did was also copyright infringement. A person in my chapter has already contacted the national office and they will be contacting the owner of the site soon.

    Please people, act like adults and don't take vengence on something that you obviously do not understand.

    To the owner of the comment I am replying to, the second half of this reply was not intended directly for you...but I felt I had to let everyone know...
  • it doesn't matter what the owner's real name is, the site has been taken down. Regardless, geocities has some way of contacting the person.

  • Maybe the 1600SW? There's information about that one here [sgi.com]. Summary:
    * 17.3" display
    * 1600x1024 resolution
    * 0.23mm DP (110 DPI)
    * US$2475 @ buy.com
  • Just a few comments from someone who works on one of the SGI 1600 flat panels daily.

    It does have a nice aspect ratio, but there are SEVERAL problems to it as well. For one, when used in anything but 1600x1024 you get a 'framed' screen with black bars and useless space. Further the NumberNine card really needs to have some improvements to it, as it can create pixelated sub-groupings on the screen in solid color fields especially at high resolution blow-ups (take a picture, any format, and blow it up a few hundred percent. you'll suddenly notice blocks of 4x4 or 8x8 pixels becoming off-color for no reason, while reproduced correctly on a CRT).

    I do graphic production as part of my living, and I prefer the ColorSync monitor next to the SGI lcd for color rendering. Once I saw one of the Apple 22" flat panels I was amazed at how handily it beat the SGI I had on my desktop, but alas it was chained to the countertop so I couldn't take it back to compare directly ;)
  • If you havent looked at the apple 22' Cinima Display, do it now. Its absolutly gorgeous.

    22 cinima display [apple.com]and some features [apple.com]

    You dont mention your computer preference(although you allude to a distrust of Apple), or what the final use of the monitor will be for(sound like you want a nice tv), so pick up a cube and one of these, and youll have your tv/dvd player. And if you ever can trust apple on one thing for, its a product with good color reproduction :p

  • Who's limiting you to the visible spectrum? :-)
  • It has an infinite maximum resolution.

    If I remember correctly, resolution should be at minimum the wavelength of light in the visible spectrum (although it varies). ;)
  • I just got a KDS AV-21TF, from onvia.com for ~$760, shipping included.

    2048x1536 @80hz max resolution.
    1600x1200 @85hz recommended resolution.
    .24 dot pitch.
    Flat Sony trinitron screen.

    The Gimp is mind-blowing on this thing. Text looks decent, too. Really shows off enlightenment. If you're jealous of those 1600x1200 e.themes.org screenshots, this one might be the ticket. Not too heavy, either -- only about 60 lbs.

    (Note, the price dropped right after I got it -- $733 now [cnet.com]. Hint for shoppers: you have to consider the shipping which is usually $40 for a large item like this and can run to $80. soft4u.com seems to have the best price right now at $733.53 and free shipping.)
  • You can get the 1600SW for around $1500 - $1800 on eBay. Just serch for *1600SW*. Number Nine Revolution IV T2R cards are on there, too.

    Buy.com has brand new 1600SWs with the multilink adapter included (expensive item -- lets you hook up a number of different video cards) for $1900 and change.
  • Looks like a cool television, but how did they arrive at a 1600x1200 resolution for a monitor with a 16:9 aspect ratio? Couldn't they have done 1600x900 and given us square pixels?

    (bitch, moan, whine...:)
  • I know that the two I mentioned don't quite fit the bill - I was making a blanket recommendation to check out the Samsung *line* of flat panel displays.

    Don't they teaching "reading the subtext" in high school any more?
  • I think they are Fujitsu. I spent way too much time staring at these on my last trip to Dallas.
  • I've got a 21" Trinitron and a ATI Rage Turbo Fury Pro (Pro Rage Turbo Fury? Whatever.) and I love it. I run 1600x1200x16bit @ 80Hz. No flicker, and great Linux support.

    The only problem is the weight and the size. The thing is a real bitch to haul around to LAN parties. :)
  • The only one that I've been able to find with native 1600x1200 resolution is
    the NEC-Mitsubishi LCD2110, a 21.3" monitor that is claimed will begin shipping in October.
    NEC estimates [necmitsubishi.com] the street price to be around $7999.
    The only site I've found that advertises [saleonall.com] it listed it for $8273.92, but
    as "call for availability." ZDNet estimates [zdnet.com] the price to be $9999.
  • I can testify from hundreds of hours of dilligent testing that high quality LCDs (eg Apple Studio display) perform beautifully for Quake. They have nice convolution filters for converting the lower resolutions favored for twitch games to the 1024x768 pixel matrix without creating blocking artifacts.

    You might get trouble with the Cinema display because of the aspect ration, but if you can pay that for a display you can buy a 2nd one in a more normal resolution for quake.

  • I had a Samsung 170MP for a little while. It was beautiful and exactly what I wanted, but I eventually sent it back because I couldn't get rid of pixel jittering. (Analog inputs only.)

    And now I'm sensitized to jittering. I can notice annoying jittering in the annoying fuzzy dots on my Nokia CRT too.

    I don't sit at my desk much any more. I geek from a Dell Inspiron laptop, 1400x1050. Crisp dots, no ghosting, no jittering, good scaling. The downside is I get to see all sorts of jpeg compression artifacts that aren't visible on a CRT.

    Next desktop monitor I get will have digital inputs.

  • The Ultimate display: laser projection (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm working at a small company that has upgraded some decomissioned military equipment used for War Room displays. They're like imagesetters, they use 3 colored lasers and can easily kick out 4000x3000 pixel displays at any size from desktop to projecting them on the side of a building. The only problem we have is finding an video image source with resolution that high, it can go way beyond HDTV rez. Its the ultimate display, the Air Force wanted to use them as displays for air fighter simulators, but abandoned the project and put the whole technology up for sale (and we bought it). Now with some upgrades, they're the ultimate computer display, movie projector or HDTV system.
    The bottom line:

    Basic unit: $500,000. Quantity discounts available.
  • ADC is just Apple's name for another standard called "Plug & Display." There was a Slashdot story on this a while back, in fact.

    The standard never caught on, it seems. I don't know why; IMHO it makes a lot of sense. Then again, it seems very few standards get popular until Macs start including them on all its machines. Witness USB, which existed but was languishing in no-peripheral-support limbo until the iMac came along and gave it the boost it needed.
    ----------
  • Apple uses the USB connection to make the monitors automatically calibrate themselves when needed. It's actually a pretty neat trick, particularly if you have color profiles for your printer too (and if you've got a scanner, one for it as well). Makes sure the colors match up exactly (at least in theory) at all times.
    ----------
  • The only drawback is that the XFree86 support is very weak, it mostly works under 3.3.6 (but no DPMS support) and there is no 4.0 support.

    It appears that an i128 driver was checked into the XFree86 CVS tree recently, so a future 4.x release will probably support the Revolution IV-FP.

    I don't think there's yet support for the 3DLabs Oxygen VX1-1600SW, though. (Anybody know of a store in the UK that sells the SGI monitor + 3DLabs card and that lets you order online? Yes, the UK - I want to buy one from the US and have it delivered to an address in the UK.)

  • The 1600SW is fantastic but the Number Nine card could be better

    It's also supported by the 3DLabs Oxygen VX1-1600SW [3dlabs.com]. I don't know whether that card's better than the #9 Revolution IV-FP or not. (Presumably one reason SGI switched is that #9 is out of business....)

    (and doesn't have a driver in XFree86 4).

    One has been checked into the XFree86 CVS tree, so some future 4.x release will probably support it.

    I don't think there's currently any XFree86 4.x support for the VX1-1600SW, but it may appear in the future.

    They now supply a MultiLink adapter which allows the monitor to accept many types of video input.

    ...although, as I read SGI's FAQ on the MultiLink Adapter [sgi.com] and, in particular, the answer to "What happens if my card is not SuperWide savvy?" [sgi.com], you don't get 1600x1024 unless you have a "SuperWide Savvy" adapter - and you may need driver support for that; see the SuperWide Savvy page [sgi.com].

  • ...which makes me think that Apple's flatpanels are just colored-plastic covered SGI flat panels.

    Unless the colored plastic can turn a 17.3-inch (diagonal) display [sgi.com] into a 22-inch (diagonal) display [apple.com], I doubt that the Apple Cinema Display is a colored-plastic-covered SGI 1600SW.

  • People have already mentioned that X 4.0 hasn't had the Number Nine drivers ported over, but that's trivial--I know they are working on this.

    It was recently checked into the XFree86 CVS tree (I don't know if it works yet, all I know is that it was checked in).

  • The high costs come from having to scrap large peices. Why not interconnect smaller peices to make one large peice. Basic Lego or JigSaw Puzzle strategy. One peice that will attach to any other type of peice. Then special peices for each of the borders. With 5 peices you could interconnect to make one large peice. To get a LARGER monitor, you just put more of the global peices in the center.
  • What happened to IBM's badass 200 pixes/inch monitor, the Roetgen (or something similar, IIRC)? From what I remember, this [slashdot.org] technology was being developed as a joint project between IBM and Toshiba, and supposedly marketable (i.e. not just an R&D effort for the "wow" appeal), for home/business consumers. Read the NYTimes& lt;/a> article for more details. [nytimes.com]

    From what I recall of the original IBM project page, this beast was designed to be as readable as printed text in a book.. basically the images are sharper, less blurry than current CRT/LCD technology, which typically has 80/100 ppi. This is something to watch out for, I think.

  • As a long-time owner of two SGI 1600SW panels, I have only one response to the news of the Multilink adapter:

    Yeeeeeeeeeessssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The Nine is just fine for 2D graphics, but sucks rocks for 3D (especially OpenGL).

    I recently assembled a game machine with a GeForce card, and I'd love to be able to move the SGI to it.

  • You are thinking of depth of field, which expresses the range in distance where correct focus is maintained.

    This is different then maximum resolution, though of course if your eye can't focus, then your maximum resolution will be severly limited.

  • Wrong. (Score:2)

    by Xar ( 11113 )
    There was no factual error made. The ADC is not proprietary. It is a little known extension, allowed for in the DVI spec., that apple implemented. It is true that you, currently, cannot use an ADC display on non-Apple hardware, but that may very well change.
  • I have this kind of setup on my desk at work (twinhead, two NEC 18" LCD screens side-by-side to give a wide desktop) but although the screens are nice the width of the bezels effectively forces you to treat it as two separate displays. It's impossible to read any window that spans the two screens as the eye loses its place as you scan along each line of text or spreadsheet row.

    The suggestion was. I believe, to join LCD displays edge-to-edge so there is no gap.

    Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
    Thought exists only as an abstraction
  • I'm sure the developer concerned would be delighted to hear your opinion that his efforts are trivial.

    Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
    Thought exists only as an abstraction
  • I went through this same decision process, somewhat in reverse. For a year or so I used a 15" LCD, which I was very happy with, but 1024x768 gets a bit tiresome after a while. I looked into the SGI and other larger LCD displays, but found similar limitations to the ones you mention.

    There are plenty of 21" and 19" monitors that don't flicker at 1600x1200. I went for one of those in the end, a flat-screen Sony, and I'm very happy.

    I'm sure big LCDs will be more viable in a few years time. In the meantime, I'd rather save my money for some other toy.

  • Samsung makes a couple of flat panels that may suit you better. I've been rather happy with the 770TFT and the 170MP that I've had a chance to play with.
  • Yep. And I'm sure that's so obvious that they NEVER thought of it.

    Heck.. why not just manufacture individual subpixels and then glue them toegether? you could ship someone's monitor to them in a bucket as a 'do it yourself' kit.

    IN all seriuosness, it comes down to how do you join those elements together cleanly enough? The reason tehy are built as a single piece is because it's the only way to get the pixels small enough and close enough together.
  • Good ones can be had for around $5000 USD now. (Paid $9000 CAD for ours, and it's wicked)

    Bulbs are the killer. $500 a piece for ultra high pressure sodium bulbs.
  • High-end CRT's don't have flicker problems.
    Color reproduction is still more accurate on a monitor..

    And.. although it's fact that digital input to an LCD is accurate.. it is also less versatile until the digital connector is standard.

    Creates problems with anything that does video passthru (like DVD decoders and such).
  • For those of you that don't know.. there ARE competing standards for Flat panel displays. DVI which is backed by intel, and proprietary.. and OpenLDI, which is the standard that is currently used in notebooks. OpenLDI consumes much less power and is capable of driving much higher resolutions. (yes there is such a thing as bandwidth when it comes to displays).. but anyway.. by the end of december, there will be a new crop of lcd displays these are 24" UXGAW displays w/ a resolution of 2048x1536. So far, these panels use OpenLDI.. ok.. I'm biased.. I used to work for a company that supports OpenLDI, but if anybody would care about proprietary standards I'd think the linux community would be the one to support the open standard. Too bad not enough consumers even know there's such a battle going on. Most geeks only care about rambus and ddr sdram. btw currently.. those 24" panels alone (like buying just a crt tube) costs around $5k
  • AFAIK, it's not the kind of adapter you want. The apple store web site clearly states that the ADC-DVI adapter is so that you can attach an "old" Apple DVI flatpanel to a new Cube or G4 with an ADC connector. It doesn't let you hook up a new ADC-only flatpanel to your DVI video card.
  • *If* you could still find an old-style DVI Apple Cinema Display, I believe your best bet is to try the Matrox G400 MAX to drive the 1600x1024. For those who don't know, most of the DVI video cards for PCs, including ATI and NVIDIA-based cards, don't support 1600x1024--the ACD's native resolution.

    For that matter, the G400 specs don't list 1600x1024 for the DVI daughtercard, but SGI lists it under their SuperWide Savvy list and a search of the Matrox support forums has responses from Matrox tech support claiming the G400 will drive 1600x1024.

    Incidentally, I know some people love the SGI 1600SW, but IMHO, a 17" monitor running 1600x1024 is just painfully small. We had a couple at the last place I worked and I didn't think they were so hot. Of course If I had spent $3k on one, I might find reasons to think that ;)

  • I really don't know much about monitor technology, but what exactly is the story on why pixels AREN'T square? I mean, why aren't they? And what's the big deal about them becoming square? Is ti harder to accomplish technologicaly?
  • The link the article was a link into the Apple store that timed out. http://www.apple.com/displays/acd22/ [apple.com] ; ; ; is a more permanent link to information. (square pixels, top notch image quality)

    The input is TMDS [ddwg.org] from the Digital Display Working Group. Follow the link, hit product list, search for vendor and cards. (Be aware the the connector changed recently. New Cinema Displays have a combined power/video/usb connector, you may need a fancy cable to get into it from your video card.)

    I have used a number of flat panel displays from different vendors. I must say the Apple ones are the best I've used, no exceptions. Its especially striking when an Apple display is next to another brand.

    If you decide to buy one you should go by smalldog [smalldog.com]. You won't find a better reseller and they sell off refurbished Apple units at reduced cost. All my displays are refurbs, I've never had a problem.
  • This is TI's "Digital Light Processing" system. It is indeed very cool: It's a direct digital output device, there's no DAC or pixel drivers required. That's because it's really just a video RAM with a set of MEMS mirrors which rock back and forth on a duty cycle proportional to the "on-ness" of a particular pixel. They ysed to have a site explaining in detail at www.ti.com/dlp [ti.com] (Warning - I haven't checked this link to see if it still works, since Netscape is acting flaky and I want to get through this post.)

    I looked at this technology a few years ago, and all the better portable "LCD" projectors out now are actually DLP units. There is *no* visible separation between pixels, unlike LCD or other systems, and the brightness is incredible - easily viewable in a daylit room.

    At one point a year or two ago, the TI web site said that Nokia was planning a (40-ish inch) DLP-based TV, which while not a flat panel, was still planned to come in at only about a foot deep. I don't know what happened to this product, but it looks like Samsung beat tehm to that form factor with their new FLCD TV.

    (I do know that TI had real problems in getting the DLP chips to scale up in resolution - they were stuck at 6x4 and 8x6 for a long time... (Yes, that's 640x480 and 800x600, really - it's a common abbrev. in the laptop business...)
  • It appears that Sony didn't actually purchase the rights to the PALC technology, but merely licensed it from Tektronics. Further, it was part of a joint venture between Sony, Sharp and Philips.

    More information about PALC, at least a nice picture and some details, can be found here:

    www.meko.com/palc.html [meko.com]

    As of last December, the three companies appeared to still be developing the technology [stanfordresources.com].

  • The newest ones use Apple's new proprietary connector, which carries power, USB, and video from the video card to the monitor. If you can still find an older model with the standard DVI connector, you'll still have to ensure it will be recognized by your video card.

  • i actually worked on lcds from a research point of view. the reason why lcds will not be cheap is, as stated, the manufacturing limitations. to create an lcd, you have to make individual transitors for each pixel (and don't forget, for each 'pixel', you need three- red/green/blue). so on a 22" display, you're requiring uniformity in the plasma processing chamber (how they create the transitors) that is very hard to mantain from step to step. so, for 1600x1200, you have 3x1600x1200 pixels to define- each pixel probably needs a few transitors. it's not the number of transitors, but the fact they are distributed over such a large area. there is a reason why cpus and such are made on 6" wafers, and not 21" ones... of course, there is a solution other than lcd or plasma displays (which throw out enough heat to keep your coffee warm) it's called PALC- plasma addressed liquid crystal display. a small spin-off company from techtronix was developing it and showed some wonderful prototypes. sony bought their rights and then killed the project a couple of years later. the beauty of this thing is that it was easily scalable to any resolution and any size. a plasma was used to switch individual rows/columns on and off. thanks sony. [yeah, i developed the plasma model to describe the thing (running on linux, of course)]
  • Remember the slashdot article about they guy making dvd players with sdi output ($10,000+) sent directly to a big plasma display?

    It was supposed to look good because the video never went through an analog stage. I've been wondering if DVD on a laptop has the same advantage? Does the video go through an analog stage before getting to the LCD display?

    What about an LCD display on a desktop monitor with digital input? Anyone watched a DVD on one of those?

    What about these dedicated handheld and larger, DVD players? All digital?

    Does anyone make a Plasma, rather than LCD display for computers? I've seen the 'used to be $10,000 now around $3,000' consumer video versions, but never in a desktop monitor. One of the things I don't like about LCD dispays is the speed at which pixels can be turned on and off. Plasmas seem to do that much faster, and consequently have snappier, cleaner, video during scenes with lots of motion.

    ************************************************** *****

    PBS Documentary on the 30 year War on Drugs tonight! 2 part special [pbs.org], tonight and tomorrow night.

    Seems like this affects as many geek's lives as, say, LEGO robots, or Start Wars trailers....

    I wonder if they'll mention that one of the candidates for president [harrybrowne2000.org] wants to end it.

    Couple of video clips here [pbs.org] and here [lp.org].

  • Check this out:

    A mouth-watering picture of the new Samsung 24'' LCD [samsung.de]. Was just tested in lastest (?!) issue of C't (germanies only computer magazine)

    Here are the technical details. [samsung.de]

    Cheers,

    Chris
  • I've got a Sony VPL-CS1 LCD Projector.
    I haven't tried to measure the dimensions (Kinda depends on the distance you can get it from your screen)
    It is great.
    I can plug my DVD system into, my Laptop can connect to it, and it's got USB connectors so you can control your mouse through the remote control.
    It can deal with PAL and NTSC.

    Quake III is NICE! ;-)

    All you need is a big White wall (or projector screen) good curtains/blinds, oh and about 2000UKP sterling (I bought mine in April, so the price may have come down since then).

    So, 20" + screen - check; Hang on the wall - er-check; $3000 - check!

    I think you're all out of excuses...

    ys
  • Actually, no. The problem is that the lens of your eye is not optically perfect. This imperfection is magnified (no pun intended) when the pupil is wide, and reduced as the pupil comes to a point.

    This is the reason why some of the contact lens companies are making a big deal about "better than 20-20" correction: the contact lens can correct the imperfect lens of the eye to a point where near-optimal focus is achived.

    Additionally, some researchers are looking into using active optics to bring focus in the eye to the limits of diffraction: in fact, the focus so achivied is so fine, that a HeNe laser (red, 632.8 nm) can be perceived as green, IF the spot falls on a green cone, rather than a red cone. In short, our vision system does not approach the limits of diffraction, but is limited by the accuraccy of focus of the lens.
  • Actually, the wider the pupil, the less resolution you have. This is the same effect as a pin-hole camera or squinting: by reducing the apeture to a point, the image will be in perfect focus for any focal length.

  • Its true, Apple has the highest-quality LCDs out there. Theyre bright, crisp, and a pleasure to look at. It sounded in your post that you were knocking them, or at least that you were reluctant, simply because they were Apple.

    Alien user-interface designs, insane business practices and an extra helping of hubris aside, Apple has always made superior hardware, bar none. (Okay, so there was that exploding Powerbook back in 1997 but hey, we ALL make a mistake [appleturns.com] from time to time).

    Truth is, Apple is the first place I'd look for a display because I know it will last, and if it does't, that they will back it up. (And if it DOES break, maybe you'll get a phone call [appleturns.com] from Steve-O himself!)

    You can use the new 15" and 22" displays on any graphics card with a DVI-out connector with a DVI-ADC adapter, availible now for about $15.

    The last generation, which you should still have no trouble getting your hands on refurbished or even new, use DVI.

    And if you wait another month or two, it is HIGHLY rumored Apple finally has a 17" or 18" display in the pipeline to fill the gaping chasm in their product line between 15-22". It will have a new case design and should be a beauty. Best of all it should be priced compeditively, about $1500.

    --Xel
    ========

  • Apple has an ADC to DVI adapter available, so the Cinema display is a viable option. ADC is just DVI with the extra stuff to clean up cable clutter. No Jobsian conspiracy or anything evil such as that :)
  • If you use the ADC to DVI adapter, it should work fine with a DVI-based digital video card.
  • As a reseller, I was able to do some research with our suppliers and there is not much choice in terms of large LCD screens (e.g. something over 20") with the exception as you found, the Apple Cinema Display.

    I have found something that seems to be what you may be looking for -- the NEC LCD2110. 21.3" viewable, 1600x1200 native resolution. Link to the NEC press Release [yahoo.com].

    There is a price sticker shock though - MSRP is $7999. :(

    Minotaur Technologies [minotaur.com], the company that I own sells it for $7595 [minotaur.com]. Free shipping! :)
  • If you want a really big high-resolution screen then go with an LCD projector. Something usable in a well-lit room will cost about ~$9000 USD + the cost of bulbs.

    If you want a resolution higher than 1280x1024 native then buy two of them with a dual-head video card and align the images to make a seamless display. This would be very cool.

    Jason.

  • Must resist temptation... Must not read such articles... must not buy huge lcd screen.. must buy clothes... arrrrrrrrgh!

    (Can slashdot have a "disable-temptation-and-bankrupcy-causing-articles " button?

  • The resolving power of the eye is measured in degrees i.e. what is the smallest angle subtended by an object that can still be seen. This resolving power is related to wavelength, but is also related to the current open diameter of your pupils (changes with light conditions). When it is dark you can see much smaller objects (stars) because your pupils are dilated. If I remember correctly (could be wrong), for a circular aperture, like eye or optical telescope, the maximum resolving power is given by:
    p = c*l/D
    where D is diameter of aperture, l is wavelength of light and c is a constant (1.22 may be?). p is in radians.
  • No it won't, because of difraction. I checked my physics books and my formula was actually correct. It gives the theoretical limit of resolution by a circular aperture. For rectangular, the constant is 1 instead fo 1.22.
  • The 22" Cinema Display has a DVI connector.

    The ADC-DVI adapter at the Apple Store allows you to connect an ADC Computer (Cube) to a DVI monitor (Cinema Display). As far as I can tell, it does not allow you to connect a ADC monitor to a DVI computer (old G4 or a PC).
  • Oops - it's the OLD Cinema Display that has a DVI - the new one is ADC.

    The question still is: Can you just turn around the Apple adapter and do DVI to ADC?

  • The Apple Cinema Display, the 22-inch one, is made by LG in Korea. LG makes some pretty good stuff, but having worked with LCD panels from LG and Philips for a while, I have to say, I am waiting just a bit longer.

    Why?

    Two things are coming that will make a big difference in the quality of the display.

    • Motion-blur compensation electronics to make up for the long change time of an STN dot (try watching a movie with lots of panning across high-contrast scenes on that Apple display and you will see what high mean)
    • Multi-domain wide viewing angle dot technologies, while will give the viewing angle and image quality you find in CRTs today.

    There are other things, like new forms of backlighting that are brighter and longer-lasting, and new ways of designing the dot layout on the glass. Let's not forget front-lighting, which is already available and makes for a much better image.

    Besides all this, LCDs are still expensive and not that great in general. Once LCDs make it into televisions, the production costs will come down as the yields come up (they will have to!), and it may be possible to have a nice, large LCD computer monitor for the price of a large CRT today. It better be possible, anyway.

  • has the nicest flat-panel displays listing the flights I have ever seen. Crisp and clean and no caffeine.

    Anyone travel to Dallas often enough to get the brand names?

  • it's because the edges have all the connectors required to power the millions of individual pixels. When I've seen LCDs naked, they're surrounded on all sides by circuitry. Hard to get rid of that.
  • Flat screens are lame and too expensive, and they'll probably stay that for another few years.

    The tech I'm excited about is that one pioneered by Texas Instruments, (of all players!) The one which uses an array of micro-mirrors that you reflect a light from onto a screen.

    They're already using this for theatrical film releases in some test markets. It looks awesome. (I actually forced myself to sit through a showing of 'Mission to Mars' to preview this system.)

    When I can project my computer screen onto my wall, (and back up my hard drive on to 30gig phosphorescent CDR disks), then I'll finally be happy with the state of affairs in the computer world.

    Probably won't become available for the lowest common denominator, though. Reflected light is too passive. You can't play Black-Ops team and scan a room from a white van like you can with CRT rays. (Paranoia, Paranoia. . .) I expect the dominant tech will end up being something that bathes us with rays, in order to keep the secret government happy!

    -Fantastic Lad

    Gentlemen, we have the technology to rebuild this man, but let's dick around and act like children and not actually do it for another decade, Okay?

  • Why don't you try QING [xs4all.nl] (QING Is Not Geiss) - it's a visualisation plugin for SoundPlay, the kickass backwards-playing sound player for BeOS?
  • Aliasing is less of a problem with the newer video cards. Also, starting with a higher resolution helps. I've seen one 1024x768 LCD run 640x480 and it looked just as good as a CRT, but it was the video card doing the magic.
  • Except that you have to use an Apple product with it...

    Is there any info on using the display with a non-Apple product?

    On the other hand, the question doesn't give us enough info on why the Apple display wouldn't work for him/her?

    The nick is a joke! Really!
  • I would think that putting the USB connection in the same cable (as the video and power) is the added functionality; less cost, less space, less hardware, less clutter. It's usability issue in which people need not figure out where cables go, etc.

    IE, if Apple decided to eliminate cables altogether in their nextgen G4 tower by going wireless (wireless USB, keyboard, mouse, speakers), the added functionality is *zero* clutter, zero confusion, zero space loss.

    The nick is a joke! Really!
  • I like them, but so far I haven't read of any which provide decent graphics quality, say for high frame rates in Quake 3. Picture quality is fine for static images or low refresh rates, as for your ...yawn... everyday business suite of applications.


    --
    Chief Frog Inspector
  • Who builds Apple's monitors?"

    This is a difficult question to answer. Apple assemble's them (or contracts out) from parts and adds custom boards (ColorSync, for example). It's the custom boards and their choice of only using high quality parts that make them stand out. Their color accuracy is astounding, expecially considering that all of the color calibration is done in internal hardware.

  • ADC and DVI are not proprietary. They are part of the upcoming standards for hookup of settop boxes to your Digital TV.
  • Apple offers, pretty much, the best monitors (or one of the best monitors) on the planet. Their flat panels are no exception. You'll need Apple hardware, which I assume you don't have. Sony also has a fine selection of flat panels. Altough slightly unrelated, they even offer a wall mountable 24' TV. I bet you can get a TV card, and hook up your computer to it.
  • Good question, and in fact this is exactly what an old "dual-scan" screen is (two passive matrix screens, one above the other - in this case the main reason was to double the scan rate, since passive screens are pretty slow otherwise). I don't know if it's as feasible to do this with active matrices, since they require more traces to feed the transistors individually. I also dunno whether you could accomplish something similar with four quadrant panels - probably not easily. In any event you'd almost certainly be able to see the joins, as you can with dual-scan screens.

  • > So why don't you just buy a new G4
    > (Cube?), and plug that 22" LCD in?
    > Okay, before you flame me - I know, I know... > They have no floppy drive (!), and the company > spends

    i'm happy that the cube doesn't have floppy drives. i'd be happy enough to buy one if:

    - it was a *dvd-ram* device (dvd-rom would have seemd cool in 1996 or so)
    - it also lacked a hard drive (and used the resulting xtra space for a couple of pci slots)
    - that is, if it was a "info-toaster appliance" instead of a weird attempt at a mini-micro-computer....

    add those features and continue to tout it as a digital video port and apple has something imho...

    --oxo

  • A good video card will scale. (Score:3)

    by BeBoxer ( 14448 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @09:04AM (#720935)
    My laptop has a ATI Rage Mobility in it that can apply what I think is a bi-linear filter to the image before it displays it. The result is that the image does not have any of the horrible aliasing that results with most video cards. The result is a little fuzzy, but rather than annoying it has an almost attractive "magnified" look to it.

    The result is that the lower resolution are 100% usable. To be honest, I don't even know why vendors implemented the old stretching method at all. It looked so crappy as to be useless. I always turned it off, and just had the display use the center 640x480 pixels with a huge black border. At least then I could read things.

    However, I don't know if this solution is available outside of laptops. It is a function of the video chipset, and I don't know if the desktop ATI's implement it. I also don't know how it would work with the VGA connection that most LCD displays use. I wouldn't be suprised if it didn't. But, if you get a laptop with the ATI Rage Mobility, you won't have this problem. However, you might want to check for a BIOS setting to let you turn the stretching off on your laptop. All the one's I've used have had an option for this. The 1:1 mapping isn't great because it's so small, but at least it looks OK.

  • Only one MAJOR problem with LCD displays... (Score:3)

    by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:22AM (#720936)
    As long as you don't switch resolutions they are great, but the instant you do, you have:

    Aliasing.

    And it looks like crap.

    I have a 2 year old laptop with a LCD screen of 1024x768. You switch to a resolution like 640x480 and you have TERRIBLE aliasing problems. The video card scales the 640 pixels up to the same physical width as the 1024, and the 480 up to the same physical height as the 768 instead of just doing a 1:1 scale and having the 640x480 image shrink. Now, since you need 1.6 pixels across and down (1024/640 = 768/480 = 1.6 scaling) and the LCD screen doesn't have fractional LCD's you end up with very bad aliasing artifacts.

    Analog tubes do NOT have this problem. (They have temporal aliasing, but that's another discussion ;-)

    For most uses, you just leave the LCD screen running at max (highest) resolution and it's not an issue. But playing, or developing games, on a LCD, and unfortunately the problem shows up.

    I love the cleaner and sharper look of the LCD screen. It seems to be easier on the eyes. I would switch over to LCD screens in a second, if this is non-issue nowadays.

    Have "modern" LCD screens fixed this scaling problem?

    Cheers

    --
    "Those who fail to learn from the past, are condemned to repeat it" - paraphrasing George Santayana

  • SGI now works with other video cards (Score:3)

    by simbloke ( 70275 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @07:45AM (#720937) Homepage
    The 1600SW is fantastic but the Number Nine card could be better (and doesn't have a driver in XFree86 4). They now supply a MultiLink adapter [sgi.com] which allows the monitor to accept many types of video input.

  • Dell 1600 X 1200 screen on a laptop? (Score:3)

    by Otus ( 72660 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:52AM (#720938) Journal
    How is it that Dell has a laptop [dell.com] with 15" 1600 X 1200 resolution (native), but you can't find one for a desktop computer? You'd think whoever builds their screens (Quanta? not sure) would be able to market that tech elsewhere. Of course, I'd like to see that pixel density on a 20" screen...

  • Wait (Score:3)

    by thesenator ( 125837 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:37AM (#720939) Homepage
    This is the kind of think I would advise waiting on. You can use this argument for anything(wait 5 more months and you can get a faster computer for the same price) but when looking at getting a flat screen monitor it would probably be prudent to wait for the technology to further develop. If you are looking for a flat screen with the same quality as a nice CRT then you should wait a while. CRTs have been around forever and have had a really long time to develop. Buying a flatscreen now could be a waste of money because Im sure new better technology will come around tomorrow. Then again... they look cool so maybe you should get one now. Chicks dig them.

  • Hot Off of the Press... (Score:3)

    by Lostman ( 172654 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @07:35AM (#720940)
    Because of rising demand for high quality hangable high resolution imaging, the new company known as ArtistInc has been formed.

    ArtistInc has some very major selling points in their special project code-named Painting. It has an infinite maximum resolution, with the average being 6 feet wide by 4 feet long. When asked about Flicker the CEO demonstrated the project in front of a large group -- one person their commented that "It looked like it was real and right in front of my face."

    One possible problem with this new technology is that it is incompatible with turpentine.

  • Re:The SGI FlatPanel 1600SW (Score:4)

    by Cyrano de Maniac ( 60961 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @10:22AM (#720941)

    (Someone please mod this information up as it's fairly important to combat the misinformation raised in the extended posting.)

    The SGI 1600SW is definitely still sold an supported and still winning awards. With the fairly new MultiLink Adapter [sgi.com] it is no longer necessary to have special video cards -- absolutely any VGA signal capable of doing 60 Hz refresh can drive the screen.

    Keep in mind however that a standard VGA signal will go through an analog stage so you lose some of the theoretically possible crispness of pure digital. To keep pure digital you would indeed need one of the supported digital cards.

    Here's a set of questions and answers [sgi.com] about the 1600SW and the MultiLink Adapter.

    I just wish I had one on my desk!

  • Re:Wrong. (Score:4)

    by gig ( 78408 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @10:06AM (#720942)
    I think I read that both ATI and Nvidia (sp?) are going to make ADC versions of their cards. This is the kind of thing that gets thrown out there and sometimes there's no follow-up, although the ATI one is a no-brainer since they make the cards that Apple ships right now.

    FWIW, the Cinema Display is the biggest on the market, and it has a truly stunning image. Very, very high contrast. You've got to actually look at these things ... if you're dropping $3000-$4000, it's worth doing an audition. Maybe you can still find one with the plain DVI connector as well, in one of the stores that carry them, although the adapter is only $39 or so, which is only an extra 1% on top, and if the ADC thing catches on in the next couple of years, you might be glad you have both on your display. It is also the best-looking display I've personally seen so far, and the way the picture-frame foot works is really nice ... the thing just sort of glides to new angles as you gently push or pull on the top of the display.

  • Re:Samsung (Score:4)

    by cybaea ( 79975 ) <<moc.aeabyc> <ta> <enalla>> on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:08AM (#720943) Homepage Journal

    Yes, I like the Samsung SyncMaster 770TFT [samsungelectronics.com] as well (and am using it now!), but the poster asked for;

    • 1600×1200 resolution; the Samsung does 1280×1024.
    • 20" diagonal; the Samsung is 17".
    • Digital input; the Samsung has standard SVGA cables.
    • Square pixels; YES! The Samsung has it.

    So it doesn't really fit the bill, does it?

    I think the poster need the SyncMaster 1100p+ [samsungelectronics.com]. It has

    • 21"(20.0" viewable)
    • 0.21mm(H) dot pitch
    • 1800x1440@75Hz Maximum Resolution
    • Recommended Mode 1600 x 1200 / 85Hz

    but it is still a standard 15-pin connector. A USB option is apparently available, but I'm guessing (does anybody know?) that it involves a converter :-)

    Unfortunately I have no experiences with this monitor, but if somebody would lend me a sample.....

  • WHY can't they put two LCD screens side-by-side?? (Score:4)

    by bill_kress ( 99356 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @07:50AM (#720944)
    This has been bugging me for years now.

    Everyone knows that the reason LCD screens are expensive is that they have to be made as a single piece, and the larger the piece the more likely that a few pixels are out causing them to have to throw the whole mess away.

    What on earth is stopping them from producing a bunch of those little gameboy color screens, or maybe even something cheaper, and placing them side-by side??

    You would be able to have a TV the size of your whole living room wall where you could place various channels, perhaps even nature settings. Add a touch sensor and you could even have the worlds coolest (and largest) white board.

    And the price should be relativly trivial--probably under $1000/wall for the LCDs, a bit more for the control hardware.

    If something like this was available, I would even forgive a little bit of a line or border where two LCDs meet (Hell, putting 4 TVs side-by-side to show one ballgame looks pretty cool, this would be MUCH better than that).

    Anyway, anyone out there know why?

  • Re:WHY can't they put two LCD screens side-by-side (Score:4)

    by tetrad ( 131849 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:06AM (#720945)
    WHY can't they put two LCD screens side-by-side??

    Good question, and in fact, it's been done [massmultiples.com]. And discussed in this slashdot article. [slashdot.org] It's not exactly what you describe, and costs well more than $1000/wall, but it's in the right direction.

  • Warning! Monty Python follows! (Score:4)

    by 11223 ( 201561 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @07:39AM (#720946)
    What is your name?

    My name is 11223.

    And what is your quest?

    I seek the holy grail of flat-panel technology!

    And what is the ModeLine of an ATI Rage Fury Pro with DVI connector neccessary to hook up to an Apple Cinema Display?

    Uhh.. uhh... I don't know... Aieeee!

  • Ooh, interesting response! (Score:4)

    by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear@@@pacbell...net> on Monday October 09, 2000 @12:12PM (#720947) Homepage
    I see what you mean, then.

    USB is a 4 wire standard; 2 for power/ground and 2 for signal. All you add to the ADC then would be the 2 signal wires, assuming that there is hardware on the monitor end and the PC end to handle the power conversion (as opposed to having 2 sets of power on the cable, though stupid engineering could very well have allowed for that as well). This is speculation on my part.

    So you can conceivably get rid of the wiring and shielding necessary for the power, if it rides along the same line as the monitor's power lines.

    You don't get an argument that it will take more engineering to get the wires, at different clocks, shielded, flexible, and working. On the other hand a new solution was needed for next generation displays, at least as defined by VESA, due to the fact that clock/refresh was increasing, display size/resolution was increasing, and the old VGA cables could not handle the bandwidth, limited at 150MHz, to the 2GHz limit of the newer interface.

    See <a href="http://www.vesa.org/news81798.html">this page</a> for more info.

    Your second point is also noted; but it is definitely an engineering solution, and not one that is insurmountable. I suspect Apple's future plan is to integrate Firewire as well into the cable, and produce a product with only one cable out the back:

    ADC.

    Speakers would migrate to USB, which collapses into the ADC, while video, firewire, and power are also provided by the ADC(Advanced Display Connector, if it's adopted outside of Apple, I would hope). Networking, of course, would be wireless.

    And it isn't the cable that your saving money on; it's the ports and complexity and chipsets on the motherboard that get condensed. Say future PCI/AGP chipsets collect USB and FireWire functionality onto them. Instead of 3 or 4 chips, you now have 1 chip running all four functions. Instead of 3 ports, you now have one. Engineering wise, this makes placement and layout easier, I think, as well as heat disippation and traces simpler.

    This has nothing to do with the stupidity of the user, though stupid people definitely benefit/gain from this arrangement. It is a convenience thing too. One less cable to package and ship. One less cable to test and try. One less cable to produce and buy. A $2 cable, a $1 in chips, $3 in ports, across a million machines => $6 million not spent. And since Apple seems to be shipping in the millions a year, I don't think saving $10-20 million is something one can laugh at easily...

    Considering that's 250 engineers for a year of about $80k, it would be worth it if it cost 5 engineers 3 years of development time to design/implement this, at $100k salaries. One year of sales, if it's even close to $6mil saved, is enough to warrant the cost/difficulty in implementation.

    My numbers are pure guesswork and rough numbers, nothing scientific. But on cost analysis, it isn't *outrageous* for Apple to implement something like this...

    On the user end, it really is 2 less cables: Instead of video, power, and USB, it is only ADC.

    So it may not be such a big deal on our end...

    The nick is a joke! Really!

  • The SGI FlatPanel 1600SW (Score:5)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09, 2000 @08:10AM (#720948)
    Well, I have a SGI FlatPanel 1600SW. This is, by far, the best LCD monitor I could find today--and that includes LCDs by Apple.

    With a Number Nine Rev 4-FP (Do they make these anymore?) 1600x1024 @ 32-bit color really kicks ass in X. What I like most is that it's unusually crisp and very clear... I can read small text from a few feet away.

    People have already mentioned that X 4.0 hasn't had the Number Nine drivers ported over, but that's trivial--I know they are working on this.

    In any case, the SW-1600 is unbeatable. They just had a deal over at sgi.com where they were selling a kind of "G3"-looking Flatpanel for something like $US 1,699. It normally sells for $3,000 and I think they throw in a card too, a 16 MB Formac if you have a Mac, or a 32 MB Oxygen VX1-1600SW if you have a PC (Oxygen VX1-1600SW is not supported under X, unfortunately, not even with Xig's (www.xig.com) Oxygen VX1 driver.) But so what? Sell it (Value=$400) and get a Number Nine Revolution 4-FP instead.

    So, that's about a 3,500 value which they are selling for 1,699. And no, I don't work for SGI, it's just that I think that this FlatPanel LCD is the best. (And believe me, I've looked.)

    For price versus quality, I think this deal is quite good--if the deal is still there. (http://www.sgi.com/flatpanel).

    Even so, I would shell out $5000 for this monitor, because I can't live with anything else anymore. I know most people don't have the money for this, but apparently the poster of this story does.

    Hope this helps.

  • Plasma Display (Score:5)

    by Ribo99 ( 71160 ) on Monday October 09, 2000 @07:45AM (#720949) Homepage Journal
    My roommate works at Panasonic [panasonic.com] and brought home one of their Plasma Displays [panasonic.com]. There's nothing quite as cool as playing Quake 3 Arena on a 42" 16x9 aspect screen. :)
    For our Y2K party we set it up to use Ryan Geiss' Winamp Plugin [geisswerks.com] as a nice conversion piece.

    Of course it costs around $13999.95... :)

    ---

Slashdot Top Deals

"Call immediately. Time is running out. We both need to do something monstrous before we die." -- Message from Ralph Steadman to Hunter Thompson

Close