[Pc_Support] 17" LCDs drop under $200 for DVI, 12ms refresh, 1280x1024, etc...

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 09:10 -0500, Damien McKenna wrote:
> Nice price.
> Personally I wish that 17" LCDs could do a 4:3 resolution, e.g.
> 1280x960, rather than throwing off the proportions.  Anyone know why
> they do this anyway?

Legacy Compatibility with vendors who wanted to fill the framebuffer
perfectly.

The 1280x1024 mode was added because it filled a perfect 2.5MB at 16-
bit.  Same deal with Sun 1152x900 instead of the 4:3 1152x864 into 1MB
at 8-bit, people were filling framebuffers as much as they could.

Besides, 1280x960 can always be shown on a 1280x1024, but not vice-
versa.  Hence the decision of today's LCD panels.

If you really don't like it, spend $500 for a 1600x1200 LCD.  That way
it can do lower-res 800x600 perfectly (a quad pixel for each).

-- 
Bryan J. Smith                                  b.j.smith at ieee.org 
---------------------------------------------------------------- 
Community software is all about choice, choice of technology.
Unfortunately, too many Linux advocates port over the so-called
"choice" from the commercial software world, brand name marketing.
The result is false assumptions, failure to focus on the real
technical similarities, but loyalty to blind vendor alignments.