On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:52:54 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Richard Russell wrote:
On Aug 23, 1:00 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Richard Russell wrote:
It's worthy of note that one of the most
common PC display settings (1024 x 768 x 75 Hz) has a line-timebase
frequency of exactly 60 kHz!
Or would have if we still had CRT monitors:

I still have a CRT monitor, and see no reason to replace it until it
fails. If I run it at 1024 x 768 x 75Hz all the MSF clocks in the
vicinity fail to receive any data, so in practice I run it at 85 Hz.

I worked out that a lower power consumption LCD would pay for itself in
saved power in less than 2 years, not give me a headache with flicker
and not expose me to strong magnetic UV or low energy gamma radiation,
and wouldnt go wonky with a pair of puodspeakers each side.

A bit of gamma radiation is Good For You ;-)

It was as they say a no brainer, especially as it liberated a few more
inches of precious desktpop.

That's the main reason for me to abandon CRT monitors. I still prefer
a good CRT over an LCD.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?