HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:03:56 +0000, Scooby wrote:

Wes, it amazes me how you continue to argue your points without actually
doing the research that was suggested. So, here is the idea explained...

And it amazes me how stupid people in this group are. He said you couldn't
buy a 19" monitor capable of 1600x1200 resolution for under $500. I showed
him many. Anyone can verify this by simply going to yahoo shopping and
typing in "1600x1200" and viewing the results. Now he admits a 19"
monitor can display a resolution of 1600x1200, he's just saying you can't
find one for under $500. Wrong again.

Without any detailed specs on the monitor you mentioned, it is a fair
assumption that this monitor probably displays 72 dpi.

In what mode? Horizontal, or vertical dpi? And why do you think 72dpi
is a fair assumption? Why do you think you never see a dpi specs for
montors? If you want the dpi, for both vertical and horizontal, simply
divide the resolution numbers for the resolution you are using. 1600/width
or 1200/height. The resolution Is determined by the number of scan lines
(1200 for 1600x1200), and the number of times the gun fires to light a
phosphur during each scan line. That's 1600 using a resolution of
1600x1200. Now running at 95Hz, this process happens about 1.5 times per
second. That's about 1850 scan lines with the gun firing 1600 times
perscan line. Pretty fast IOW's. Not many years ago they didn't have the
hardware capabilty of this. Today it's easy, and cheap. If you really want
to know how many times the gun can fire on a scanline, which is waht
all this boils down to, you need to calculate it using the
horizontical and vertical speeds. I'll leave that up to you. The H is
200MHz. V is whatevr you want up to 95H I believe (non interlaced). So
perhaps it's you two that need to do some current research.

A 19" monitor
would be about 15.2" (w) x 11.4" (h). Actually less, because of
viewable area, but we'll use the higher numbers for argument sake.
Assuming a dpi of 72, you get 15.2x72 = 1094.4 and 11.4x72 = 820.8 for a
max resolution of about 1094x820. Assuming a dpi of 96 would give a max
resolution of about 1459x1094 (which is pretty close to what Jeff had
suggested).

And all this is meaningless since you don't know anything about the
contruction of the CRT I'm using.

There is a big difference between native resolution and max resolution
that a monitor can display. For example, look at the HDTV's that have a
native resolution of 720 or 768 lines, but advertise that they can do
1080i. Same idea.

Hmmm... I consider native resolutions as ones that are built into the
hardware of the monitor as presets. But again, there could a native indian
from NA, and another from India.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

"Wes Newell" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 05:54:35 -0800, zafdor wrote:

Jeff,
Please don't feed the trolls!

It would be better if he didn't even post. About everything he write is
BS. And you people suck it up like a milkshake.:-)



--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php


Look in the mirror when you say that, Wes.

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

Wes Newell ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
You're about a hard headed ignorant sob aren't you. No, I don't have it
backwards. You do.

We're both right.

After more research, they started out with "PowerNow!" for all processors
and changed to "Cool'n'Quiet" for *desktop* processors, but stayed at
"PowerNow!" for mobile.

So, both are current terms. Weird, but that's how the AMD site uses
them.

Maybe not in the world you live in, but it was sure available to everyone
else. It was a socket A (462) cpu. I was wrong though, Powernow was
actually introduced in the K6-2 and was formerly called Gemini. It carried
over into the K7 line of cpu's as Powernow.

No, you were right in the first place about this. The K6-2 couldn't
switch on the fly, and the K7 couldn't reliably. It wasn't until the
Athlon 4 Mobile (a *very* short-lived chip...no wonder I hadn't heard
of if) that this was available in reality.

Now why the hell do you think it's called powernow_k8?

For the same reason the older Intel gigabit ethernet driver on Linux
is called e100. Because the driver works with both new and old hardware,
and might simulate some of it through the motherboard (as opposed to the
CPU).

But, despite all this, it *still* wasn't until 2003 that AMD introduced
on-chip, no driver-required power reduction capabilities in the Athlon
64 line...which is the same technology that Intel just started using and
is bragging about (and which the OP was talking about).

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/BabyBlues/OnTheRemote.gif

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

Wes Newell ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
And it amazes me how stupid people in this group are. He said you couldn't
buy a 19" monitor capable of 1600x1200 resolution for under $500.

And, you can't.

I showed
him many. Anyone can verify this by simply going to yahoo shopping and
typing in "1600x1200" and viewing the results. Now he admits a 19"
monitor can display a resolution of 1600x1200, he's just saying you can't
find one for under $500.

And, this is exactly the same thing you said above, and what I've said
all along. To truly resolve 1600x1200 on a 19" screen, you need some
really good technology in the build, and you won't find that in a
sub-$500 monitor.

Without any detailed specs on the monitor you mentioned, it is a fair
assumption that this monitor probably displays 72 dpi.

In what mode? Horizontal, or vertical dpi? And why do you think 72dpi
is a fair assumption? Why do you think you never see a dpi specs for
montors? If you want the dpi, for both vertical and horizontal, simply
divide the resolution numbers for the resolution you are using.

Or, you can just read the spec that says "0.26mm dot pitch". Take the
14.48 x 10.86" display screen (that's what the 18.1" diagonal viewing
area works out to) and convert to metric: 367.792 x 275.844mm. Divide
by the dot pitch of one dot per 0.26mm and you get 1414.58 x 1060.94 dots.

That's all there are available...1414x1061 pixels. Now, it's up to you
to figure out how the manufacturer crams 1600 pixels into 1414 and 1200
pixels into 1061.

And all this is meaningless since you don't know anything about the
contruction of the CRT I'm using.

We don't need to, because we know that a $100 19" monitor doesn't have
what it takes to display a full 1600x1200. And, if you provide us with
the model number, we'll prove it.

--
Jeff Rife | "Man, I thought Ultimate Robot Fighting was real,
| like pro wrestling, but it turns out it's fixed,
| like boxing."
| -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 19:47:34 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:

Wes Newell ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
You're about a hard headed ignorant sob aren't you. No, I don't have it
backwards. You do.

We're both right.

If you want to think so, ok.:-)

But, despite all this, it *still* wasn't until 2003 that AMD introduced
on-chip, no driver-required power reduction capabilities in the Athlon
64 line...which is the same technology that Intel just started using and
is bragging about (and which the OP was talking about).

Nope, youre wrong here again. AMD still hasn't introduced a CPU that will
do power reduction without a driver, unless it's been in the last month or
so. Well, Intel isn't bragging about it. They didn't even tell anyone
about it for one reason. They only put it in to keep their lousy cpu's
from burning up under constant heavy load. Once it got out, I don't know
how they tried to spin it. Probably call it a new feature. Maybe they
already did that. I don't know. After reading about how some poor suckers
discovered this some time back I haven't kept up with Intel. maybe their
new 65nm process will help. I know there's talk about killing netburst (P4
technology) because it sucks. Check the specs on the Intel cpu's if you
want to see cpu's that really consume power.:-)

ROFLMAO
NO Intel CPU Throttle Down

Intel CPU Throttle Down is a a feature provided by Intel in
protecting their CPU's from heat damage. When a CPU is not
adequately cooled and runs too hot, Throttle Down slows down
the clock rate on the CPU to avoid overheating and further damage.
The protection is good, although it means your system is not
operating at the speed purchased. Patent Pending Cooling in the
Round TM, assures the Intel CPU will run at the speed specified for
optimal performa

How funny. Well, I guess this comapny can make some money on it selling
special cpu coolers. Yep, that's just what I want a $1000 CPU that only
runs at half speed when you try and use it under load.:-)

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

Jeff and Scooby,
You efforts are nobel, but leave the troll alone and he'll stop.
Trolls are ignorant and want to stay that way. They get their jollies
by keeping threads like this alive. Do you notice when you state facts
proving him wrong, his response is to call you stupid? This troll
seems to be emamoured with the phrase 'you're wrong again', followed up
by his senseless ramblings.

I just did a quick search on the troll in this NG. You see in 12/05
his MythTV box was $600, the troll got a 101 post thread on this one.
Fast forward two months and now the trolls box is $400. I can't wait
until May, it should be free by then!

Go back under your bridge troll!

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 04:38:54 -0800, zafdor wrote:

Jeff and Scooby,
You efforts are nobel,

I glad you think passing false info is nobel.


Do you notice when you state facts proving him wrong, his response is to
call you stupid?

I haven't seen any facts proving me wrong. But I posted several proving
Jeff and Scooby both wrong.

This troll seems to be emamoured with the phrase 'you're wrong again',

And there's a reason for that. Why I say it. You damn well pretty much
count on the fact that it's correct.

I just did a quick search on the troll in this NG. You see in 12/05 his
MythTV box was $600, the troll got a 101 post thread on this one. Fast
forward two months and now the trolls box is $400. I can't wait until
May, it should be free by then!

You see, you can't understand anything. The $600 price was for a standard
set of hardware and HD at the time. The $400 is bare minimum for a 2
2 tuner system. And I can build one for that. Well, if you want one,
you'll probably have to have someone build it for you. You don't sound
capable of doing it yourself.

Go back under your bridge troll!

Your mother ran me out when I ran out of quarters.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

Wes Newell ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
Or, you can just read the spec that says "0.26mm dot pitch". Take the
14.48 x 10.86" display screen (that's what the 18.1" diagonal viewing
area works out to) and convert to metric: 367.792 x 275.844mm. Divide
by the dot pitch of one dot per 0.26mm and you get 1414.58 x 1060.94 dots.

If you want to do it that way, why not take the real .21mm dot pitch that
this $149 monitor has.

The link you posted was to a monitor with a .26mm dot pitch.

You know, the one you keep deleting the specs on
every time I post it. An AOC 9GLR.

Well, if you had ever posted that you owned this monitor before, then
maybe I'd agree here, but you haven't.

So, now we have a monitor that *might* be able to fully resolve 1600x1200
instead of one that absolutely cannot. So, check it out with a
resolution chart:

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~wes...3-reschart.pdf

Display it at 100% and see what you can see.

--
Jeff Rife | copy protection: n. A class of methods for
| preventing incompetent pirates from stealing
| software and legitimate customers from using it.
| Considered silly.
| -- Jargon File version 4.4.6

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:35:58 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:

Wes Newell ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
Or, you can just read the spec that says "0.26mm dot pitch". Take the
14.48 x 10.86" display screen (that's what the 18.1" diagonal viewing
area works out to) and convert to metric: 367.792 x 275.844mm. Divide
by the dot pitch of one dot per 0.26mm and you get 1414.58 x 1060.94 dots.

If you want to do it that way, why not take the real .21mm dot pitch that
this $149 monitor has.

The link you posted was to a monitor with a .26mm dot pitch.

Well, although I probably should have, I didn't check the specs on it
before posting it. It was just the first and cheapest one I came across.
So if you'd had said you couldn't buy one for under $100 Reatail price you
might have been correct, but $500 was just rediculous.

You know, the one you keep deleting the specs on
every time I post it. An AOC 9GLR.

Well, if you had ever posted that you owned this monitor before, then
maybe I'd agree here, but you haven't.

I don't own either of them.:-)

So, now we have a monitor that *might* be able to fully resolve
1600x1200 instead of one that absolutely cannot. So, check it out with
a resolution chart:

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~wes...3-reschart.pdf

Display it at 100% and see what you can see.

I'll have to set up something to move the file over to the other machine.
Knoppmyth doesn't even install the base command line ftp client, but I
really don't see the point. Even running 1024x768 on this machine I see
all vertically, and only have to go to 94% to get 16:9 hor. So I have no
doubts about seeing it all at 100% on the the one running 1600x1200.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

HDTV MythTV and HD Tivo series 3 compared.
 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 23:54:47 +0000, Wes Newell wrote:

I'll have to set up something to move the file over to the other machine.
Knoppmyth doesn't even install the base command line ftp client, but I
really don't see the point. Even running 1024x768 on this machine I see
all vertically, and only have to go to 94% to get 16:9 hor. So I have no
doubts about seeing it all at 100% on the the one running 1600x1200.

Now here's something real strange. On this machine If I change resoution
to whats supposed to be 1280x1024 and load the chart and set it to fit in
window, it goes to 103%. IOW's the whole chart, including all the black
is well within the reader and no scroll bars. So what does that mean? Does
that mean I'm really in a 1600x1200, or 2048xwhatever mode? I didn't pay
much attention to the icons, but they looked real small. So small I
couldn't really read them. That's why I use 1024 mode I guess, but there's
something going on here as 1280 shouldn't make that much difference. In
fact I have a gkrellm stuck on the right lower side of the 1024 screen and
it moves to almost the center of the new screen telling me that the disply
is going into some mode way higher than 1280x1024. Got an answer for this
one anyone?



--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php