DVCS (was Re: Moving to D)

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Sunday 16 January 2011 23:17:22 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "retard" <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:ih0b1t$g2g$3 at digitalmars.com...
> 
> > For example used 17" TFTs cost less than $40.
> 
> Continuing to use my 21" CRT costs me nothing.
> 
> > Even the prices aren't very competitive. I only remember that all refresh
> > rates below 85 Hz caused me headache and eye fatigue. You can't use the
> > max resolution @ 60 Hz for very long.
> 
> I run mine no lower than 85 Hz. It's about 100Hz at the moment.

I've heard that the eye fatigue at 60 Hz is because it matches electricity for 
the light bulbs in the room, so then the flickering of the light bulbs and the 
screen match. Keeping it above 60 Hz avoids the problem. 100Hz is obviously well 
above that.

> And I never need to run it at the max rez for long. It's just nice to be
> able to bump it up now and then when I want to. Then it goes back down. And
> yet people feel the need to bitch about me liking that ability.

You can use whatever you want for all I care. It's your computer, your money, 
and your time. I just don't understand what the point of messing with your 
resolution is. I've always just set it at the highest possible level that I can. 
I've currently got 1920 x 1200 on a 24" monitor, but it wouldn't hurt my 
feelings any to get a higher resolution. I probably won't, simply because I'm 
more interested in getting a second monitor than a higher resolution, and I 
don't want to fork out for two monitors to get a dual monitor setup (since I 
want both monitors to be the same size) when I already have a perfectly good 
monitor, but I'd still like a higher resolution.

So, the fact that you have and want a CRT and actually want the ability to 
adjust the resolution baffles me, but I see no reason to try and correct you or 
complain about it.

- Jonathan M Davis