 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/11/2015 03:48 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 11/2/2015 2:46 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> Heh, yeah. I think the whole "burn your monitor" thing is just people
>> wanting to cover their butt; I've never heard of anybody actually
>> breaking a monitor this way. Sometimes you get some rather weird video.
>> Sometimes the CRT makes that weird sound. (Pro-tip: You shouldn't be
>> able to *hear* what your CRT is doing!) But mostly you just get a black
>> screen.
>
>
> Please sir, please sir. I've seen it.
You've seen it?
You've seen a ship with black sails, that's crewed by the damned, and
captained by a map SO EVIL that Hell itself spat him back out?
No, wait, wrong file...
You've seen a monitor break because somebody drove it with the wrong
scanrate?
> When I worked on the rigs. The control room operators would keep the
> same screens on their monitors 24 hours a day. After a few years you
> could see the ghost images burnt into the screens.
I've seen a ghost image burned into the screen on an iMac. Which is
weird, because I didn't think LCDs even *do* that! o_O
Now here's a question: Why does printing white text shift the
corresponding scanlines left slightly?
> As for the high pitch whine. That generally is the fly back transformer.
> I agree you should not be able to hear it but I never had a monitor fail
> because of it. It is not like an incandescent light bulb where that is a
> sign it will fail soon. (For variable values of soon. ;-) )
I remember the day I walked into one of the classrooms, and three people
were transfixed by a lightbulb. And I'm guys "guys, WTF? Haven't you
seen a light before?" And they were like "no, LISTEN..."
And it was making a bizarre sound like some kind of synthesizer. And we
stood and watched it for maybe a minute, and then it just turned itself
off...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/2/2015 4:07 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 02/11/2015 03:48 PM, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>
>> Please sir, please sir. I've seen it.
>
> You've seen it?
>
No, I've just proved that I don't read properly. <Blush>
> You've seen a ship with black sails, that's crewed by the damned, and
> captained by a map SO EVIL that Hell itself spat him back out?
>
Seen it! I crewed it. And the stories are wrong. We were slandered by
those damn Geeks. ;-)
> No, wait, wrong file...
>
> You've seen a monitor break because somebody drove it with the wrong
> scanrate?
>
In a way. The frequency should have been 60 Hz instead of 50 Hz. The 220
Vac instead of 110 Vac might have been a factor as well. ;-)
>> When I worked on the rigs. The control room operators would keep the
>> same screens on their monitors 24 hours a day. After a few years you
>> could see the ghost images burnt into the screens.
>
> I've seen a ghost image burned into the screen on an iMac. Which is
> weird, because I didn't think LCDs even *do* that! o_O
>
I've not seen that myself but I've heard others say it.
> Now here's a question: Why does printing white text shift the
> corresponding scanlines left slightly?
>
I don't know. Why does printing white text shift the corresponding
scanlines left slightly?
Boom! Boom! ;-)
>> As for the high pitch whine. That generally is the fly back transformer.
>> I agree you should not be able to hear it but I never had a monitor fail
>> because of it. It is not like an incandescent light bulb where that is a
>> sign it will fail soon. (For variable values of soon. ;-) )
>
> I remember the day I walked into one of the classrooms, and three people
> were transfixed by a lightbulb. And I'm guys "guys, WTF? Haven't you
> seen a light before?" And they were like "no, LISTEN..."
>
> And it was making a bizarre sound like some kind of synthesizer. And we
> stood and watched it for maybe a minute, and then it just turned itself
> off...
Turned off or blew?
I just tried googling it and did not find an answer. Most of the
articles were about lamps on dimmer circuits. When I have heard a light
bulb singing. It was before dimmers were common.
Invariably the bulb would blow within a week or so.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:46:55 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Also, less is an EXTREMELY ANNOYING "feature": When you exit it, the
> screen reverts to what was there before, so you can't copy out any
> information that was in the file. As if not being able to copy and paste
> text just because it's a terminal wasn't bad enough...
less -X avoids that.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/11/2015 05:00 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:46:55 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> Also, less is an EXTREMELY ANNOYING "feature": When you exit it, the
>> screen reverts to what was there before, so you can't copy out any
>> information that was in the file. As if not being able to copy and paste
>> text just because it's a terminal wasn't bad enough...
>
> less -X avoids that.
OK, I gotta try that tomorrow...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> When I worked on the rigs. The control room operators would keep the
>> same screens on their monitors 24 hours a day. After a few years you
>> could see the ghost images burnt into the screens.
Someone had installed plasma screens above every gate in Munich airport
when I used to go there a lot. When a flight was not departing it just
showed a default static "Lufthansa" logo. As you can imagine all the
screens ended up with a horrible ghost image on them. Plasma screens are
possibly the worst for burn-in.
> I've seen a ghost image burned into the screen on an iMac. Which is
> weird, because I didn't think LCDs even *do* that! o_O
They will easily burn if the time-average voltage across the pixel is
not zero volts (they switch between + and - every frame). Obviously
exactly zero volts is impossible, but the further away from zero you are
the faster you will burn in that pixel. So it depends on the quality of
your driver electronics.
If you're destructively-minded you may have realised that if you were to
display black one frame and white the next frame, then repeat, this will
create a massive non-zero average voltage on the pixel. And yes this
will cause damage eventually. Note that screens don't normally do all
pixels with the same polarity, it might do one column +, one column -
(or row by row, or in a checkerboard pattern), then flip for the next
frame. That's what this page is meant to figure out, assuming your
monitor electronics are non-ideal then the pattern that matches will
flicker slightly:
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/inversion.php
> Now here's a question: Why does printing white text shift the
> corresponding scanlines left slightly?
On a CRT? I remember that if you drew a white rectangle around the edge
of the screen, then flipped the inside between black and white and shape
of the screen would change massively. I believe it's because the extra
current needed to draw all the "white" slightly reduces the voltage from
the PSU which is also used to control the timing/geometry, so the shape
of the picture will change based on the average brightness of the image.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/11/2015 08:06 AM, scott wrote:
> Plasma screens are possibly the worst for burn-in.
Yeah, so I heard. ;-)
>> I've seen a ghost image burned into the screen on an iMac. Which is
>> weird, because I didn't think LCDs even *do* that! o_O
>
> They will easily burn if the time-average voltage across the pixel is
> not zero volts (they switch between + and - every frame). Obviously
> exactly zero volts is impossible, but the further away from zero you are
> the faster you will burn in that pixel. So it depends on the quality of
> your driver electronics.
Huh. And here I was assuming that Apple would have used only the most
over-priced hardware components they could source...
...apparently it's only the *best looking* hardware. :-P
>> Now here's a question: Why does printing white text shift the
>> corresponding scanlines left slightly?
>
> On a CRT? I remember that if you drew a white rectangle around the edge
> of the screen, then flipped the inside between black and white and shape
> of the screen would change massively. I believe it's because the extra
> current needed to draw all the "white" slightly reduces the voltage from
> the PSU which is also used to control the timing/geometry, so the shape
> of the picture will change based on the average brightness of the image.
I just remember spending many days (and nights!) in front of a giant
Grundig CRT driven by my dad's Commodore 64. If you changed the text
from the default light blue on a dark blue background to being pure
white, the display got seriously bent.
While we're on the subject, what causes the weird diagonal lines that
all RF-modulated signals have?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Nov 2015 17:53:33 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Huh. And here I was assuming that Apple would have used only the most
> over-priced hardware components they could source...
>
> ...apparently it's only the *best looking* hardware. :-P
The basic rule of thumb is to buy the least expensive component that meets
the specifications - assuming the specifications are properly, erm,
specified. ;)
That can cause you to run into situations like this:
http://www.staingate.org/
Looks like Apple is responding appropriately to it, though.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Huh. And here I was assuming that Apple would have used only the most
> over-priced hardware components they could source...
As Jim said they will put *a lot* of effort in to sourcing the absolute
lowest price parts they can find that will "work". I suspect either
there was a fault with the display you saw, or they had literally shown
the same image for months on end. IIRC the spec we had for Nokia was
something along the lines of showing a big checkerboard pattern for 24
hours, then switching to a white/black screen and no checkerboard
pattern should be visible after 5 seconds. During development we'd quite
often have screens that failed this test, but then the panel and
electronics often weren't optimised at that stage.
> I just remember spending many days (and nights!) in front of a giant
> Grundig CRT driven by my dad's Commodore 64. If you changed the text
> from the default light blue on a dark blue background to being pure
> white, the display got seriously bent.
Yes, it's PSU not being perfect.
> While we're on the subject, what causes the weird diagonal lines that
> all RF-modulated signals have?
Non-perfect electronics :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2015-11-03 12:53, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
> Huh. And here I was assuming that
Stop doing that!
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/4/2015 2:05 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2015-11-03 12:53, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
>> Huh. And here I was assuming that
>
> Stop doing that!
>
I can't stop giggling. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
