Path: seunet!news2.swip.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!mimuw.edu.pl!news.nask.org.pl!fuw.edu.pl!wariat.org!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!news.ecn.bgu.edu!news.moneng.mei.
From: [email protected] (Dawn Owens-Nicholson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video
Subject: Re: High quality 17" monitors: Nokia vs. Sony vs. Mitsubishi
Date: 18 Mar 1995 07:00:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uxh.cso.uiuc.edu

Jeffrey J. Kosowsky asked:
>I am interested in buying a high quality 17" monitor capable of
>displaying 1280x1024 at >70Hz.  The Nokia 447X, Sony 17se1 &
>Mitsubishi 17TX all appear to be highly recommended for their quality,
>resolution and quality. They all are similarly priced in the 1000
>price range. Do any of you readers have any suggestions or insight in
>how to choose among these 3 monitors?  Any suggestions would be much
>welcomed.

David S. Day replied:
>I suggest you add the Idek Illyama to your list for consideration.
>I just took delivery of one yesterday and am quite pleased.
>17"
>1280X1024 @ 80Hz
>26 dot pitch
>3yr waranty
>$799
>I spent $65 extra to get guaranteed 48 hr replacement over the 3 yrs.

The September 27, 1994 PC Magazine reviews all these monitors except
the Mitsubishi 17TX (the PC Magazine review talks about the Mitsubishi
17FS though).  The editors' pick was the Nokia Multigraph 447X.  The
Sony 17se offered "outstanding image quality" and earned an honorable
mention.  The Nokia and Sony (among others reviewed in this article)
let the owner of a non-Energy Star PC take advantage of power saving
by using a screen blanking utility.

Personally, I'm picking the Nokia because:
* I like the Trinitron tube (which means either the Nokia or the Sony,
using only the choices offered above)

* I don't mind spending a little more for the monitor (since it's
going to get so much use)

I don't like the Nokia because:
* It offers 1600x1200 non-interlace abilities.  If I want to go to
that high a resolution, I'll look into getting a monitor where I
could actually read the text and not get a headache.  A 17" monitor
is too small for me to use such a high-res screen full-time.  (this
isn't a big minus though...I'm sure I'll play in 1600x1200 a couple
of times, I'm just saying that I'd rather not pay for the ability if
I had the option).

I considered the Sony, but:
* It costs more than the Nokia

* There's no manual degaussing (but there is auto-degauss on power
on)

* There's no Trapezoidal or Orthogonality adjustment (it's said to be
automatic, but I'd prefer to manually adjust as much as I can to make
the picture -just- right).

I do like the Sony's larger active screen size (16" versus the Nokia's
15.4" and the Idek's 15.8"), however.

The main reasons I don't like the Idek as much:
* It's a "flat-square" tube (a misnomer; it's really a spherical
section cut out of a larger sphere so it's flatter than, say, a
non-trinitron tube-based TV set, but not actually flat either
or horizontally).  The Trinitrons are actually flat vertically
(a cylinder section).

* No orthogonality or convergence adjusters.

* "Non-exemplary color" (according to the PC Magazine review) left it
mainly for 'business' users, not 'high-end color' users.  Perhaps they
were being overly picky, but the whole reason I'm buying a color
monitor is to get brilliant color, without exception.  Since I can't
afford an Ikegami or a 20" monitor, I'll pick the best color output I
can get in a 17".  I'm not an expert, but the reviews I've read tell
me that the Nokia is a good choice.

Also check out the January 1995 Byte magazine, these monitors (or some
appreciable subset thereof) are reviewed there.

Hope this helps,
-Dawn
Path: seunet!news2.swip.net!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.luth.se!eru.mt.luth.se!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news2.near.net!satisfied.apocalypse.org!news.mathworks.c
From: [email protected] (W.D.WILLIAMS           -56-8)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video
Subject: Re: Unhappy with Mag DX17F...help!
Date: 23 Mar 1995 13:56 -0500
Organization: Eastman Chemical Company - Texas Eastman Division
Lines: 60
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tx8600.tex.emn.com
Keywords: MAG;  Cirrus;  Video
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Dan E Babcock ([email protected]) wrote:
: I recently took a risk and mail-ordered a Mag DX17F, the $599 17"
: monitor.  (There was no local dealer to speak of).  And now I'm
: wondering if I made a  mistake...
(goes on to describe problem: deleted for brevity)

(JL Gomez) [email protected] replied:
:A lot of it has to do with the video card.

:I had the same problem you had with a CL-5428 card.

:Exchanged it with a S3-805 and voila! No more problems.

:[email protected]

I tried to E-Mail JL Gomez at the above addres and the note was returned as
undeliverable.  I'll post it here for general comments as well as Mr. Gomez
Any response will be appreciated on this subject.  Thanks in advance.
(Apologies for bandwidth)

I recently read a couple of posts on problems with the MAG DX17F monitor.
I had been planning to upgrade my 14" Acer to a MAG until I read these
posts.  Needless to say, I was really disappointed.

I just today read your post stating that the problem was with the video
card, to wit, a Cirrus Logic card. If it's the board that's the problem, that
would restore my confidence in the Monitor and I will probably go ahead and get
one  Only problem is, guess what Video card I have? Cirrus Logic, I'm pretty
sure.

So, looks like if I want to upgrade to the MAG Monitor, I'll need a card
card upgrade also. You mentioned a S3-805, but seems that this card is
optimized for Windows and the DOS performance is the pits.

I play a lot of games and the CL card seems to do great here, even though
it only has 1mb on board. I have a 486 DX2-80 (ASUS VLB). I have NO problems
running either WCIII or USNF where most people report sluggish video with
these two games using some of the other cards. What I have gleaned from
the video group is that the video framerate has a lot to do with the video
card/system interface. I would hate to sacrifice that with the new monitor
and a card upgrade.

Not to say that I don't use Windows and need a card which will at least
work well in Windows, but not necessarily scream as it does in DOS.

I have also concluded that the Hercules series of ET4000-WP2 cards are a
good compromise for high DOS performance with acceptable if not good Windows
performance.

Any comments?


Thanks if advance for your reply


                  W. D. Williams
                  PH 903-237-5837 FAX 903-237-6667
                  E-Mail  [email protected]

You are viewing proxied material from bitreich.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.