0
edits
VGA Converter Boxes: Difference between revisions
m
add to category
m (Hertz hurts) |
Dummy User (talk | contribs) m (add to category) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
In 2005 a suitable device was finally located, and a unit bought as a test. This proved to be a great success, giving much better picture quality than many of the Cubs they replaced. A cheaper alternative was discovered, and it had advantages, including being smaller and having slightly more conveniently located ports. After finding no major difference in quality, 8 of the cheaper boxes were bought to enable the worse half of the Cubs on the monitor rack to be retired from October 2006, and the remainder the following year. Whilst not as good as a proper video monitors, and so not used for critical output monitoring, the commercial converters have stable and reliable brightness and colour, provided that the monitor itself works. Once a few of the worst VGA monitors had been disposed of and replacements blagged, this was not a problem. | In 2005 a suitable device was finally located, and a unit bought as a test. This proved to be a great success, giving much better picture quality than many of the Cubs they replaced. A cheaper alternative was discovered, and it had advantages, including being smaller and having slightly more conveniently located ports. After finding no major difference in quality, 8 of the cheaper boxes were bought to enable the worse half of the Cubs on the monitor rack to be retired from October 2006, and the remainder the following year. Whilst not as good as a proper video monitors, and so not used for critical output monitoring, the commercial converters have stable and reliable brightness and colour, provided that the monitor itself works. Once a few of the worst VGA monitors had been disposed of and replacements blagged, this was not a problem. | ||
[[Category: Equipment]] | |||