Apple BCGM1212 use on a PC's..

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by The GHOST of WOGER., May 25, 2004.

  1. As I have found a source of VGA Adapters, what is this monitor, ? very little
    Hits on Google..

    Is it a single frequencie one..?

    Thanks
    The GHOST of WOGER., May 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. The GHOST of WOGER. got lost in the Apple orchard:
    > As I have found a source of VGA Adapters, what is this monitor, ? very little
    > Hits on Google..
    >
    > Is it a single frequencie one..?


    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=15087

    is a good X reference, then follow the links from

    http://www.info.apple.com/support/applespec.html

    to

    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=112524

    yeah, waste of a good trinitron to be stuck at

    Res. 640x480
    Vert. 66.7 Hz
    Hoz. 35 kHz
    dpi 70

    dig a bit harder in Google, but I don't think you'll have much luck,
    some Apple multiscans could be stretched out of spec, but not this one...
    J.Random Luser, May 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Wed, 26 May 2004 13:06:18 +1200, "J.Random Luser" <> wrote:

    >The GHOST of WOGER. got lost in the Apple orchard:
    >> As I have found a source of VGA Adapters, what is this monitor, ? very little
    >> Hits on Google..
    >>
    >> Is it a single frequencie one..?

    >
    >http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=15087
    >
    >is a good X reference, then follow the links from
    >
    >http://www.info.apple.com/support/applespec.html
    >
    >to
    >
    >http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=112524
    >
    >yeah, waste of a good trinitron to be stuck at
    >
    >Res. 640x480
    >Vert. 66.7 Hz
    >Hoz. 35 kHz
    >dpi 70
    >
    >dig a bit harder in Google, but I don't think you'll have much luck,
    >some Apple multiscans could be stretched out of spec, but not this one...




    Gee only 640 x 48o, how low can you go, a Monitor repair from told me to dump
    the 17" 1710 as they a totally un reliable..
    The GHOST of WOGER., May 26, 2004
    #3
  4. The GHOST of WOGER was amazed:
    >
    > Gee only 640 x 48o, how low can you go, a Monitor repair from told me to dump
    > the 17" 1710 as they a totally un reliable..


    Well there was the 12" RGB at 600x400
    which everyone thought was cinerama after the
    512x384 mono screens previously available...
    J.Random Luser, May 27, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    "J.Random Luser" <> wrote:

    >The GHOST of WOGER was amazed:
    >>
    >> Gee only 640 x 48o, how low can you go, a Monitor repair from told me to
    >> dump
    >> the 17" 1710 as they a totally un reliable..

    >
    >Well there was the 12" RGB at 600x400
    >which everyone thought was cinerama after the
    >512x384 mono screens previously available...


    The mono screens were 512x342 (the buffer taking up exactly 21888 bytes
    of RAM). And I just checked that in my copy of Inside Mac Vol III (page
    III-19).

    The el cheapo 12" RGB was 512x384. Nobody thought it was cinerama, since
    it came out in 1990, 3 years after the 13" RGB at 640x480, which was a
    colour screen so good you could use it in black-and-white without
    realizing it was a colour screen. That was a rare thing in those days.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 1, 2004
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,727
    GlassCutter
    Jul 4, 2004
  2. BOB
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,066
    RichardS
    Apr 16, 2006
  3. Rich
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,079
  4. MiLi
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    8,398
  5. GraB

    Apple sues Apple over iPod

    GraB, Mar 29, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    647
    shannon
    Mar 29, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page