[ale] 30" LCD monitor locally

arxaaron arxaaron at gmail.com
Tue Nov 23 23:18:24 EST 2010


Thanks David.  I stand thoroughly corrected.  The pixel count
resolution limits in regard to the Single or Dual DVI make
sense now.

The stupid part is that the wikipedia page you reference is what
I was looking at, but I was totally myopic in searching for "dual-link"
references in the page.  That exact phrase only seems to occur in
reference to the bit depth, not in the sections referencing the
resolution capabilities.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface>

The joys of being a slow reader.

peace
aaron


On 2010/11/23, at 19:19 , David Tomaschik wrote:

> On 11/23/2010 12:25 PM, arxaaron wrote:
>> On 2010/11/21, at 23:36 , Richard Bronosky wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to remind everyone that most 30" monitors require Dual
>>> Link DVI to function properly. My company just bought about 28 of  
>>> the
>>> Dell 30" monitors and if you hook a regular DVI device to it, it  
>>> runs
>>> at 1/4 resolution. (That is a square of 4 native pixels make up 1
>>> software pixel.) As you can imagine it looks TERRIBLE. We could have
>>> spent less than 50% of the money on 27" monitors and they would have
>>> looked a lot better. The only people that could use the monitors are
>>> the Mac users. (Even the new $900 MacBook Air can drive a Dual Link
>>> DVI!) The people in the office with Dells were out of luck.
>> Upon reviewing the details of exactly what dual-link is designed to
>> provide, this sounds like either design incompetence or a corrupt
>> forced migration scam on the part of the Dell corporation.
>>
>> All that dual-link  does is provide additional data channels and
>> connector lines to support 48bits per pixel.  There is absolutely NO
>> practical design reason for reducing a display's resolution when
>> it only receives 24bits per pixel.  REQUIRING dual-link DVI on
>> any digital monitor is absurd.
>>
>> Your company should not only send the monitors back and
>> demand a full refund, they should demand a public apology
>> from Dell for the design failure, whether intentional or not.
>>
>> peace
>> aaron
>>
>>
> With a single-link connection, you've got 3.96Gbps of data available  
> to
> you[1].  If you are assuming 60Hz refresh (most LCDs are 60 or 75, but
> let's be generous and say 60) and 24 bpp, you get enough data for  
> about
> 2.8 Megapixels.  2560x1600 resolution is 4 Megapixels.  That's why it
> won't run.  It's not an evil Dell thing this time.  If you look at the
> DVI spec, you can EITHER do 48 bits per pixel OR double the number of
> pixels you can use at 24bpp.  Basically, it doubles your bandwidth.
>
> [1] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface
>
> -- 
> David Tomaschik, RHCE
> Ubuntu Community Member
> Moderator, LinuxQuestions.org
> http://www.tuxteam.com
> david at tuxteam.com [GPG: 0x6D428695]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo



More information about the Ale mailing list