5 ms·
640x400 - since 640*400/8=32000. The ST always had 32,000 bytes of display memory. (edit: I dawdled over my reply while doing multiple nostalgic google searches
by to3m 11y ago
640x400 - since 640*400/8=32000. The ST always had 32,000 bytes of display memory. (edit: I dawdled over my reply while doing multiple nostalgic google searches, and my correction is now redundant)
I don't know what they did to make the mono monitor look so nice. It was only 70Hz, and it only did black OR white, but it was completely flicker-free, like an LCD. But unlike an LCD - at least an LCD in the 1990s - there was no blur; unlike the then-popular passive-matrix LCDs, there were no crosstalk streaks; and unlike your average 1990 colour CRT, assuming you could find one that ran at 70Hz, there was no visible flicker even to my teenager's eyes.
Focus round the edges was pretty bad though, at least on the model I had. The options appeared to be "pin-sharp stamp-sized display with a massive border" or "nice big screen with blurred edges".
It doesn't really compare very well to anything modern, but you're right that it was streets ahead of 640x512 interlaced on the Amiga, and I don't care how many colours that would have been.
- cmrdporcupine 11y agoI loved my SM125 monitor with those rare properly designed GEM applications that showed off the potential of the GUI. A shame GDOS didn't ship with the original distribution of the OS and a shame that Atari wasn't better at getting developers to produce quality GEM applications. It could have been a Mac killer.
- jacobush 11y agoNot that I ever saw one, but there was the Amiga 2024 monitor. Supposedly it had less flicker and also higher resolution. http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=863 http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=...
- Flow 11y agoI still have one. It does 1024x1024 in 50Hz or 1024x800 in 60Hz. 4 greyscale tones. Very good monitor for the time.