{ "numMessagesInTopic": 13, "nextInTime": 2103, "senderId": "Nqwe4CXcOgkhn_FZ_u-yrjTPIghXVXB6oEy-09xsCn2R3Bw5ErpqH3bYP0ENCUXlN8qBKmgsnM08JTfB88kcdoAWTuFU8d8G19V8FZwJ", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: [IBM_T2X_LCD] Vp2290b vs. T221 DG5", "from": ""Brian Chambers" <brian@...>", "authorName": "Brian Chambers", "msgSnippet": "Even as a Windows user, Aero graphics requires a PCI Express video card to even run and, more importantly, future video cards that might be able to actually", "msgId": 2102, "profile": "angryazul", "topicId": 2099, "spamInfo": { "reason": "0", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 293501126, "messageBody": "
> You are correct. The VP2290B (and similarly the IBM T221 DG1 and DG3)----------------------------------
\n> are fussier than the DG5. But, as Al points out, the image is just as
\n> amazing on the VP2290B and the price is much better. Its a pain in
\n> the ass as a Mac user but if I were happy to run Linux or XP then the
\n> VP2290B is better value.
\n>
\n>
\n> On Jan 5, 2007, at 8:57 PM, Brian Chambers wrote:
\n>
\n> > Ignoring momentarily whatever vitriol is happening in the Manhattan
\n> > thread, an interesting claim was made that I would like to know more
\n> > about. I have thus far avoided the Vp2290b because I had assumed it
\n> > would be impossible to run with Windows Vista Aero or anything
\n> > requiring
\n> > decent 3d capabilities. Could someone clarify that the Vp2290b
\n> > requires
\n> > 4 separate DVI inputs to run at 41Hz (requiring something like that
\n> > PCI
\n> > Matrox card with 4x DVI) whereas the DG5 can actually run successfully
\n> > off a fairly decent nVidia PCI-Express card with a dual link DVI +
\n> > single link DVI routed through the magic box. Am I missing some
\n> > part of
\n> > this equation> In my mind, this had put a very big gap between these
\n> > two monitors.
\n> >
\n> > -b
\n> > ----------------------------------
\n> > Brian Chambers
\n> > brian@...
\n> >
\n> >
\n> >
\n>
\n