Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: 17 or 19 or 21 inch? |
| From: | Markus Vester <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:34:05 -0400 (EDT) |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
|
Hi Stefan,
small is beautiful - I'd say please leave it as it is! Especially when I'm outdoors with the little netbook, I just hate having to scroll around laterally to see the latest pixels appear on the right side...
With regard to the scaling, I generally favour one pixel per FFT, and relatively slow scrolling (ie around 70% FFT overlap).
Best 73, Markus (DF6NM)
-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: Stefan Schäfer <[email protected]> An: rsgb_lf_group <[email protected]> Verschickt: Mi, 28 Sept 2011 11:30 pm Betreff: LF: 17 or 19 or 21 inch? LF, VLF, Would like to hear some opinions about the best width of a grabber window. Currently all my windows are optimised for a xxx*1024 pixel monitor. This is suitable for the most monitors. But since many years the standard seems to be 19 inch or even more. Furthermore the 16:9 format becomes normality. I think about extending the window sizes of the grabber captures to a 19 inch format, like G4WGT runs them. This may be a bit nerving if a smaller monitor is used but allows a better overview on the wide screens. What do you think is the best width of the windows? 73, Stefan/DK7FC |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | LF: DCF39, Stefan Schäfer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: 17 or 19 or 21 inch?, jrusgrove |
| Previous by Thread: | LF: 17 or 19 or 21 inch?, Stefan Schäfer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: LF: 17 or 19 or 21 inch?, jrusgrove |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |