16 Oct
2008
16 Oct
'08
1:59 p.m.
In article <48F755C5.5050501 at gmail.com>,
Jules Richardson <jules.richardson99 at gmail.com> writes:
Mainly becuase you asked a question, expecting (I assume) a precise
answer, and it's not at all clear what you will and will not include. A
couple of messages ago, you excluded analuge computers, which I would
most certainly consider to be computers. Of course you can consider
digital machines only if you so wish, but surely you should state that
Furthermore, what's a "graphical
display", anyway?
The only people that seem to torture themselves with these definitions
are the ones on this list. Most reasonable people have no troulbe from the outset.
distinguishing between a text terminal and a graphics
display. One
Well I am not use of the exact distinction. I've worked on devices which
have used pixel-addressable LCD displays (that is, the display is capable
of displaying graphics, it doesn't, in iteslf, have a 'text mode' or a
character generator, but the (not normally changeable) firmware that
controlled the device used said display to display text only (the
character generator paterns were part of the firmware ROMs for the main
procesor). To me, as a hardware person, that's a grpahical display
module, but I'll bet you'd call it a text display.
displays TEXT. The other displays arbitrary figures
and drawings, and
no before someone gets off on another torturous stretch of the
definition, "block" graphics character sets on text terminals don't
count either.
OK, and what's the distinction here? Do you have a minimum resolution
before somethign is caleld a 'graphical display' (if so, what is it?). Is
a display of 80*24 pixels, with no other capabilites a graphical display?
If it is, why does it lose that distinction when it can _also_ display text?
-tony