28 Aug
2014
28 Aug
'14
12:34 p.m.
I do recall both green and amber were considered to cause less strain on
the eyes than white, especially during night time computing. I was sort of
wondering if IBM chose amber just because their competition (Compaq
Portable) already used green.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x at nf6x.net> wrote:
On Aug 28, 2014, at 09:58 , Peter Corlett <abuse at cabal.org.uk> wrote:
there's
just
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 09:06:33AM -0700, Mark J.
Blair wrote:
[...]
> I can't explain it; I just think it's ugly. My dad says that using an
amber
> monitor makes him physically ill. It
doesn't do that to me, but I just
don't
like it.
My hypothesis is that the two of you are red-green colourblind and not enough contrast to read comfortably.
I can't speak for my dad, but that's not my issue with amber screens. I
discern red vs. green just fine; in fact, I have to pass red/green
colorblindness tests annually for my commercial driver's license. I have no
problem with the contrast of amber monitors, either. It's the hue of the
phosphor that I dislike, in much the same way that I prefer not to view
things that are hot pink. A hot pink monitor phosphor would be perfectly
viewable, and some people would probably even like it, but I would consider
it to be eye-rape.
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/