Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (
More info?)
<dotnw@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121148922.596408.37180@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> By using a monitor extension cable, I now have 2 lumps between my
> monitor and PC. Would it be better if I got rid of the extension cable
> and bought a longer monitor replacement cable, thus reducing the number
> of lumps in my cable back down to 1?
>
> (I can't see any problems with my current set-up - image quality wise.)
>
> Thanks, regards, dnw.
>
Definitely better from the standpoint of reducing the number of
possible impedance discontinuities along the line (where the connectors
are) - not important at all from the standpoint of reducing the lump factor,
as they tend to operate at frequencies much higher than the pixel rates.
The lumps (cores) should not be contributing any negative aspects to image
quality.
This *does* assume that what you can get in a longer cable will have
good enough impedance characteristics to avoid or at least minimalize
possible image degradation. Try to look for one that has a low a
resistance value as possible for the "co-ax conductor" between the two
ends, as that factor will tend to decrease the signal amplitude at your
monitor end, likely resulting in lower luiminance output (assuming you
are using analog "VGA", not DVI). If you can find an "active" type of
extension (AKA KVM) you may be happier with the performance, but
the cost will be higher, typically. But that way you can have the imput
devices Kbd & Mouse) nearer the display (V).
It still does not necessarily mitigate the other factors I mentioned to
use a single long cable, compared to two (joined) shorter ones. As far
as KVM operation, I have no personal experience, but at least some of
them are active types, and user satisfaction reports are generally
favorable.
Regards,
NGA