X1900 or 7900GT cards have no dsub?

[graysky]

Looking a cards for a new system and I just realized something: all these new cards (X1900 series or GF 7900 series) don't support "analog" monitors (no D-Sub connectors)! They only have dual DVI connectors.

Now I have to budget 300+ more dollars for a $300 for a LCD monitor!

Has anyone used those adapters to go from DVI-->D-Sub? Do they erode the quality of the picture at all? I do some gaming and a lot of photo retouching work so color and picture quality are key for me.

Thanks!

 

[prozac26]

Has anyone used those adapters to go from DVI-->D-Sub? Do they erode the quality of the picture at all? I do some gaming and a lot of photo retouching work so color and picture quality are key for me.

You can use a D-sub, and it won't affect quality or performance at all.

 

[sojrner]

the dual-link dvi connectors on the cards carry both the digital and analog signals. When you use the adaptor for an analog monitor you are getting the same signal as you would w/ an old-school "straight analog" connection. It just disregards the digital signal. No difference, just another connector to use.

Have been using one on my old 9700pro AIW (only dvi) and a trinitron for years w/ no quality loss. Am using one on my 1900 and my 19" trinitron also w/ no issues.

 

[PhearChyld]

Both cards come with two adapters RGB-DVI...

 

[elpresidente2075]

Just make sure they are in the box, Open Box/Refurb stuff often is missing those components, and some manufacturers don't include them by default :roll: .

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Not to scareyou or anything, but you can get bad connections so check to be sure. But it's just like anything else. Everything between point A and Z is a potnetial failure point, but for the most part they are fine (and I say that as someone who's used most possible combination of adapters at one point or another [in fact right now I'm using a DB-15 TO DVI-A connector for my P260 here at work]).

 

[elbert]

Looking a cards for a new system and I just realized something: all these new cards (X1900 series or GF 7900 series) don't support "analog" monitors (no D-Sub connectors)! They only have dual DVI connectors.

Now I have to budget 300+ more dollars for a $300 for a LCD monitor!

Has anyone used those adapters to go from DVI-->D-Sub? Do they erode the quality of the picture at all? I do some gaming and a lot of photo retouching work so color and picture quality are key for me.

Thanks!

The adapters work great and yes they do erode quality but only at high resolution. You'll not see any differance unless you monitor goes beyond the 1600X1200 setting.

 

[sojrner]

The adapters work great and yes they do erode quality but only at high resolution. You'll not see any differance unless you monitor goes beyond the 1600X1200 setting.

proof? link?

afaik there is NO degredation as the signal is the exact same as if it had come from a d-sub connection. same dac's, same signal just w/ an additional connector in the path. No extra conversion means no signal diffs.

 

[elbert]

The adapters work great and yes they do erode quality but only at high resolution. You'll not see any differance unless you monitor goes beyond the 1600X1200 setting.

proof? link?

afaik there is NO degredation as the signal is the exact same as if it had come from a d-sub connection. same dac's, same signal just w/ an additional connector in the path. No extra conversion means no signal diffs.
DVI only sends anolog if its DVI-A or DVI-I. If its DVI-D then it has to be converted. I shouldn't have said erodes but part of the signal isnt making its way to the monitor. The digital enhancements end at the connector and does cause the dead pixel affect only noticable in higher resolutions. In text with d-sub you'll see ghosting not so with DVI.

The cable itself is sensitive to external influences and may cause distortions but this is really outside of the fault of the adaptor.

The issue of proving a differance in DVI and d-sub isnt fair for LCD's only do 1 good resolution, most DVI monitors are LCD, but the 1 good resolutions of the LCD does show sharper image.
http://www.mysuperpc.com/lcd_flat_panel_monitor.shtml

Its true that the anolog signal isnt affect by the adaptor but dont expect it to be as good as DVI. I was simple stated the problems of anolog signals have at higher resolutions.

 

[graysky]

Thanks for the info, guys!

 

[sojrner]

k, but in the context of the OP's question it was about an analog monitor (crt) running on the adaptor for the dvi. Of course lcd is losing the battle as it must conver to analog @ the card and then convert back to digital @ the monitor.

The question here (which promted my query as to if you could prove it) was why you though there was loss of quality on the config the OP was asking about. Seems there was a mix-up.

 

[elbert]

k, but in the context of the OP's question it was about an analog monitor (crt) running on the adaptor for the dvi. Of course lcd is losing the battle as it must conver to analog @ the card and then convert back to digital @ the monitor.

The question here (which promted my query as to if you could prove it) was why you though there was loss of quality on the config the OP was asking about. Seems there was a mix-up.

Its how you look at it IE the DVI digital enhancements want pass though the adapter. The quality only ends up as good as the anolog which compared to DVI starts falling short beyond 1600X1200 resolution.

Dead pixels and other things I pointed to start occuring around 1600X1200 so the OP will notice a different from DVI to D-sub at that point.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

DVI only sends anolog if its DVI-A or DVI-I. If its DVI-D then it has to be converted. I shouldn't have said erodes but part of the signal isnt making its way to the monitor. The digital enhancements end at the connector and does cause the dead pixel affect only noticable in higher resolutions. In text with d-sub you'll see ghosting not so with DVI.

TWO completely DIFFERENT issues.
You're talking about digital versus analogue, the OP was talking about Analogue versus Analogue, with the DB-15 versus a DB-15 adapter on a DVI-I connector (BTW, there are no DVI-D on the X1900/GF7900).

The cable itself is sensitive to external influences and may cause distortions but this is really outside of the fault of the adaptor.

However the cable has nothing to do with it because the OP's situation would require the same cable, same length and same externalities to influnce both setups, the only difference would be the adapter, which in and of itself CAN cause issue just like any other part like I said between A to Z, but the generation of such adapter issues are rather minor, especially if you aren't trying something 'special' like a monitor 15+ft away.

The issue of proving a differance in DVI and d-sub isnt...

Isn't relevant.

Its true that the anolog signal isnt affect by the adaptor but dont expect it to be as good as DVI.

Depending on the card, resolution and cable length it can be better, so really that's too general a statement without specifying the "under most conditions".

I was simple stated the problems of anolog signals have at higher resolutions.

At higher resolutions? Heck at HIGHER resolutions Single-Link DVI runs into more problems, so if you just say DVI in general, then you ignore the bandwidth limitations of DVI where Analgue would excel over a single-link solution.

Anywhoo, needless to say very little of your post was actually in reference to the OP's question, except for the complete discounting of interface degredation (which may be small enough to not matter, but does matter more than a solid piece of wire end to end even if it's effect is a X approaches 0), that is why Sojrner was saying, WTF !?!

Remember even the singal carried along the DVI cable is technically the Analogue porperties of the digital signal (degedation is an analogue pehnomenon in cable, the SIGNAL is digital, the method of transmission is Analogue). Tough to grasp but important to understand when talking about things like interferance and signal loss.

 

[elbert]

DVI only sends anolog if its DVI-A or DVI-I. If its DVI-D then it has to be converted. I shouldn't have said erodes but part of the signal isnt making its way to the monitor. The digital enhancements end at the connector and does cause the dead pixel affect only noticable in higher resolutions. In text with d-sub you'll see ghosting not so with DVI.

TWO completely DIFFERENT issues.
You're talking about digital versus analogue, the OP was talking about Analogue versus Analogue, with the DB-15 versus a DB-15 adapter on a DVI-I connector (BTW, there are no DVI-D on the X1900/GF7900).
True but I wasn't replying to the OP and the OP was budgeting $300+ for a LCD monitor.

The cable itself is sensitive to external influences and may cause distortions but this is really outside of the fault of the adaptor.

However the cable has nothing to do with it because the OP's situation would require the same cable, same length and same externalities to influnce both setups, the only difference would be the adapter, which in and of itself CAN cause issue just like any other part like I said between A to Z, but the generation of such adapter issues are rather minor, especially if you aren't trying something 'special' like a monitor 15+ft away.
Again not replying to the OP but the cable may not be the same as the OP stated budgeting $300+ for a LCD if their was a difference.

The issue of proving a differance in DVI and d-sub isnt...

Isn't relevant.
And again not replying to the OP but he did state budgeting $300+ on a LCD monitor.

Its true that the anolog signal isnt affect by the adaptor but dont expect it to be as good as DVI.

Depending on the card, resolution and cable length it can be better, so really that's too general a statement without specifying the "under most conditions".
No joke I was point this out if the OP decides to buy the LCD monitor.

I was simple stated the problems of anolog signals have at higher resolutions.

At higher resolutions? Heck at HIGHER resolutions Single-Link DVI runs into more problems, so if you just say DVI in general, then you ignore the bandwidth limitations of DVI where Analgue would excel over a single-link solution.
True but I wasn't comparing it in this statement but just stating the limitations.

Anywhoo, needless to say very little of your post was actually in reference to the OP's question, except for the complete discounting of interface degredation (which may be small enough to not matter, but does matter more than a solid piece of wire end to end even if it's effect is a X approaches 0), that is why Sojrner was saying, WTF !?!

Again I wasn't replying to the OP but the OP did state budgeting $300+ for a LCD monitor.

Remember even the singal carried along the DVI cable is technically the Analogue porperties of the digital signal (degedation is an analogue pehnomenon in cable, the SIGNAL is digital, the method of transmission is Analogue). Tough to grasp but important to understand when talking about things like interferance and signal loss.

True mostly as some carry both yet you can also have loss in digital where the lenth of the cable being longer than 5 meters.

 

[sojrner]

...I wasn't replying to the OP...

actually, your very first post was a reply to the OP. So you are still @ an irrelevant place here. GrapeApe got exactly what I was getting @, you are just missing the entire point of this thread and the reasoning of the responses.

Not really sure what your point is actually, as no-one was trying to start an argument but you seem to have been successful @ starting one. Personally, as far as arguments go you seem to have the short end here. Replying w/ this:

True but I wasn't replying to the OP and the OP was budgeting $300+ for a LCD monitor.

over and over again is not really doing much but sounding like you do not understand the argument. GrapeApe's very good reasoning on every other point aside... even if the OP is planning on an LCD purchase it would not be one w/ a dvi connection, and therefore not need the adapter. The only reason the OP would need the adapter is for a current monitor, and that is an analog monitor as stated. The purchase of an LCD w/ only an analog connection is worthless w/ prices as low as they are now, so that recollection of the $300 lcd budget is useless for this argument.

Now for the real kicker:

Now I have to budget 300+ more dollars for a $300 for a LCD monitor!

this is a statement that translates to "because of my understanding that my current analog monitor will not work as good, I now have to get an LCD."

This is not a statement that the OP wants to get an lcd, but assumes that it is needed and so asks whether the reasoning it accurate. We here at the forums have tried to help by saying that using the adapter will work wonderfully w/ the current monitor. Thus negating the perceived need for a new lcd. (The wording here lends to the premis that the OP's current analog monitor is performing well enough for now)

again, the "$300 budget" is not a given. again, you are way off here man.

b/c you are not even on track w/ the OP, one wonders why you are jumping on those that are?

@ the OP:
Don't take this as a sign that your thread here is bad. On the contrary, many of us just like arguments and in the midst of responding to good questions like yours we take the time to refute garbage logic.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

True but I wasn't replying to the OP

As Sojrner pointed out you were;

"(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Post subject: Re: X1900 or 7900GT cards have no dsub? [in reply to: graysky]"

You even quoted his text, hence the confusion/reaction.

True but I wasn't comparing it in this statement but just stating the limitations.

But it's not analogue versus digital there alone because there's a cross-over between the two (more bandwidth can be carried across an analogue set of component BNC connectors than even dual link DVI). It's not the type signal alone that does it, but the combination of factors, that's the point.

True mostly as some carry both yet you can also have loss in digital where the lenth of the cable being longer than 5 meters.

But what you're missing in my statement is that the transmission of the singal along the wires and their degredation is an ANALOGUE property of metal, not digital and it's that analogue property of the signal along transmission device that is affected by cable length, sure it's still 1s and 0s, but they are transmitted in waves or pulses and it's the effect on those that cause signal issues. You can increase the range by changing the carrier; convert it to light pulses on fibre instead of electomagnetic waves on wire and you get greater distance, but still have singal degredation issues although they are further out.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

On the contrary, many of us just like arguments and in the midst of responding to good questions like yours we take the time to refute garbage logic.

Exactly, although I don't like the argument part (prefer acquiesence) but want to refute bad/mis-info whenever possible.

 

[Heyyou27]

I've used them before and they work fine.

 

[sojrner]

Exactly, although I don't like the argument part (prefer acquiesence) but want to refute bad/mis-info whenever possible.

for me argument=debate.

NOT to be confused w/ beligerent ranting and missinformed/foolish gainsaying.

While I respect acquiescence, I find that my personality does not achieve that state very well. Not that I condone the aforementioned deliberate contrary opinion simply to sidestep that complementary position, but when a debate rises up I find it hard to stand by when I can opine within it. Trying to keep it friendly is tough as many ppl do not appreciate a fine debate... they take "argument" to mean "fight".

This is where that passive position you mentioned comes in handy of course. Probably your point in mentioning it in the first place.

 

[elbert]

...I wasn't replying to the OP...

actually, your very first post was a reply to the OP. So you are still @ an irrelevant place here. GrapeApe got exactly what I was getting @, you are just missing the entire point of this thread and the reasoning of the responses.
Not really as the reply grapeape quoted was to you and your response to my post.

Not really sure what your point is actually, as no-one was trying to start an argument but you seem to have been successful @ starting one. Personally, as far as arguments go you seem to have the short end here. Replying w/ this:

My point was your getting into a gray area where the adaptor doesnt change the anolog but what comes from the GPU doesnt have the digital parts to the D-sub monitor. The digital parts dont effect the image much but its loss in quality as my earlier link article states.

True but I wasn't replying to the OP and the OP was budgeting $300+ for a LCD monitor.

over and over again is not really doing much but sounding like you do not understand the argument. GrapeApe's very good reasoning on every other point aside... even if the OP is planning on an LCD purchase it would not be one w/ a dvi connection, and therefore not need the adapter. The only reason the OP would need the adapter is for a current monitor, and that is an analog monitor as stated. The purchase of an LCD w/ only an analog connection is worthless w/ prices as low as they are now, so that recollection of the $300 lcd budget is useless for this argument.
I as most took the OP to mean if theres a difference in quality lost using the adaptor he would purchase the new LCD. I stated the differences so he could decide for himself.

Now for the real kicker:
Now I have to budget 300+ more dollars for a $300 for a LCD monitor!

this is a statement that translates to "because of my understanding that my current analog monitor will not work as good, I now have to get an LCD."

This is not a statement that the OP wants to get an lcd, but assumes that it is needed and so asks whether the reasoning it accurate. We here at the forums have tried to help by saying that using the adapter will work wonderfully w/ the current monitor. Thus negating the perceived need for a new lcd. (The wording here lends to the premis that the OP's current analog monitor is performing well enough for now)
Its a statement to if theres a lose in quality he would buy the LCD. The OP knows he doesn't need to buy a new monitor else he wouldnt have know about the adaptor. He went on to talk about the adaptor, which a need is something you cannot do without and is incorrect, and wants to know if there is a difference.

again, the "$300 budget" is not a given. again, you are way off here man.

b/c you are not even on track w/ the OP, one wonders why you are jumping on those that are?

Sorry but you replyed to my post so dont try and turn it around on me. I'm defending my quote to the OP and your defending your reply to me. Can you put words in other peoples mouth, one being you, as the OP has said nothing of being off track and the only reply he or she made was to thanked us for the information.

Thanks for the info, guys!

@ the OP:
Don't take this as a sign that your thread here is bad. On the contrary, many of us just like arguments and in the midst of responding to good questions like yours we take the time to refute garbage logic.

This is a good thread but it does seem that we have hijacked it for this argument. I guess you dont understand the logic of garbage in, garbage out. Your reply to my post was garbage so natural everything following is garbage.

 

[elbert]

True but I wasn't replying to the OP

As Sojrner pointed out you were;

"(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Post subject: Re: X1900 or 7900GT cards have no dsub? [in reply to: graysky]"
No if you look at my quote it was in reply to sojrner. Here's the only reply I made to the OP.

The adapters work great and yes they do erode quality but only at high resolution. You'll not see any differance unless you monitor goes beyond the 1600X1200 setting.

Erode was a bad word to use but it was part of the OP's question and I was simply stating my response for him to understand easly their will not be a difference unless at high resolutions.

proof? link?

The issue of proving a differance in DVI and d-sub isnt fair for LCD's only do 1 good resolution, most DVI monitors are LCD, but the 1 good resolutions of the LCD does show sharper image.
http://www.mysuperpc.com/lcd_flat_panel_monitor.shtml

If you read the link you'll note the article states sharper picture for the 1 good LCD resolution.

It's definitely true that FPD screen images look their sharpest at their native resolution. But it's also true that they look excellent and better than a CRT at some of the other resolutions, but not all. There are some resolutions where the screen images will not be pleasing and will actually look worse than a CRT. The problem with viewing on an FPD that has a native resolution of 1600x1200 is that the images are too tiny for comfortable viewing. Quite sharp, quite clear, and quite tiny. Younger eyes may not find them so uncomfortable.

You even quoted his text, hence the confusion/reaction.

Pryer information we have seen is always fair game. My second and third posts has no quote from graysky and those are the post you replyed to.

True but I wasn't comparing it in this statement but just stating the limitations.

But it's not analogue versus digital there alone because there's a cross-over between the two (more bandwidth can be carried across an analogue set of component BNC connectors than even dual link DVI). It's not the type signal alone that does it, but the combination of factors, that's the point.
Its is if he buys the LCD.

True mostly as some carry both yet you can also have loss in digital where the lenth of the cable being longer than 5 meters.

But what you're missing in my statement is that the transmission of the singal along the wires and their degredation is an ANALOGUE property of metal, not digital and it's that analogue property of the signal along transmission device that is affected by cable length, sure it's still 1s and 0s, but they are transmitted in waves or pulses and it's the effect on those that cause signal issues. You can increase the range by changing the carrier; convert it to light pulses on fibre instead of electomagnetic waves on wire and you get greater distance, but still have singal degredation issues although they are further out.
No I truly didnt miss the fact that degredations is an analogue property. You miss the fact that using the adaptor doesnt allow the transmission of the digital information thous making a difference in the final picture where the OP to buy the LCD.

 

[elbert]

On the contrary, many of us just like arguments and in the midst of responding to good questions like yours we take the time to refute garbage logic.

Exactly, although I don't like the argument part (prefer acquiesence) but want to refute bad/mis-info whenever possible.
Thats kind of your fault for total taking 1 side as the issue is total gray area due to the adaptor doesn't allow transmit of the digital information. In conflict resolution the third party should never take sides. I guess your correct that my reply was to the OP so why isnt it him and me in this argument? You have to be correct in refuting bad/mis-information else the garbage just keeps comming.

 

[sojrner]

You miss the fact that using the adaptor doesnt allow the transmission of the digital information thous making a difference in the final picture where the OP to buy the LCD.

that is NOT the issue here! Dang man. Your argument/response to Grape and myself did nothing to refute what we said, and only proves that you do not understand what is being said here. It does not matter if the adapter blocks the digital signal! The OP is connecting an ANALOG monitor, and it will work fine.

regardless of possible future purchases, that was the original question. You brought in the whole lcd/digital thing that is irrelevant and it was already proved how it is not a factor in my last post. We have proved you wrong w/ simple logic and yet you continue on your sandy foundation.

I guess your correct that my reply was to the OP so why isnt it him and me in this argument? Wink You have to be correct in refuting bad/mis-information else the garbage just keeps comming.

We are here to help answer the OP's question. The reason we are arguing w/ you (or rather stating logic and getting nothing as you are not really arguing but ranting) is b/c you are stating missaligned ideas that cloud the real issues of connecting a native analog monitor (NOT an lcd) to a dvi video card.

Sorry but you replyed to my post so dont try and turn it around on me. I'm defending my quote to the OP and your defending your reply to me. Can you put words in other peoples mouth, one being you, as the OP has said nothing of being off track and the only reply he or she made was to thanked us for the information.

Actually, my first two responses to you were first to ask for links to establish what you were getting at (was not clear why you were saying what you were) and to then confirm that yes, an LCD would lose quality on an analog connection. (any analog connection, adapter or not) After that confirmation I pointed out that the OP wanted the reverse of that. You simply do not get it man... No-one was attacking you, but simply trying to point out that you are answering the wrong question. Sometimes it is OK to be wrong, even when you think you are right.

regardless, the OP's question has been answered.

[/argument]

 

[elbert]

You miss the fact that using the adaptor doesnt allow the transmission of the digital information thous making a difference in the final picture where the OP to buy the LCD.

that is NOT the issue here! Dang man. Your argument/response to Grape and myself did nothing to refute what we said, and only proves that you do not understand what is being said here. It does not matter if the adapter blocks the digital signal! The OP is connecting an ANALOG monitor, and it will work fine.
What is it you want me to refute? What you and grape said makes know difference as all you say is posted to the OP. The adaptor blocking the digital, for the price of the GPU, could mean alot as to him or her buying the new LCD. Ghosting text may be a reason for buying the LCD over using a adapter.

regardless of possible future purchases, that was the original question. You brought in the whole lcd/digital thing that is irrelevant and it was already proved how it is not a factor in my last post. We have proved you wrong w/ simple logic and yet you continue on your sandy foundation.

Is that some king of new fuzzy logic in which you say it and its so. Grape brought up with the OP only wanting anolog to anolog.

TWO completely DIFFERENT issues.
You're talking about digital versus analogue, the OP was talking about Analogue versus Analogue, with the DB-15 versus a DB-15 adapter on a DVI-I connector (BTW, there are no DVI-D on the X1900/GF7900).

If the OP buy the new monitor then we are talking about digital versus anolog.

I guess your correct that my reply was to the OP so why isnt it him and me in this argument? Wink You have to be correct in refuting bad/mis-information else the garbage just keeps comming.

We are here to help answer the OP's question. The reason we are arguing w/ you (or rather stating logic and getting nothing as you are not really arguing but ranting) is b/c you are stating missaligned ideas that cloud the real issues of connecting a native analog monitor (NOT an lcd) to a dvi video card.
There both at issue do to the OP planing to buy 1 if their was a difference.

Sorry but you replyed to my post so dont try and turn it around on me. I'm defending my quote to the OP and your defending your reply to me. Can you put words in other peoples mouth, one being you, as the OP has said nothing of being off track and the only reply he or she made was to thanked us for the information.

Actually, my first two responses to you were first to ask for links to establish what you were getting at (was not clear why you were saying what you were) and to then confirm that yes, an LCD would lose quality on an analog connection. (any analog connection, adapter or not) After that confirmation I pointed out that the OP wanted the reverse of that. You simply do not get it man... No-one was attacking you, but simply trying to point out that you are answering the wrong question. Sometimes it is OK to be wrong, even when you think you are right.
True but with the 1900 or 7900 to a new LCD there would be no analog adapter and the link stated a sharper picture with the DVI. You also gave mis-information on DVI having anolog as DVI-d doesn't.

regardless, the OP's question has been answered.

My lord the worlds going to end, we agree on something. I think grape may have made matter worse causing a lot of confusion.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Well first of all learn to quote, I didn't say the segment you quoted me in, and the reason there's even 1 extra post beyond Sojrner's WTF post is because you can't relate to your quoting the original poster and then replying about something not relevant.

Let's clear up one other thing you seem to have missed (making that the AvsD/AvsA issue and then.....);

The original poster was not LOOKING to buy a new LCD but was under the impression that now he was FORCED to buy a new LCD because there was no D-SUB, look at the section you quoted again;

Looking a cards for a new system and I just realized something: all these new cards (X1900 series or GF 7900 series) don't support "analog" monitors (no D-Sub connectors)! They only have dual DVI connectors.

Now I have to budget 300+ more dollars for a $300 for a LCD monitor!

I would say that that phrase alone indicate not his pleasure at looking to buy a shiny new LCD monitor, but his exasperation at the possibility that he may be forced to buy a new LCD because the new cards do not have a DB-15 connector. He then goes on to ask about the Adapter degrading the signal, and your reply to him (don't say you weren't for the umpteenth time because you quoted him in an 'in reply to' thread) was that they do erode quality, not that they might, just like a poor DVI cable might, not that digital is better than analogue for carrying information to a digital panel (no that argument came later in defence of this), your statement was a declarative statement to which you had nothing to back it up other than the type of signal, which once again has nothing to do with the OP's question about the adapter, to which you were directly replying.

You can try to twist the posts around, but the fact remains, the OP was asking specifically about the adapter degrading/eroding the quality of the signal (which would be the analogue portion of the signal) and he did not say he WANT to buy a new LCD but that NOW he HAD to budget for a new LCD because of this.

Seems pretty straight forward, and really the point is, either you made a mistake in what you said in reply to the OP, or your reading/comprehension & quoting skillz suck, causing unnecessary confusion for others reading this thread. Either way it's not the responsability of other to read your mind and try to get some unwritten subtext to what you post so they can figure out what you're trying to say not what you're actually writing. :roll: