<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">>----- Original Message ----<br>>From: Raymond McLaughlin <driveray@ameritech.net><br>>To: MDLUG's Main discussion list <mdlug@mdlug.org><br>>Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 1:07:14 PM<br>>Subject: Re: [mdlug] Building a Linux PVR<br><div>><br>><br>>Maybe you can shine some light here. I had the impression that 'scan',<br>>progressive vs. interlace, was a CRT thing. With progressive meaning<br>>that the whole screen was repainted, line by line, top to bottom, by the<br>>electron gun with each pass. And interlaced essentially meant that every<br>>other horizontal line was painted with each pass, thus
requiring two<br>>passes to repaint the whole screen.<br><br>>Is this over simplified to the point of being wrong, or just plain<br>>wrong, or what?<br><br>>In such a scheme how does a device like an LCD have a 'scan' pattern?<br>>Aren't all the pixels refreshed more or less simultaneously?<br><br></div></div><br>No you are not wrong at all. CRT are rated that way but the rating also still applies to<br>LCD, DLP, Plasma, etc TV's because they almost all refresh every pixel at once they are rated as<br>Progressive Scan. Yes it is a little misleading but when you are comparing TV's (or even monitors)<br>and the industry still uses the Scheme (I think there are even a few LCD, DLP, Plasma, etc TV that<br>are not Progressive Scan).<br><br>-Ron<br></div></div></body></html>