* Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
> In article <vRsyk.28673$kh2.12684@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>> > This has been is OS X forever, and earlier versions of MacOS even longer.
>> >
>> > When you order a Mac Pro from Apple, for example, you can configure it
>> > with up to 4 graphics cards, with each card supporting two 2560 x 1600
>> > displays.
>> >
>> > I believe similar things can be done in Windows. It's fairly common in
>> > the financial world, where people need to have a lot of information
>> > available without the hassle of dealing with overlapping windows.
>>
>> Another "open mouth insert foot" poster on the topic of 1 virtual screen
>> made up of 24 monitors on 12 computers.
>>
>> Incredible.
>
> You are confused. There may have been something about tying multiple
> computers together somewhere in one of the articles Schestowitz linked
> to, but the parts he chose to extract and quote in his post was about
> the UI difficulty of handling multi-screen displays.
>
> What he quoted in his posts, combined with the subject line, combine to
> make a claim that OS X and Windows do not handle multiple screens well,
> period.
Obsession with what Roy said, and not what the video showed, noted.
--
The computer should be doing the hard work. That's what it's paid to do,
after all.
-- Larry Wall in <199709012312.QAA08121@xxxxxxxx>
|
|
